Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Obama Conspiracy


Evan Burton
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm getting pretty sick & tired of people condemning Obama - even before he has taken office! Give the bloke a chance before attacking the guy.

The taunts seem to come from those camps who also predicted that Obama would never take office because Bush would arrange some type of event which required him to assume "emergency powers".

Anyway, if you think Obama is some type of NWO poster child, please give us some predictions about what he / his administration is going to do (e.g. reinstate the draft, suspend the Constitution, etc).

Thanks... or PFFFFT! (Depending upon your opinion)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Stephen Turner
I'm getting pretty sick & tired of people condemning Obama - even before he has taken office! Give the bloke a chance before attacking the guy.

The taunts seem to come from those camps who also predicted that Obama would never take office because Bush would arrange some type of event which required him to assume "emergency powers".

Anyway, if you think Obama is some type of NWO poster child, please give us some predictions about what he / his administration is going to do (e.g. reinstate the draft, suspend the Constitution, etc).

Thanks... or PFFFFT! (Depending upon your opinion)

Evan, I don't believe that Obama is a fully paid up member of the Illuminatti, but, based soley on the History of Democratic Presidents the answer is, he'll keep the White House in good repair until the next GOP President. But, only time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the makeup of Obama's administration, it will be the Clinton administration again, but without the bimbos and balanced budget. How much corruption remains to be seen, since Ron Brown is unable to come back with the others. A good sign is that Sandy Berger isn't getting the CIA post, as his theft of documents from the National Archives was far too sloppy to meet professional standards.

As far as the idea of Bush arranging something to prevent Obama taking office, Bush doesn't have enough political capital left to even think about such a thing. Besides, as you could see in his final press conference, the man is simply worn out. Utter sorriness has taken quite a physical toll on Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evan, I don't believe that Obama is a fully paid up member of the Illuminatti, but, based soley on the History of Democratic Presidents the answer is, he'll keep the White House in good repair until the next GOP President. But, only time will tell.

So do you think he'll be a - pardon the pun - vanilla president? Being notable only for not doing anything notable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the makeup of Obama's administration, it will be the Clinton administration again, but without the bimbos and balanced budget. How much corruption remains to be seen, since Ron Brown is unable to come back with the others. A good sign is that Sandy Berger isn't getting the CIA post, as his theft of documents from the National Archives was far too sloppy to meet professional standards.

To be honest, Ron, I don't really know what people thought of the Clinton administration. So do you think it was (and thus Obama will be) good, bad, or indifferent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, Ron, I don't really know what people thought of the Clinton administration. So do you think it was (and thus Obama will be) good, bad, or indifferent?

The Clinton administration was one of the most corrupt in history, including everything from murders to covering up terrorist attacks. But many Americans loved and still love the Clinton crime family, just like they love the Corleones and like the Argentinians love Juan and Eva Peron. Their corruption is irrelevant (it was "just about sex" etc.) as long as they "do a good job."

Obama would appear to be a break in the decades-long reign in America of the Bush and Clinton crime families. But if you look at Obama's appointments, it's really just the Clintons' turn again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This guy did not serve under Clinton (I don't think), but fits right in with the Clinton culture that Obama is establishing. A tax cheat who will be in charge of the Treasury Dept.

His cheating, of course, was just "an honest mistake." Remember Filegate? Clinton called it "just a snafu." Clinton was lying then, of course, and this guy is lying now.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/01/14...minee.html?_r=2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I see.

I would describe the first four as ratbag sites, the DPF thread as a legitimate discussion about Obama's antecedents and the last link is not really criticism of Obama but rather a criticism of the makeup of his new team and its probable foreign policy direction.

I agree it's unfair to be too critical of Obama at this early stage but there are some worrying signs emerging. Hilary Clinton's comments at the Senate confirmation hearings were a disturbing sign that Obama could be bullied into conforming with the Congress position of refusing to speak with the democratically elected Government of the Palestinian Authority in Gaza. On one hand she stated that the US would use all diplomatic (and military) options at its disposal to solve the problems in the ME and then she promptly rules out any discussion with Hamas.

