Question:
Why are liberals upset at the Obama cabinet appointments ?
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Why are liberals upset at the Obama cabinet appointments ?
21 answers:
?
2016-10-20 10:40:46 UTC
They allowed republicans to administration the narrative. on no account rather advance the reality that a million, the republicans decrease the funds to the embassies. 2, decrease than the previous administration fifty 4 embassies have been attacked ensuing in 13 American deaths. of those fifty 4 assaults, purely 3 hearings have been held, none of that have been used as a sword against the administration. and 3, If the youtube movie had not something to do with the protests, then what have been the different 19 protests in front of our embassies that day approximately?
2009-01-01 16:49:22 UTC
Could we not come down off the "bleachers" for a minute? Leave this adolescent arch-rivalry behind, share a good, solid hand-shake, discuss the issues NOT as "libs" or "cons" (neither of which is really represented in an incumbent congress) but as Americans? [Americans are certainly not represented in D.C.]



It has become clearer and clearer: politicians promise the moon if elected. And, once elected, they moon us.



And it's only getting worse as we fall for their puppet-show of why the 'spirit of parties' somehow does anything but spit on the People and our Liberties.



Forgive me but I can no longer picture the visage of a logical person still trusting this party-charade or the media-machine bawling its eyes out to distract us from truth.



G. Washington said it without a hint of apology in his Farewell Address:



"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.”
cantcu
2009-01-01 11:03:34 UTC
Wish you understood what a "liberal" generally is!



"Liberalism is a broad class of political philosophies that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal.



Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. Within liberalism there are various streams of thought which compete over the use of the term "liberal" and may propose very different policies, but they are generally united by their support for a number of principles, including freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, an individuals right to private property, free markets, and a transparent system of government. All liberals, as well as some adherents of other political ideologies, support some variant of the form of government known as liberal democracy, with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law.



Modern liberalism has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment and rejects many foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, established religion, and economic protectionism. Liberals argued that economic systems based on free markets are more efficient and generate more prosperity.



The first modern liberal state was the United States of America, founded on the principle that "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." This said, much of early liberal thought originated in and influenced the politics of the United Kingdom." wiki



I have an issue with another Wall Streeter watching over Wall Street. They work for Wall Street, not the people of the United States, as shown by past appointments! That is part of the reason we are in the mess we are in! The same is true of Bankers! However, I am not upset, and I won't be, unless this becomes politics as usual.



And what do you have to complain about?



Kill Capitalism? Read the above and quit holding your hand out for a bailout. That isn't capitalism! When you socialize risks, which is what your ilk is doing, it no longer is 'Capitalism!"



It never was anyway because the rich have always made it a 1 way street with workers. That is not true Capitalism either! Nor is it true capitalism when you have Republicans selling our country to a few!



Capitalism is not guaranteed under the constitution, nor is it the governments role to dole out welfare for the rich! My issue is with your definition it is a one-way street. Well, that is not the way it works!
Vote Republicrat
2009-01-01 11:32:43 UTC
If I happened to be an Obama supporter, I would be upset by now. Seeing how I oppose FISA, The Patriot Act, and the Iraq War. Funny how he ran on "fundamental change".



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/12/politics/main3253449.shtml



Sept. 12, 2007:



(AP) Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is calling for the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. combat brigades from Iraq, with the pullout being completed by the end of next year.



"Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was," Obama said in excerpts of the speech provided to The Associated Press.



"The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year β€” now," the Illinois senator says.



http://voices.kansascity.com/node/2015



Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama had a change of heart yesterday about one of his major campaign issues; the Bush Tax Cuts.



The Associated Press quotes Obama as now saying that β€œhe would delay rescinding President Bush's tax cuts on wealthy Americans if he becomes the next president and the economy is in a recession, suggesting such an increase would further hurt the economy.”



http://thecurrent.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/public-financing.php



Reneging on his earlier promise, Barack Obama announced that he wouldn't accept public funds for his campaign, removing the cap on how much money he can raise and spend.



