Who knew the “change” would be his own platform?

Looks like BO plans to carry this change idea through to every half hour or so.

A couple of days ago he dropped his plans for a windfall profits tax:

On Tuesday, an aide to the president-elect’s transition team said Obama was dropping his plan for a new windfall profits tax because oil prices had dropped below $80 a barrel and were expected to stay there. Oil prices have fallen from a record $147 a barrel in July to less than $50 a barrel this week.

One might presume those $1,000 checks to families that this tax would have paid for should bite the dust as well, but you never know with this guy.

Of course, we’ve known for a while (ok, those of us grown up enough to admit it, anyway) that Obama’s promise to leave Iraq in 16 months was not worth the air he expelled speaking the words. From the New York Times:

But as he moves closer to the White House, President-elect Obama is making clearer than ever that tens of thousands of American troops will be left behind in Iraq, even if he can make good on his campaign promise to pull all combat forces out within 16 months.

“I said that I would remove our combat troops from Iraq in 16 months, with the understanding that it might be necessary — likely to be necessary — to maintain a residual force to provide potential training, logistical support, to protect our civilians in Iraq,” Mr. Obama said this week as he introduced his national security team.

Obama’s advisors started the wave against repealing the Bush tax cuts last week. Again, the NY Times reported:

In light of the downturn, Mr. Obama is also said to be reconsidering a key campaign pledge: his proposal to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. According to several people familiar with the discussions, he might instead let those tax cuts expire as scheduled in 2011, effectively delaying any tax increase while he gives his stimulus plan a chance to work.

Tom Brokaw confirmed the idea with William Daley on Meet the Press the 23rd.

So the guy threw a lot of promises against the wall to get elected. What other ones do you think will be sliding off soon? The war, windfall profits, and tax increases for the wealthy are three pretty big disappointments to the far left who supported him.

Comments

  1. Tinkerbell says:

    The answer my friend is blowin’ in the wind… the answer is blowin’ in the wind.

    We may need a windsock to track the “changes” in direction.

    I get tired of hearing Ol’Boomer boom his proclamations at us from our TVs. He dramatizes each superfluous announcement as though it were an urgent declaration… as though he is filling our need for vital information, or our need for his patriachical reassurance. I nearly laughed out loud the other day when he boomed, in an overly serious tone, that Mr. Bush is President until he (BO) takes his oath of office on January 20th. LOL! While he stated the obvious, his tone suggested that it was by his say-so that Mr. Bush is remaining President. Several others have brought this up in conversation as well… great material for a Saturday Night Live parody.

  2. Randy in Richmond says:

    The biggy will be that 95% of Americans will not be getting a tax cut. It was a great election slogan but will be impossible to initiate in the real world.

  3. J. Strupp says:

    What are you complaining about?

    I notice that no one has commented to the fact that Obama “about face” actually makes good economic sense, given our current economic reality.

    ….and his administration will most likely put together a trillion dollar stimulus package that includes sizeable cuts taxes for the middle class.

    Makes sense too.

    The guy is adapting to economic realities that didn’t exist a few months ago even though his change of direction runs contrary to what his base wants him to do. Some would say that’s what a leader does.

    95% of taxpayers may, indeed, get a direct tax cut.

    My guess is that tax incentives for cap-ex, such as the acceleration of depreciation write-offs will be forthcoming as well.

    All are fine by me.

  4. You’re funny. No, I’m not complaining at all. My point is to draw out the number of times he lied to bring out a far left voting block when he had no intentions of following through. Tee hee. Had I known he was going to be this reasonable, heck, I might have voted for him!

  5. Tinkerbell says:

    Dear J-S,
    What might economic stimulus consist of? Creating sustainable jobs? Sending the unemployed to gain skills in rebuilding the storm-ravaged areas of the south? Paying them to host grass-roots agenda-learning meetings?

    A tax-cut for 95% of taxpayers may include me (yippeee) but would it be a meaningful amount? $10? $10k? If the income taxes I pay this year decrease, does government spending decrease by the same amount? Or does the government take it out of my other pocket in property tax, user fees, or creative new taxes like mailbox tax, window tax, chimney tax, inches of precipitation tax, garbage tax, un-green tax? Or does the national debt increase? Remember there are two sides to each transaction. If we “owe” the national debt, who have we borrowed it from?? Who “owns” us in return?

    The financial market is a delicate web of interactions, whose light filaments have begun to entrap us.

