That is such a total rewrite of history. Granted, Congress gave Bush the powers necessary which Bush asked for to deal with Iraq.
From the "Iraq Resolution Wiki Page":
The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."
Bush decided to invade Iraq. Congress, under pressure of a flag waving populace whipped up by phony intelligence, authorized Bush to invade Iraq but to try to use diplomatic means.
Bush then invaded Iraq. If you really believe it was Congress and not Bush that invaded Iraq you are horribly deluded by someone.
No, I don't think that President-Elect Obama necessarily won the primaries and the general election on promises alone. I think that when people got to know him through the campaign, they also learned that he is a very responsive and intelligent person, a couple of things that we haven't been quite used to lately. When I was making calls for the campaign, I was talking to a lot of people that did not respond to Obama's campaign promises nearly as much as that they had faith he was a serious and talented person on par with the challenges of the job.
I think that people responded well to the promises, but the core of the campaign wasn't, "hey, let's all feel better about ourselves and hope for a better day." Even if that was the outward mantra with "change" and "hope," I think the bulk of the campaign was, "here's a really smart guy who is listening to people's problems."
Think about what Clinton is best known for... "I feel your pain." That's not a promise, it's an understanding that people are attracted to.
While your point that it is true as gold, is all a bunch of Hope
No, my point is that President-Elect Obama has a clearly defined and publicly accessible agenda on his transition website that is point by point what he ran on during his campaign. He's already being called a liar and selling himself with strawman positions and there's nothing of the sort that has occurred. When he enacts policy as POTUS and he detours from his stated Agenda without unseen circumstances or explaination to the public, then I'll join you to call him on it. There are too many parroting the media wingnuts who are jumping the gun calling him a liar and calling the majority (by 9 million) who voted for him blind & gullible.
What is "true as gold" is that Obama has been consistant and has made his Agenda and point-by-point policy positions open to the public. What is "true as gold" is that Obama has kept his word that he would chose a cabinet on the merits of competence.
I have "Hope" that Obama can run his administration with the honesty, integrity, and smarts that he has run his campaign and is currently organizing the transistion of power.
to be fair, he didn't ask me to make an endorsement speech. did he ask you?
part of the reason that people who endorsed Obama are getting positions (actually a big part of it) is because they have typically made a name for themselves politically and likely are known entities. for example, Janet Napolitano has been recognized as one of the best governors in the nation. she was a democrat who won re-election in a conservative state by a landslide. she's doing something very, very right. just because she endorsed Obama doesn't take away from the fact that she's got extreme talent in what she does.
Actually, my statement was agreeing with you ...but referring to what Matt had questioned from the outset of the topic... "Giving Up on the Base..." Obama NOT Awarding positions to people that Matt claims that he "OWES" them for their support and/or endorsement.
Further up the page: One of the CHANGES WE NEED is a thoughtful administrator who DOESN'T dole-out positions of PUBLIC TRUST based solely on payback for favors (Illustration: "good-job" BROWNIE BADGES) or as GIFTS handed out to old friends, but rather, as you'd stated, ...awarded to people with the proven Credentials, who can be sought out for sound advice in their respective fields and counted upon in a time of National crises.
IOW: one of The CHANGES WE NEED is an END TO CRONYISM!
BTW That's the genius of the way Obama raised campaign funds. Despite the whining about "breaking his word about agreeing to public funding" when the definition of "public" is the mega-corps and industries that make 10 times the maximum allowable contributions, by splitting them between cover- companies, as INVESTMENTS rather than as public good.
Companies like Exxon-Mobile that enjoy the RETURNS on their INVESTMENTS a hundred fold by placing their EXECUTIVES in POWERFUL DECISION-MAKING POSITIONS that funnel back money and de-regulation favors to the corporation.
(Condasleaza Rice & DICKô Cheney spring to mind)
By accepting the majority of funds as small donations, Obama engaged the people at the grass roots level by using their contributions as a vote of confidence... that they WANTED him to win & bring the changes to a broken system... had they not CONTINUED to WANT him, the campaign would have ended then and there.
The result was a fully engaged people standing behind him in every possible way, without any Mega-Corps to appease.
Free at last, Free at last! Great God Almightey ... We're Free at Last!
(That the Conservative Party has a problem with that only goes further to showing how badly they need rethinking)
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.