digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

The New and Not Improved Barack Obama is Disappointing

nytimes.com — Barack Obama stirred his legions of supporters, and raised our hopes, promising to change the old order of things. But now he seems to have changed for the worse. We are not shocked when a candidate moves to the center for the general election. But Obama ’s shifts are striking because he was the candidate who proposed to change the face of politics

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • davecachia, on 07/04/2008, -25/+9WTF?

    This article is *****. Buried down for inaccuracy!
    • Ridgeliner7, on 07/04/2008, -5/+14
      Poor dave. :-(

      It is the lead editorial in today's right-wing, Murdock and Rove controlled New York Times!
      • sanman, on 07/04/2008, -7/+1NYT is kontrolled by Murdoch and Kharl Rove?? What mackhes you thinck that?
    • xBDVx, on 07/06/2008, -2/+1Submitters should really point out that this is an editorial in the description.
  • Ridgeliner7, on 07/04/2008, -14/+20
    Oh, oh! Que Shelia and the "Boy at Home", the Apologists-in-Chief!!

    That damn nasty Faux News, and Rupert Murdock/Roger Ales/Carl Rove strike again!! This is all Bush McSame's fault!

    Oh, wait......it's the New York Times. Never mind. I always knew they were behind Hillary, and this is just another ploy on her part to wrest the nomination out from under Barack at the convention, those nasty traitors!

    Yeah. That's it. That and the fact that the NY Times is confused, they just misunderstand Obama's positions, that's all. I know....we need to send emails and explain it all to them! They'll have to listen! :-) ROFL!

    Face it, they said what they needed to say to help knock Hillary out, and now the true face is showing. Is there any doubt Obama comes back from Iraq talking about the "improvements"? Is there any doubt he too will soon say it's okay if our troops are thre for years, so long as the violence is down, and our troops aren't getting killed (so much)? Of course he won't say that. But the meaning of what he does say will be very clear. Voting for Obama is a vote for Hillary and Bush combined. Time to get out the Nader signs.
  • ssn697, on 07/04/2008, -13/+14That is one unhappy far lefty. Obama mis read the 2nd amendment? The guy even bitches about decisions where he AGREES with Obama!

    Pretty funny stuff.
    • Ridgeliner7, on 07/04/2008, -1/+15
      Dude, it isn't "some guy". It is the official opinion of the New York Times.....it's lead editorial today. ;-)
      • ssn697, on 07/04/2008, -2/+10Wa huh?!?!? That is the lead editorial????

        All I can say is "WOW".
  • Stevanoski, on 07/04/2008, -10/+13To the new voters on the Left: Welcome to Politics 101
    • EIderofzion, on 07/04/2008, -5/+7funny cause it's true,, there are video's on youtube showing how the Democrats purposely lied (SAYING they could lose the war I MEAN END THE WAR OOPS! by winning the senate) knowing full well it was impossible..
  • KMye, on 07/04/2008, -5/+14Obama's been talking big and backpedaling after the vote since the beginning.
    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2006/02/cong ...
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-02-06 ...

    This NYT posturing that they're surprised he's not embodying "change we can believe in" is disingenuous *****.
  • Stevanoski, on 07/04/2008, -11/+8If Obama really spoke his mind he would probably say: "On this 4th of July, I urge my fellow Americans to exercise tolerance for those with different beliefs than their own. Remember that even though you might have the urge to get caught up in the dangerous flag-waving nationalism of the day, Europe is watching. At least try to make a good impression."
  • l0k0, on 07/04/2008, -7/+5Almost all politicians do this, but it is more of a problem with Obama because it is "business as usual" in Washington, which he has criticized so vehemently throughout the primaries. With McCain, he has had an easier time making adjustments to please the middle, since he is moderate, and as he showed in NH, does well with independants. Regardless, Obama has been beating McCain over independants in the polls (for what they are worth), so this doesn't seem to be hurting him too badly.
    • Stevanoski, on 07/05/2008, -2/+2You and I probably on opposite sides of the spectrum but could find nothing wrong with your comments so dugg.
  • scottc, on 07/05/2008, -4/+13That editorial pretty much sums up why I stopped volunteering for Obama. The sad thing about it is that he doesn't need to take those stands to win the election. In another year, or against a stronger opponent, you could make the case that he was being pragmatic. Not this time.
    • FrankHope, on 07/05/2008, -4/+16Exactly, McCain is such a weak candidate that Obama doesn't need to abandon his principles to beat him. So why's he doing it? Has he just sold out?
    • muckemuck, on 08/13/2008, -0/+1"he doesn't need to take those stands to win the election" ... he does.. because that's what the people who are getting him great media exposure are telling him to do. The lobbyists, AIPAC, etc who pull the strings are taking charge now and they don't represent the voting public. They represent the big corporations and the big corporations could care less about your constitutional rights or how you vote (because they're backing both parties.. . they win whether Obama or McCain win).
  • Cpd4224, on 07/05/2008, -5/+3donating more to religious groups than Bush? cmon...
  • eh123, on 07/05/2008, -5/+8Naive Obama supporters are in for a rude awakening. Behind shallow promises of "hope" and "change" likes the dark heart of a politician.
  • Santiak, on 07/05/2008, -6/+13Obama has disappointed many of this followers during the last couple of weeks.
    This was to be expected. Democrats and Republicans are not very different. They are just two different factions of a single party at the service of large corporations.
    • peticsu, on 07/05/2008, -3/+3Scroll down to the bottom of the page...

      the very bottom...you see "Digg Inc."