    BO has stated the economy will get worse before it gets better. He boomed this last week in tones perhaps meant to leave us in awe of his wisdom rather than us perceiving him as weak and ineffectual. Sounds like he is somewhat resigned to the situation as long as he is isolated and protected from it. I recall this is what he accused the conservatives of?

    Is is leadership? Waffling? Flip-flopping like a fish out of water? I thing the biggest “change” is that he is determined above all else to always land right side up, demanding a level of respect which he did not give to our current President.

  6. Randy in Richmond says:

    J Strupp
    Interesting choice of the phrase ‘about face’. As I didn’t vote for Mr. Obama I would use the words lying, misleading, preaching to the left wing choir, etc. When President Bush, as a result of 911, had to change the direction of his administration and make many tough, unpopular decisions, I don’t remember you on the left extolling his leadership abilities as you do for Mr. Obama.
    And if I give you $50 and then tell you to give me $75 back, are you better off financially? This is exactly what will happen when Mr. Obama allows the Bush tax cuts to expire. When this is taken into consideration there is no way 95% of taxpayers will receive a net tax cut. But the catchy sound of it helped Mr. Obama get elected.

  7. J. Strupp says:

    The #1 problem of President Bush’s administration is that he NEVER did an “about face” and adapted to the realities that faced this nation.

    If he had chosen to do so at any time during the continuous blunders of our war on “terror”, I would have been the first in line to commend him.

    The Bush tax cuts will not be allowed to expire under the Obama administration. I’m of the opinion that the economy will not show enough of a recovery in the next 2 years to warrant such a move. Obama is a logical man. He knows not to raise taxes during times such as these. That’s why he has backed off on his tax increases already.

    P.S. all politicians lie to get elected. I couldn’t care less. They all pander to the suckers to get elected. Results, once in office, is what’s important.

  8. The Lorax says:

    richard is right, the bush administrationlied about wmd and then admitted reality only when they had no other choice. what a courageous feat!

  9. Randy in Richmond says:

    Lorax
    This is such old non-news. The Bush administration used intelligence not only from the CIA but from France, England, Israel, and others. There are videos of Sadaam using WMDs against the Kurds. To report the best intel one has is not lying. If it is then Bill and Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore, Senators Tom Daschle, Bob Graham, Ted Kennedy, Carl Levin, Robert Byrd, Jay Rockerfeller, and others as well as Sandy Berger, Madeline Albright, and Reps. Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman all ‘lied’ according to you.

    Strupp
    What lies did John McCain make? I’m not talking about mis-speaks as there are plenty of those to go around. Using your logic how does one make a decision on who to vote for?
    And I guess it depends on your priorities as to whether President Bush’s war on terror has been sucessful. In seven years there have been no other sucessful attacks on American soil and to many that is a more than satisfactory.

  10. The Lorax says:

    yup they did. i wasn’t trying to make a political point. i was just simply showing the great ”decisionmaking” of bush himself.

  11. You are correct. There have not been any other terror attacks on American soil since that big one where American airliners were flown into American buildings during President Bush’s first term as President.

    If you want to gauge success of the war on “terror” based on a simplistic argument that there has not been a terrorist attack on Amercian soil since 9-11, I reserve the right to argue that, indeed, the worst terrorist attack in American history occured during President Bush’s first term as President and he is somewhat responsible for failing to prevent it.

    Randy, if you really believe the stuff you say regarding what “intelligence” our government used to go to war, I truly feel sorry for you.

  12. Good grief, a couple of you must be very bored to pull WMD out of your backsides as an argument.

    Randy – good to hear from you!

  13. I agree! With all of the issues facing our nation right now, I’ve managed to involve myself in another WMD debate.

    I take full responsibility for my actions. Sorry.

  14. Tinkerbell says:

    Dear J-S,
    Unfortunately it is NOT a debate when you are not sharing facts/sources which counter another’s… but give an emotional response (attack, pity, etc). True debate is something you may aspire to.

  15. The Lorax says:

    i love how WMD is so passe for you cindy when it was the propaganda that has led to the deaths of thousands of american troops, and hundreds of thousands of iraqis.

    WMD wasn’t pulled out of my backside, it was pulled out of bush/cheney’s collective bum. and for that, thousands have died. compassionate conservatism at its finest.

  16. J. Strupp says:

    Tinkerbell,

    Fine. Then It’s not a debate.

    I’m more than comfortable with my knowledge regarding this issue. I’m really not interested in getting into it though which is why I’m not going to.

