Man (0.00 / 0)

Obama is such a sleazebag.  

---

by: Ga6th @ Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 07:12:20 AM CST

LOL Ga6th (0.00 / 0)

I appreciate that succint summary. He really is a sleazebag. I am astonished to note how much worse he is than I expected--and my expectations were very, very low. Really it's no exxaggeration to say that he is worse than Bush, mind-boggling though that is!!

I'm so done with the Democrats it isn't even funny. Not that either party interests me, I'm a Green for life I guess.

---

by: DancingOpossum @ Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 10:30:18 AM CST

[ Parent | ]

He's worse than Bush (0.00 / 0)

because he says one thing and then turns around and does the complete opposite.  At least with Bush we got to know his agenda, as despicable as it was.

With Obama, we know nothing about his motivations, but it appears that he wants badly to please the power-brokers responsible for the whole damn mess.

---

by: Gabriele Droz @ Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 11:35:23 AM CST

[ Parent | ]

Never, ever, support a politician on faith (0.00 / 0)

Why the geniuses in our white latte liberal economic class did is still a mystery to me.

---

by: Pacific John @ Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 14:04:29 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

Because it was in their interests to do so... (0.00 / 0)

... especially those in Versailles, and because they talked themselves into thinking his values were really "progressive" enough (whatever that means these days).

---

by: lambert @ Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 15:31:14 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

I had one friend (0.00 / 0)

who said, in response to my point that Hillary had experience dealing with the mechanisms of government, that Obama's lack of experience was better, because he would be open to new ideas.  And that he was a great man, a transformative person, etc, etc, etc.  I just think that they were so enamored of the idea, that they'd engage in whatever manner of pretzel logic they had to in order to justify their infatuation.

---

by: cellocat @ Sat Jan 09, 2010 at 12:51:54 PM CST

[ Parent | ]