Should we care that Barack Obama has decided to reject the public financing system in his bid for the presidency, breaking a pledge he made earlier? My sense is that we should not. Rather, we should object to the fact that he continues to pay lip service to a model of campaign finance regulation that restricts speech and corrupts our politics.
John D "Your ad here"
2009-01-01 10:54:23 UTC
"I thought you guys wanted genetically modified food, open borders, a North American Union, and to kill Capitalism?"



Maybe it's time to think again, or to stop thinking in black and white terms, like "liberal" and "conservative".



I'd be called a "liberal" for many of my views, but I'm certainly not for "open borders", nor do I want to "kill capitalism" (why would I; I own my own business).



Overall, I'm very pleased with Obama's cabinet choices - especially Nobel Laureate Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy.



****



"Democrats are a fine collection of groups of scum of the earth".



And a Happy New Year to you as well.
Boss H
2009-01-01 11:06:27 UTC
I'm not mad at all.

I think its going to be interesting to watch what Hillary does with the Patriot Act after using information in FBI files against political opponents.

Thank you Bush!



Do we need to hire scooby doo and the gang to find out who these mystery liberals are?
EviL
2009-01-01 10:55:22 UTC
I'm not upset at all about Obama's cabinet appointments.



I'm a Liberal and I just hope that Obama can turn this mess around before I end up being out of work.

like so many already are.
2009-01-01 10:54:32 UTC
You got a link to something creditable that says liberals are upset at these appointments? I'm a liberal and I'm not upset so I can't explain why these mystery liberals are, if true.
Rayne
2009-01-01 11:00:59 UTC
Are you serious?



MOST Obama supporters have no idea who Obama has appointed for ANYTHING, other than Hillary Clinton, for which they are excited (except for the ones who don't like Hillary, of course).



I know many Obama supporters in RL, and they honestly have no clue who he has appointed, don't recognize the names or know anything about them when you TELL them who he has appointed, and don't really care anyway...They wanted him in, he's in, that's all that matters to them.



If you don't believe me, ask some Obama supporters that you know personally...See what they say.



EDIT: Or just read the answers here...
Water_Resources
2009-01-01 10:51:10 UTC
I am. And every-time I ask about all the neocons Obama has supported they report my answer.http://gnn.tv/headlines/18978/Obama_s_War_Cabinet



You Democrats lost me when your plutocratic whore Nancy said Impeachment was off the table, Obama has shown through his appointment to his cabinet a single-minded agenda, a neocon agenda, the same one Bush was following.
2009-01-01 10:56:48 UTC
Huh? I'm not, but then I'm not a lot into having a hissy fit. Seems to me its just politics as usual, dammit.
liberal_60
2009-01-01 11:02:40 UTC
I am not upset. Your question just illustrates the desperation of those who never liked Obama to begin with.
2009-01-01 10:52:29 UTC
Which liberals? Can you point them out? Give names? Its amazing how many liberal people, who support liberal ideas, use the term "liberals".
Sugar
2009-01-01 10:51:27 UTC
Only a few, Not all of them.
2009-01-01 10:58:14 UTC
Because Obama is not what the voters thought he was. He is not going to do one thing he promised in his campaign. You young voters better get used to that. He has not even had to hide his faults because you wouldn't believe them when you heard them in the first place.
2009-01-01 10:51:16 UTC
I don't think we want any of those things.
2009-01-01 10:55:32 UTC
knowing what crooks cons are wories us, as he has been bi-partisan in his cabinet choices
2009-01-01 10:52:59 UTC
Because there are many groups with narrow activists views who don't give a crap about the good of the country, just themselves and their pet cause.



Democrats are a fine collection of groups of scum of the earth.
Show Me Your War Face
2009-01-01 10:55:51 UTC
I think he did a great job.
2009-01-01 10:56:47 UTC
Liberals want a socialist utopia and they want it now!
2009-01-01 10:56:44 UTC
No one can please everyone-But he tries.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...