Posted on 11/11/2008 8:28:28 AM PST by Loud Mime
Here’s some change that supporters of President-elect Obama may not want to see: all of the policy commitments on specific issues have been removed from his transition Web site.
On Nov. 7, global health advocates noticed that some of the details of Obama’s “fight global poverty” statement had been removed. Specifically, the site no longer promised to fully fund debt cancellation for the world’s poorest countries or provide the full U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
Activists already were concerned, since boosting foreign aid was the one thing Obama mentioned during the campaign when asked what proposals he’d have to scale back due to the faltering economy.
(Excerpt) Read more at cqpolitics.com ...
The only solace I take in the next 4 years is that the economy will not allow Obama to do what he said he would do.
Hmmm.
They're anti-hunger, but not anti-poverty...
Odd.
Anti hunger keeps their voters alive, but poverty keeps them in popular! If there was no poverty, who would they victimize?
Well of course! Without poverty they have no raison d’être ........
We have got to keep yelling “Where’s the Beef!” about Obama’s promises.
Devotion is a strange thing. It all but blinds the devoted one to any blemishes on the part of the devotee. Both McCain and Obama agreed to take public financing for their campaigns. When it became obvious he could way out spend the opponent if he went back on that promise, he did so without hesitation and without so much as a “Gee, I'm sorry, but conditions have changed.”
He's gone back on several promises and yet he was still elected. Doesn't that send a great message to him and how well he can be trusted to keep his word after his win?
Remember, though. These are liberals. Outcome is not important. They are the masters of planning, not performance.
bttt
Uh...
I would hope that boosting foreign aid is the first thing to go if our economy is faltering...
Is this supposed to be news?
We have $10 trillion of debt to service.
Why should we forgive other countries’ debts when we have a mountain of debt that we have to deal with?
We differ here. Their performance is excellent, as in acting. Their salesmanship is excellent. Their desired outcome is power at any cost to our Constitution.
They have been very successful.
To me the goal is to successfully govern the US into an era of peace and economic stability. I agree though, if the object of the game is to simply win the election, yes, you are very correct.
I say outcome is not important to them because they have gone on funding projects for 40 plus years that actually cause to happen the very thing they say they are trying to prevent.
When I watch the way President Bush is handling the transition of power I realize even more the great gulf between the Parties.
But you are certainly correct, they have been very successful and that would be a great thing if there goal was to actually help make America a better place for all of us. Sadly, their goal is to make things better for themselves.
I think the big O intends to give us all Pork Injections...
Reading Obama’s website evokes the image of him moon-walking away from most of his promises.
Obama backing out of his promises the msm and obama will say it was all w’s fault for four years
Backpedaling faster than an NFL cornerback.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.