First, Obama. He seems a decent enough fellow, but I really DON'T LIKE the people he owes favors to. That is the single thing that has tripped up many, many past Presidents; Debts. He will pay them, never fear; he has to if he wants to get re-elected.
Like I said: some of the people who helped put him in office are really far-left dillitante Social Experimenters who will happily let HIM take the fallout of what doesn't work.
That was Mc Caine's problem, too; only his "good buddies" were really dangerous to the nation.
There is something you really ought to consider here: the President can veto legislation; but that's about it when it comes to Laws. So, his promises? He'll need "friends" in Congress to get anything done, and even then; only after he's paid down some of the Political Debts he's incurred in gaining the Oval Office.
That bites. Nasty-bad.
He won because he out spent Mc Caine almost three-to-one; and all that money came with attachments. Now we get to see how he does the job he's been elected to.
You think you're griping now? Give the man a YEAR to either become a Hero or a Zero; right now he's neither. He's Potential, and that's about it. He will actualize on January 20, 2009, when he's sworn in.
Opinions: Obama cheated the Campaign Spending Limits law by using money-raising methods that the law didn't consider when it was passed. Is he going to keep trying to "slip around" other limits? Only time will tell. We really don't need a President that is "clever" in that way; that's dangerous to the whole system of checks and balances we depend on for some semblance of Government in this country.
What we need is a Grant system: every Qualified Presidential Candidate gets $100 million as a Grant for his/her Campaign; and NO fund-raising allowed. That way we see who can do the most with the same amount; a good pre-test for any Executive in my opinion.
It also reduces the "debts" carried into office by the one who is elected.
We also need to reclaim our political parties from the elites who currently run them...or start a Centerist/Pragmatist party to balance things. Right now, both parties are in the hands of "True Believers" rather than in the hands of the People who will be governed. Is it too much to ask for a Party that listens and acts, rather than theorizes and enacts?
I can tell you, it didn't used to be this way. Once, Democrats and Republicans were pretty much alike with differing but not exclusive political ideas on what needed to be done. They agreed on what was needed, and differed on how that need was addressed.
Now, they don't agree on anything. This is bad: our motto...
E Pluribus Unum (From the many, one) really meant something. Now its more "Unum Dictum ad Populum" (One Word, to the People). In short, "do what you're told."
Perhaps a return to less separated politics would be in order here. We'll see.
I will keep my faith in the Gods, AND I'll keep my powder dry.
But then, I've been around a bit...