    I think you have me confused with someone else if you think I offer up emotional responses without knowing the subject matter.

  17. Tinkerbell says:

    Dear J-S,
    Please accept my apologies – I had you confused with the commentor who said, ‘if you really believe the stuff you say regarding what “intelligence” our government used to go to war, I truly feel sorry for you.’, rather than offering facts/sources in opposition.

    Oh, that WAS you.

  18. because it’s popular knowledge that the bush administration distorted evidence.

    it’s inefficient, even in debate, to have to offer sources for well-known truths. this isn’t a policy debate. it’s a values debate.

  19. Mr. Lorax, that’s why the site isn’t named “the compassionate conservative.” You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about as you plop your lazy backside in a warm chair with a computer in your face making excuses for all of the things that never go right in your life which are, of course, someone’s fault but not your own.

    Too bad your savior abandoned you on this issue. After all of his promises, that’s gotta hurt. At least I knew who I was voting for last November. You got a Jekyll/Hyde out of the deal. I’m sure that’s OK with you, though. You’ll have someone new to blame for everything soon.

  20. Tinkerbell says:

    Dear Lorax,
    You don’t seem to realize some ‘popular knowledge’ is myth. Too many are easily bamboozled. Don’t be a sheeple, but investigate deeply and do your own thinking. Remember there is a reason for the saying, “The Masses are Asses”.

  21. Tinkerbell says:

    Well put, Cindy!

  22. this is funny. compassionate conservative was the bush phrase, his campaign slogan. So cindy, isn’t it kind of funny that you are pointing out my candidate is running back on his campaign mantra…40+ days before he even gets in office?

    obama hasn’t abandoned this cause…not even a little. i know it’s hard for you to see a real pragmatist in office, because not everything is black and white.

    yes, it really isn’t my fault that bush lied about wmd. i didn’t have anything i could do about it. so yes, it isn’t my fault.

    that being said, if obama doesn’t keep up to his basic campaign planks, i WILL be out there criticizing him. something you couldn’t do to your own candidate when he pulled a jekyll/hyde on numerous issues (torture, bush tax cuts, the war, etc.)

  23. Tinkerbell says:

    Dear Lorax,
    Cindy referred to blame regarding things which don’t go right “in your life”, so there seems to be disconnect with you responding with blame for President Bush regarding not finding weapons of mass destruction.

    What some see as waffling, going back on one’s word, etc, you see as “leadership”, … while what others see as “leadership”, needing to make decisions with imperfect knowledge at a point in time, hindsight-is-20/20, or being responsive to a change in circumstances with the passage of time, you see as lying, etc.

    I think you would find many of these words and phrases to carry the same essential meaning, although some are positively or negatively charged with emotion.

    The essential difference between BO’s variance from platform and Bush’s variance from platform is the time frame: BO is making significant changes within a month after election – when time has not elasped to allow circumstances to vary from what was foreseen by many during the election. Some may therefore consider that his change in direction is capricious or planned with intentional forethought.

    Meanwhile the Bush administration has had the test of 8 years time and we can see how plans set in motion by others before him, as well as decisions made during his office, have played out on the stage of an ever-changing world in the past decade.

    Regardless the difference of opinion, there is no need to put others down (as you do when you use phrases like “something you couldn’t do” when addressing Cindy). If your essential point is, has Cindy ever not agreed with a decision of the Bush administration, I believe you would find the answer is “yes”.

    You might want to consider whether you are a person who sees everything in the extremes of black and white as you accuse Cindy of. So often what people find as weaknesses in others reveals more about themselves.

  24. The Lorax says:

    ooh, a pop psychology diagnosis. thanks for that.

    obama saying he might have to delay or scrap the windfall profits tax in light of an even larger economic downturn to me suggests he’s thinking pragmatically instead of holding on to his beliefs for fear of adaptation.

    indeed, the economic outlook has changed a lot since november. wasn’t it ralph waldo emerson who extolled, “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

    long after the whole bush rationalization for war was disproven, it had taken bush YEARS to finally admit it. bush may or may not have a small mind, but his administration is pretty obviously insecure about changing their mind.

    further, i’m sure cindy or others might rip on me for “pulling the wmd/war thing out of my keester” but it’s merely a case study in the thought process of the bush admin. (hey, i can be a pop psychologist, too!)

  25. From “savior of the world” to “real pragmatist” in a month. Who’d have thunk it.

  26. The Lorax says:

    nope, he’s still a pragmatic savior.