      You sound really stupid with the corporation bashing thing...
      its just a business entity...are LLCs and sole-proprietorships evil too?
      • arjie, on 07/06/2008, -0/+4Santiak only voiced an objection to political parties being controlled by large corporations - possibly a reference to the influence corporate lobbyists have with America's policy makers. He did not voice an objection to corporations per se. You are attacking a point he did not make.
  • fatas, on 07/05/2008, -5/+7Obama is a phony, all talk just the usual lawyer at the end.
  • henrikakselsen, on 07/05/2008, -2/+4FTA: "Mr. Obama endorsed the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the District of Columbia’s gun-control law. We knew he ascribed to the anti-gun-control groups’ misreading of the Constitution as implying an individual right to bear arms. But it was distressing to see him declare that the court provided a guide to “reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe.”

    What could be more reasonable than a city restricting handguns, or requiring that firearms be stored in ways that do not present a mortal threat to children?"

    Diggers are gonna hate NYTimes now...
  • MarkEarhart, on 07/05/2008, -3/+3We're in a Hell of a mess. Everything that ran for office this time from both parties could easily be stacked together and one wouldn't be able to tell where one pile of buzzard ***** ended and another began, if indeed they came from separate birds.
  • peticsu, on 07/05/2008, -4/+3anybody who didnt expect this is truly naive...

    I'm Obama all the way but people need to think politically for a second...but lets remind all these poor disappointed people if Hillary was in his seat right now...
  • Chassit, on 07/05/2008, -4/+5I don't support Obama anyway...
  • apc3161, on 07/05/2008, -6/+11To all democrats:

    So instead of voting for Kucinich or Gravel who had 20+ years of actions backing up their words, you voted for a guy who gave a good speech and spoke very eloquently, but had little record of matching his words with action.

    Hopefully in the future you won't make the same mistake again.

    Don't blame me though, I voted for Ron Paul.
  • Kangalanatolian, on 07/05/2008, -3/+3Could just a few more of us look past Bob Barr (a man with a couple of good points to make)? We have Chuck Baldwin of the constitution party making the anti-occupation, pro-life libertarian position of Ron Paul. Let's restore the republic with the Constitution R3VO]ution !!
    • superkendall, on 07/06/2008, -1/+2That would make more sense if we were actually in an occupation instead of a support role. The Iraqi people want us there for a while yet, why don't you want to help them?
      • muckemuck, on 08/13/2008, -0/+1Last I heard they were asking us to leave and Bush ignored their request. The media didn't make a big fuss about it though (no surprise there).

        Here's how McCain responded when the Iraqis asked the US to leave:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6ZlM7F_wvo
  • btschul, on 07/05/2008, -4/+9Obama '08 - Hope and change. You should HOPE that I haven't completely CHANGED my policies and positions by the time I get into office.
  • chubbybubba, on 07/05/2008, -3/+4The first time I have ever heard about Obama was when he gave his speech at the democratic convention. He talked about true unity and against partisanship. Not many will admit it now but alot of conservatives spoke favorably after hearing what he said. I hope as president he goes Beyond the restraints of a two party system Americans and diggers so easily fall prey to. I am NO Liberal... but how can anyone Not be persuaded by the hope.
    • runCMD, on 07/06/2008, -1/+2I heard the same speech. It truly gave me hope. I see beyond him now. He's not the hope he advertised himself to be. I wont be voting for him and although you never can really tell until the race is over ... I expect he will not be the next president. : )
  • DavidinBoston, on 07/05/2008, -5/+3BOTTOM LINE: The main difference between Obama and John McAncient is that Senator Obama will put the correct Supreme Court justices up for nomination. McAncient will set the clock back with his Supreme Court picks.
    • superkendall, on 07/06/2008, -1/+3Obama has said he would try and get new justices just like the very justices that voted AGAINST heller. Is that really what we all want? I think not.
    • runCMD, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2DavidinBoston - why do you have to disrespect McCain because of his age ? Experience ?
  • zephyr42, on 07/05/2008, -2/+9SURPRISE!!


    Looks like all the obamabots are figuring out he's just another politician.
  • ileftfark, on 07/05/2008, -5/+1At least we all new Clinton was a shill from the beginning.
  • irvman21, on 07/06/2008, -4/+8He's nothing but a typical politician who happens to be good looking and an extremely gifted public speaker. If he weren't a socialist I would be happy to support him, but I would rather see my bottle of water elected president than someone with his bat-***** crazy liberal views.
  • EyeJayKool, on 07/06/2008, -2/+1Wow! What a surprise! I wonder what it will take for people to realize that the state of electoral politics in this country is so broken that it needs to be changed fundamentally. CHANGE like that can only be enforced by people and will not be negotiated by governments.
  • flip2trip, on 07/06/2008, -0/+5Change we can believe in, yes we can.
  • andrewtheart, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2Summarize? You don't actually expect us to read that.

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story ...
  • n0gnuz, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2'because he was the candidate who proposed to change the face of politics'

    That is, 'because liberal newspapers and TV networks campaigning on his behalf told us he would.'

    More plausible scenario: The reason he doesn't have a game plan or anything other than nebulous claims of 'change' is that he was chosen as a non-threatening challenger for Hillary, one who couldn't win because he had no credibility, but who could augment an Affirmative Action ticket for the Democrats. The DP simply overestimated the liberal media's support for Hillary -- and underestimated their pro-minority zeal -- ending up with a hollow liberal media favorite struggling to define his candidacy.
  • yellowcakewalk, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1Obama is nothing but another right-wing Democrat out of the Clinton mold. Not that the power elites will let win anything but a right-wing Democrat or a right-wing Republican. Not until American citizens get off their asses and take their country back.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.