When one looks at some of Obama's appointments, one is entitled to be worried. A paradigm shift in US foreign policy appears unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark,

Do you think it is possible for him to make significant reforms with those appointments?

It's possible but not likely, imo.

The point is, except for what Obama has said during the campaign, and much of what he said was risk averse politics, we don't know what he will do when he becomes President. Many of his appointments might be the result of deals stitched up to satisfy lobby groups and political donors. In the end, Obama has the power.

He will be forced to oversee the biggest drop in living standards in US history, but FDR was able to manage a similar situation successfully. His biggest hurdle will be to dismantle the influence of the power elites--the arms manufacturing lobby foremost--which cause such wealth inequality within the US. The power elites and their lobbies are entrenched in the American system so he would need to go outside the system to achieve anything worthwhile. i.e directly to the people. A system of citizens referenda, like the current Swiss model, for major policy decisions would be worth a try, imo:

http://direct-democracy.geschichte-schweiz...eferendums.html

US foreign policy is such a disastrous mess that I think his best option is to use his current global popularity and support to bring about the necessary changes, and go over the heads of the Western media and big money interests. JFK would be a useful model for Obama in changing the direction of foreign policy, imo. Of course, this means he would risk sharing JFK's fate. And no foreign policy changes can work unless he detaches the US from its passionate attachment to Israel. Israel is a pariah state and this attachment has almost destroyed America's reputation. If he can develop an objective ME policy, the rest becomes a lot easier, imo.

I don't really think he can do all that, but you never know.

Edited by Mark Stapleton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark,

Do you think it is possible for him to make significant reforms with those appointments?

It's possible but not likely, imo.

The point is, except for what Obama has said during the campaign, and much of what he said was risk averse politics, we don't know what he will do when he becomes President. Many of his appointments might be the result of deals stitched up to satisfy lobby groups and political donors. In the end, Obama has the power.

He will be forced to oversee the biggest drop in living standards in US history, but FDR was able to manage a similar situation successfully. His biggest hurdle will be to dismantle the influence of the power elites--the arms manufacturing lobby foremost--which cause such wealth inequality within the US. The power elites and their lobbies are entrenched in the American system so he would need to go outside the system to achieve anything worthwhile. i.e directly to the people. A system of citizens referenda, like the current Swiss model, for major policy decisions would be worth a try, imo:

http://direct-democracy.geschichte-schweiz...eferendums.html

US foreign policy is such a disastrous mess that I think his best option is to use his current global popularity and support to bring about the necessary changes, and go over the heads of the Western media and big money interests. JFK would be a useful model for Obama in changing the direction of foreign policy, imo. Of course, this means he would risk sharing JFK's fate. And no foreign policy changes can work unless he detaches the US from its passionate attachment to Israel. Israel is a pariah state and this attachment has almost destroyed America's reputation. If he can develop an objective ME policy, the rest becomes a lot easier, imo.

I don't really think he can do all that, but you never know.

Mark...you speak as if Obama has power to do those things. A dog will not

bite the hand that is feeding him. A sock puppet moves only when the hand

up its bottom moves it.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark...you speak as if Obama has power to do those things. A dog will not

bite the hand that is feeding him. A sock puppet moves only when the hand

up its bottom moves it.

Jack

I know. I'm wishing out loud a bit here.

Although JFK set a precedent as a leader who tried to take control and set the agenda himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark...you speak as if Obama has power to do those things. A dog will not

bite the hand that is feeding him. A sock puppet moves only when the hand

up its bottom moves it.

Jack

I know. I'm wishing out loud a bit here.

Although JFK set a precedent as a leader who tried to take control and set the agenda himself.

Mark / Jack,

That is what I am talking about; the man hasn't even taken office and he's already been tried, sentenced and condemned.

After 6 months I think it could be fair to criticize him if he hasn't met your expectations, but even before inauguration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...