A Congressman just said on CNBC that tax increases for high wage earners would likely not come into play until 2010.

Blogging is fun but facts don’t change if you go to the Govenment Website for Bills passed or being reviewed now. As for my statement I posted the information came from the Govement Website which all people can view. I know some find it hard to believe but this happen. Bush knows how to fool Americans just as with the bailout. As Americans read headlines of the bailout, Paulson and Bernanke were busy handing out the money to the chosen few with no accountablity. Just as you missed the War Crimes Detainee Bill we all miss the bailout being robbed. Even AIG got another 40 billion dollars after wasting most of the money they have already been given. So like President Obama ssid we have to pay more attention to what our Govenment is doing.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Your vote is for that theory to not hold. That’s mine as well.

I hope he doesn’t do that. On the other hand, I’m kind of glad, now, that Congress didn’t push Karl Rove into perjuring himself so he can go to jail. If they had, Bush just would have pardoned him. This way we can go after the Bush Crime Family for all the crimes they have committed and there won’t be anyone there to pardon them, meaning THEY WILL GO TO JAIL!

Other websites dedicated a whole webpage with multiple stories on Obama’s new Chief of Staff. TP published one sentence?

I quit sharing my concerns about Rahm Rahm Rahm Rahm Rahm Iran on this progressive website.

I do know leaders like Rahm drive in fear, which distorts any organization. It causes lying and cheating to give the boss what they want. It remains to be seen how Obama and Emanuel will mix.

Actually I have concerns also, but not about Emmanuel as chief of staff. As Chief of Staff he will have to follow Obama’s agenda, not Emanuel’s.

My concern was and still is the flip-flop Obama did on the FISA/Telco Immunity bill, and that still concerns me. My hopes are that the Constitution and Bill of Rights will be preserved and the erosion of our rights will be reversed.

Despite my concerns over that, I donated to Obama, supported him and voted for him, because we needed to get the Republicans out.

I will be watching the new president also, and I have no expectations that I will like everything he will do, just as I did not like everything Clinton did. But lets let him get sworn in before we get too critical. He is not the President yet.

Serious point this, someone getting inside the Bush bubble is pretty rare.

What bush bubble? mcchimpy dissed him worse and that’s his buddy.

I hope President-Elect Obama brings his own hand sanitizer.

Maureen Dowd talks about how personal demons are magnified inside the White House. People clearly know Bush’s demons and don’t like them. He turned the White House into a heavy handed CorporaWhorehouse.

If you start taking Maureen Dowd’s commentary seriously, you need a cold shower and a stiff drink.

Work through the system…is there any other way really?

This whole thing started just because I stated my displeasure with the Emmanuel pick.

It worries me, it does not mean I’ve already given up on Obama’s presidency.

If we think the new Administration is making a mistake, isn’t it better to warn them ahead of time, rather than “wait and see?”

Certainly, but I think this level of concern is unwarranted and ridiculous… he appointed Emmanuel as chief-of-staff- he didn’t decide to invade another country illegally.
I believe one of those decisions demands intense scrutiny and examination and opposition, I think we can let the other slide for the moment with a ‘wait and see’ attitude.

I wasn’t comparing LT’s criticism to the invasion of Iraq-

Oh really?

I was comparing LT’s preconceived notions about Emmanuel driving LT’s hysteria with little or no facts to base that hysteria on to the preconceived notions about Iraq driving that hysteria with little or no basis in fact…

So, how are you not comparing my criticism…

Ugh, whatever, I give up.

I’m not hysterical. I’m pi$$ed off rightly that a bunch of so-called fellow Progressives have attacked me today for questioning my President-elect’s decisions.

I have plenty of reasons to dislike Emmanuel and to therefore questions Obama’s decision to pick him. Of course, those reasons have been ignored.

From Foreign Policy.com:
The most infamous Rahmbo story of them all is the one that begins with the dinner the night after Bill Clinton was elected in 1992. Among those present at the dinner table was ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, who watched while an overwrought and clearly exhausted Emanuel began ranting at a long list of Clinton “enemies.” As he shouted each name, he stabbed the table with his steak knife: “Nat Landow! Dead! Cliff Jackson! Dead!” Apparently, others joined in.

Table stabbing with a knife. Great…

That one is trivial, admittedly, so how about this:

1. He lobbied other Democrats to support the Surge
2. He lobbied other Democrats to back off on Cheney Impeachment support
3. He actively worked AGAINST anti-war Democrats in FAVOR of pro-war Democrats in the ‘06 elections
4. Lips are FIRMLY planted on AIPAC’s pucker
5. Was on Freddie Mac’s board during book cooking…

Anyway…back to your regularly scheduled programming.

