Obama Is The Detox The Government Needs
March 8, 2008 by Mike Rushmore
In the past, I’ve called Obama a steaming pile of charisma, but now I’m convinced that he is MY steaming pile of charisma. First, the man’s wife can admit that sometimes there are reasons not to be proud of America. Then I read about that he is a civil libertarian. Now he has officially stated that he will review all of President Bush’s executive orders and throw out any that are unconstitutional. The clinches it. Obama is the candidate who will best serve America, and he will do it by reversing at least some of the damage done by Bush.
I was afraid that Obama would become president and just sit there for 4-8 years, but clearly he is would actually do some good as president.
The most important topics for the next president have to be Iraq, the national debt, and reversing the damage that Bush has done. Oh wait, both those first two things are very related to what Bush has done as president. With that in mind, it is even more important that the next president pledge to turn the country around and go in the opposite direction of President Bush.
Obama’s pledge to review and discard illegal and unconstitutional executive orders is the first step towards completely removing any remnants of Bush administration policy from America. He has even gone so far is to say that warrantless wiretaps are not just outrageous and undemocratic, they are also unrepublican. An overhaul of the federal government will have to be done once President Bush leaves office, and Obama has the backbone to do it.
“Obama has the backbone to do it.”
Give me one experience that Obama has required to use this backbone? He has not done anything that has showed courage in his public life.You can’t just say you want to change America, especially when you have no record of such change.
[Reply]
Valid point, much like Clinton’s claims of experience, Obama has used his claims of courage and change with little to back them up. When I am in doubt about Obama’s claims, one place I look is at his record in the Illinois State Senate. He had a record of voting “present” instead of yes or no for bill which he felt needed to be revised before being passed. Of course, it can be argued that he didn’t do this alone. I also look at the fact that he has been against Iraq from the start, and has said so at a time when few politicians would. That took foresight and courage.
[Reply]
What happened to that courage once he came into the Senate? It sure dried up when he voted with Senator Clinton to fund the war.
He could have even made another one of his great speeches denouncing the war, but saying he would still fund it anyways. That would be courage.
With his present votes in the Illinois State Senate, and his record in voting for funding the war in the U.S. Senate, Obama has not shown courage.
[Reply]
One major aclompishment of Obama was requiring interogations with death sentences be video taped. Both the GOP, cops, and governor opposed this. But with all this oposirion he still got his bill passed.
[Reply]
With all due respect to Obama for addressing the executive orders issue, the dreaded Hillary said the same thing long ago. For instance, in the 2007 Des Moines Register debate she said: “I will review executive orders, rescind those that undermine the Constitution & betray the rule of law, & issues like not interfering with science. I’ll ask Congress to send me everything that Bush vetoed like stem cell research and begin to prepare my legislative and budget proposals for the Congress.” http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/2007_Dems_DMR_Hillary_Clinton.htm
At the end of January ‘08 she told Wolf Blitzer on CNN that on her first day in office she would reverse some of Bush’s executive orders that gave too much power to the president at the expense of other branches.
There are other such instances as well, if anyone were interested enough to google for them.
So with all kudos to Obama for his stance, he wasn’t exactly the first to go there.
[Reply]
Valid points, still doesn’t make up for all of Clinton’s flaws, but you’re right that she may have been the first to say that. Though for whatever reason (probably a manufactured sense of honesty) I feel that Obama is more likely to deliver on this particular pledge.
[Reply]
Obama is not much of a change. He is the same ordinary politician who talks a lot, he just talks better than most.
[Reply]
Mike, I don’t think you’re giving credit where it’s due. Senator Clinton obviously came out first and said she was going to draw back on executive power. I wish you would explain more as to why you think “Obama is more likely to deliver” especially since there are no facts to back this up with. It’s all assumption.
[Reply]
Dan, you’re you make a good point that Clinton said this first about executive orders, but as I have said, Obama has a history of being a civil libertarian. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/01/opinion/01rosen.html that article does a great job of talking about how Obama has been consistent and ahead of the curve on championing civil liberties, while Clinton has not been. It could be true that Clinton has delivered on more promises in this area than Obama, but it seems that those promises have often been ones that don’t promote civil liberties. From what I can tell, Obama will deliver on that front.
[Reply]