I'm neither a Republican nor a Libertarian. I question authority - no matter who that authority is. If Obama decides to hire someone who's currently on the board of Chevron or a woman whose husband is responsible for NAFTA onto his foreign policy team, you can be assured that I will be calling him on it.

Change, whatever - I'm not a political zombie. If Obama fucks up, and it sure looks like he's on the path to fucking up - I'm going to talk about it.

i dont think he was referring to you with that tinfoil reference, ha ha ha.

Yup - I know that. But I hate to see people just lock step behind any politician.

Why, 'cuz I don't bow down to yr god?

Since when does having a thoughtful approach to foreign relations mean that he is President of the world? And Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School. Obama may have made compromises in order to make the Patriot Act more transparent instead of voting against it (and failing), but that doesn't mean he is against civil liberties.

it's the famous honeymoon... period? effect? what you call it.

i didnt know jim jones was in the board of chevron-- whoa!!!!

ok, i feel like putting on a tinfoil hat myself...

well, anyway, we'll see what happens. im willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt at this point in time.

Yup - he seems to be on the road but not all the way there. - I hope I'll be proven wrong. It's definitely a varied team, but I would have been much happier if his team leaned more to the left. I feel like so much needs to be overcome over the past 8 years.

Voting to re-authorize the Patriot Act, & voting for the bailout, he compromises the same people who elected him.

People post about politics on forums because they're bored with themselves, the world, or something is an urgent matter with thier daily lives. Apathy ensues because it means fuck all, and it's always is nothing more than a bit of insignificant ranting. Say what you like.

And the only option other than being in lock step is to be a skeptical sniper? You really must be beyond cynical if you think a person cannot defend a politician without being a crony.

He reauthorized the Patriot Act with amendments to clarify rights of detainees while also voting against the extending wiretap provision and, thus, kept the bill provisional and not permanent. Would you rather him vote against it and have it pass without these amendments?

And voting for the bailout is compromising the people? Bullocks.

How can you defend the appointment of a Chevron board member? Haven't we had enough of big oil in our government already? It's better to question than to just accept. We definitely need checks and balances and that's part of the responsibility of the people. I'm always going to ask why.

the agenda seems to be getting the big things done that require bipartisan support first: ending the iraq war, passing health care, energy, etc., and avoid the clinton fuckup of derailing his public support early on with small
"controversial" issues (gays in the military early in clinton's first term, while an issue of fairness, is what got gingrich elected).

congress & the people are going to be more willing to support an iraq withdrawal coming from a hawkish marine general than from say ufo-sighting kucinich.

so i'd be looking for his second term for the more left-leaning policies. right now the plan as i see it is to get things done, something washington hasn't been good at for decades now.

People who post on forums at all are bored with the world, if you consider the internet unworldly. And "bored with themselves" sounds like some existential point that you've misunderstood as a negative quality. Perhaps you mean bored by their own inability to find activity? And again, posting online at all seems like a common place for procrastinating urgent matters.

I like what I said.

Have you seen one reply of mine to the Chevron point? Or should I jump on your bandwagon to prove that I don't jump on bandwagons? I've never said all criticism of Obama is bad and I never would. If you bring up a legitimate point, I'll look into it myself but I'm not going to assume that all critical points are legitimate because they are critical.

Any form of the Patriot Act puts the Constitution in jeopardy, which if he taught law anywhere, he would recognize compromising the Constitution is not tolerated in American law.

& if you think giving the international bankers more governmental powers is good, you're sorely mistaken. Just expect the inevitable Martial Law.

Obama isn't a Supreme Court Justice, he does not have the authority to declare legislation unconstitutional, nor do you. I thought you preferred the separation of powers?

And your second point is bizarre conspiracy slippery slope nonsense.

it cracks me up to see you arguing earnestly with marleypumpkin and porkmarras. you do make good points, but you realize they are wasted, right? if you're doing it as an exercise in rhethoric for your own sake, then please, keep bench pressing.

I believe the the heading on the Constitution is "We The People", not "We The Supreme Court". Anyone has the right to speak out against clearly un-constitutional laws.

& for so-called conspiracy theory, yr right. I'm just some nut who made up the IMF, World Bank, & Club of Rome.

The controlled environment helps. Last time I talked politics with my Ron Paulite friend, he was playing poker with the other guys and I think I screwed over his game.