I still support Barack Obama, but I do not like the Emmanuel pick.

I’ve always respected your opinion as expressed in your posts here and I still do.

I also understand what you want to do and agree that now that we have regained our footing that we should try to keep the boat on an even keel.

This is the perfect place for discussions like this.

I also think there is still a lot of pent up emotion guiding many liberals actions these days.

We have to remain pragmatic and work within the system that we have. We can also work to change that system if we deem it ineffective…..

You obviously have very strong feelings about Rahm’s selection.

We all know the things you mention. This is not new to most of us. However Obama has a challenge ahead of him and we selected him because we trust his judgement over all others that we could have picked from.

We will also have to allow him some mistakes, it seems inevitable that there will be some.

Personally, I’m taking a longer view of events. You or I cannot micromanage this new administration.

Let’s see how he handles a few things before we throw in the towel.

As with any leader, everyone is not going to like everything that they do, ever…..remember JFK’s quote?

I personally like the selection of Rahm, it shows that Obama plans to take a firm hold on events that he can control. Rahm is included in that catagory of what Obama must control.

Just my thoughts.

Peace

November 10th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
_______

Fair enough, but I don’t think the concerns about Rahm Emmanuel are all that farfetched. There has been a bit of concern raised among Middle Eastern scholars and peace activists over the selection of one of the most pro-Israel members of Congress as Chief of Staff. That’s legitimate. There’s also concern that Emanuel’s connections to the hedge fund and securities industry may influence who he allows to have access to the new President.

That having been said, I’m also optimistic – the plain fact is that Emanuel will work for Obama, not the other way around. This President will set the policy, and if his aim is to surround himself with people who don’t necessarily agree with him on every issue, I salute the decision. We’ve had too much administration by Yes-men.

I wholeheartedly agree… peace!

and I apologize to you Liberal Traitor, I never meant to imply that you were contemplating the invasion of a sovereign nation, you’re welcome in the party as far as I’m concerned– just please stop telling me not to dance.

For some, the honeymoon is not over. Telling these people that there is laundry to have to face, clean and air is not welcome.

For others, the hangover is killing them and need fresh air and a cold shower.

.

You have been debunked for this misinformation on another thread. The bill you mentioned does no such thing.

PAX

I am not, as you call it, “horrified” by anything Obama has done thus far (other than his vote for the FISA bill. That was horrifying. I still voted for the man).

I am worried, and I will not be quiet when he does something I don’t like.

Rahm Emmanuel is a bad CoS choice for many reasons. The only good reason to pick him is he is aggressive and placates the Blue Dogs in the Democratic party…and the Israel Whores…and the Corporate Whores…see where I’m going with this?

Obama already went back on his supposed support for decriminalization of marijuana.

He removed his support of Net Neutrality from his web page…then when he was criticized for it BY HIS SUPPORTERS it was put back up on change.gov. Hooray! Questioning your leaders works!

The all caps statements were written in anger. Because so far today I have been called names, told to leave the party I have always belonged to, and told to keep quiet, and been compared to the preemptive invasion of Iraq for simply questioning a few things about Obama.

And my statement about “Obama is better than Bush, doesn’t say much” was clarified later. I understand it warranted clarification.

I was saying Obama would not have to do anything at all in 8 years and he’d still be better than Bush. My focus is on how much better he can be. He can be a GREAT President, and criticism, debate, questioning, and pressure from his supporters will help make that happen.

I was just as patient, just as much against my will, as any of you these last 8 years.

No, Obama will not treat Congress like a whipped dog or declare martial law to get his way. I am glad of that.

No, Obama would torture or destroy our economy like Bush did. I am glad of that.

He won’t be ignighting the flames of hate and bigotry as palen and mccain did via his actions. Just by being who he is he inflames the bigotry of the already bigoted. This is not his fault of course. This is one thing we all should be vigilant against. I am extremely happy that America finally elected a non-white President. It’s about damn time.

Certainly, but I think this level of concern is unwarranted and ridiculous… he appointed Emmanuel as chief-of-staff- he didn’t decide to invade another country illegally.
I believe one of those decisions demands intense scrutiny and examination and opposition, I think we can let the other slide for the moment with a ‘wait and see’ attitude.

I wasn’t comparing LT’s criticism to the invasion of Iraq- I was comparing LT’s preconceived notions about Emmanuel driving LT’s hysteria with little or no facts to base that hysteria on to the preconceived notions about Iraq driving that hysteria with little or no basis in fact…