Hey, did Obama or the Clinton's win the election? Is this really change?

(This article is extension of article below this one)

It doesn't look very promising does it? Is this change? Is it real change? Are these peole going to provide “change”! It looks very doubtful. Okay, I can hear some of you saying “give him a chance, he is not President, not in power, yet”! Yeah okay, but he didn't get elected on the basis of “give me a chance” he got elected on the basis of “change” and I am sure that most people meant “real change” when they voted. So what about his silence or non-action over the Israel – Gaza situation with over 900 dead. Is this change, real change? So the "I am not yet President" silence and non-action, is this a sign of real change? Wouldn't real change have meant doing something, something different from the past, which includes not remaining silent, non-active just because presidency has not yet taken force. Doesn't this mean taking action that is really different from the past, not following routines and ideas from the past, and policies of the past? Even doing something even though the presidency has not yet come into force? Wouldn't this be the real change? Are we truly seeing change here? Change from the Bush policy, the Clinton policy, and all the policies before that! Is this just more of the same, in a different wrapping?

Is this really change? Does this really promise real change? Yeah right, the court is still out on this one! But somehow or other, sadly, I feel it might not be..........

Hey, did Obama or the Clinton's win the election?

Hey, who is running the show folks?

Obama.: More of the same? And the same from whom?

Over 900 dead in Gaza and still Obama says and does nothing! Israel and Jewish influence still is the master!

Obama's determination to carry on the fight in Afghanistan! Does this mean another war loving President?

Hillary Clinton as secretary of state? The papers talk of „...conflicts of interest...“! What conflict of interests? It is possible that some people might see this as some kind of pay-off position, but there is no evidence of that. Of course she is married to an ex-president who still has much power and sway, and whose charitable foundation have received a number of donations from foreign governments and multinational corporations. And who is still actively busy in business and political matters all over the world. She did run for president herself, and only gave up reluctantly (has she really given up?), so she has strong ideas and policies of her own, she was rather quick to vote for the Iraq war (so does this mean she is another warmonger?), Obama and Hillary Clinton clashed on some foreign policy issues during the primary campaign ........So, what conflict of interests?

Robert Gates: a former director of the CIA, appointed Defence Secretary by President Bush and who promoted the military surge in Iraq..................

Eric Holder: another Clinton ...he was number two in the Clinton Administration Justice Department

Susan Rice, to be UN ambassador was also in Clinton administration

Lisa Jackson to head Environmental Protection Agency -worked for the EPA under Bill Clinton

Shaun Donovan: Secretary of Housing/Urban Development - was also in the Clinton Administration

Tom Vilsack: Agriculture Secretary - endorsed Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

Leon Panetta: to head the CIA (?) - former Clinton White House chief of staff

Janet Napolitano: to head the Department of Homeland Security - President Bill Clinton appointed her US Attorney for the District of Arizona.

whose show is this really?

My oh my Obama is “deeply concerned“

My oh my, Obama is „deeply concerned„! What about! There is nothing to be „deeply concerned“ about is there? I mean Israel has only killed about 600 people or more, and goodness knows wounded how many more, and many of these children and women or innocent men! What has Obama to be concerned about? And why should he be concerned at all, after all he is only the president elect that takes office in a few days time. Why should he be bothered or concerned with such matters? The inauguration party is more important! Sitting on the fence is more important! Not upsetting those Jewish power bosses and voters and right-wingers is more important. Not going against the American trend of supporting Israel no matter what they do, or treat other people, is more important. Why should Obama be „deeply concerned“! What good is that going to do anyway, lets get on with the big party in Washington, that’s more important, that’s what we have be more concerned about!

Obama’s kind of change: Sitting on the fence

Bush supports the war in Palestine, he supports Israel. We can not expect anything good or worthwhile from him. Obama canvassed for election on the word “change”. Apparently change for him is sitting on the fence.

Obama is busy. Busy sitting on the fence, enjoying his view from a luxury hotel of the Whitehouse, “busy” making financial plans for the “recovery of America“. Very noble. The only trouble is as he is doing this hundreds of people, once real live people, are being killed in Palestine. Not his problem! Not his business! Not his watch!

Come on, what a load of rubbish!

I would say it is every human beings problem, no matter where they are.

Not his business? Why not? He is a human being isn’t he? It’s the business of all of us.

He has been elected because he promised change and just because he is not in the White House (on Watch!) surely does not exclude him from this; he is busy with other presidential problems.

Not his watch (Only one president)! Well I don’t see what his not yet being president has to do with this. I am not president and even I am trying to do something (by writing this and other things) and he is in a more powerful position than I am.

There are a lot more reasons. For example how about the unbalanced and biased support of America for Israel. How about that America has helped Israel to be such a well armed and powerful country and force, even having nuclear capabilities. How about the fact that America has armed Israel. How about the way America has encouraged Israel over all the years, either directly or indirectly or secretly or through third parties. How about the fact that America is still doing that right at this moment. How about the fact that America is responsible for what is going on now, directly or indirectly. How about so many reasons. ……

…….How about the simple fact that these are human beings, that Palestinians are human beings too, and are supposed to have human rights too…but no one can ever really believe this…

…not his watch…only one president at a time……

….come off it…..

…..were not talking about real change…(and he has been elected now so forget that)….

…………..were talking about the game of politics…staying in power…not upsetting those powerful right-wingers, the powerful and influential Jewish votes and power bosses….

….change…what change…change is selective, it means I’m going to talk about it, promise it….it don’t mean I’m going to do it…and even if I do…well don’t expect any heroics or anything "really changeful "

Bush: A liar and getting senile? Who, him or us?

An article (and the responses to this article) in the Politics selection of www.netscape.com (link on right of page) stimulated me to write my own response, reproduced below (also published on netscape.com).


Lies; extreme fear of public speaking; just drunk; bad conscience; brain trauma; average intelligence; drugs; Alzheimer’s; the poor guy - leave him and our great nation alone; not as good an actor as Reagan – difficult to hold a thread in mind (under pressure); democratic plot; unpatriotic (traitors)…the list goes on.

Aren’t the reactions amazing! Are we talking about some top national comedian celebrity, or some Reality Television show? If we were then probably that person or that show would be getting top viewing ratings. Well judging by the comments and reactions many of us are more than a little confused by what we are “watching” (witnessing); is it some tragic comedy or a Reality Television Show disguised?

What are we watching then (or participating in) if it is not a comedy or reality television?

The President of the USA, the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, and a government that has also taken on (undemocratically and unasked for) the role of policing the world.

Katrina: a city destroyed, people dead, over a billion dollars of aid funds missing; Iraq: a country illegally invaded; thousands of dead, chaos, war, billions of dollars in aid gone missing; Terrorism: democracy and freedom severely curtailed and reduced, increased terrorism and threat of; Stability: instability around the world; Fear: use of fear to gain control and manipulate to achieve aims and hidden agendas; ….the list goes on!

Surely there can be little doubt that Bush struggles with a web of lies. Yet no one seriously looks at the psychological background history of Bush and answers the question if this person is “fit” to lead the nation, which has also taken on the (undemocratic and unasked for) role as “world policeman”. Instead we say things like: it is difficult to hold a thread in your mind while under pressure….your a liar…..

After all who wants a president that polices the world to be able to hold a thread in his mind under pressure, and who tells the truth?