If customary deference to a sitting president by president elect

• Obama not going to attend economic - summit.......too busy for our economy?
  • He is not supposed to attend since he's only the President-elect. - Backwards typist
  • Nope...(sm) - Just the big bad
    • huh, I actually agree with you on something...sm - ms
    • That's the best excuse you have for the - incoming president? pleeeze
      • If customary deference to a sitting president by president elect - is an excuse, then yes....sm
      • No doubt there will be thousands more excuses - for him as well.........NM
        • What part of one president at a time - do you not get? sm
          • That's funny....he didn't seem to mind sticking - his nose where it didn't belong
            • You mean the tour McC goaded him into? How about McC - with the Dali Lama? sm
    • then why is he sending people to represent him? - cj
      • One would imagine so he can get bipartisan 1st-hand info - from people whose judgment he trusts. sm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

is doing just that...sitting on his a$$ and not doing anything.  Meanwhile the economy has been going down the tubes.  Yeah, it's much more important to kiss Bush's butt than to actually address the situation we are in and get people working again.  Have you ever heard of the word *priorities?*

And speaking of rude, how about that Blair house thing?  How petty is that?

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_president_elect_/2008/11/10/149643.html

Obama Invents 'Office of the President-Elect'

Monday, November 10, 2008 12:54 PM By: Jim Meyers Article Font Size   Barack Obama has created a stir by proclaiming that he heads “The Office of President-Elect” — an office that does not officially exist. At his first news conference on Nov. 7, Obama stood at a podium bearing a sign that read: “Office of the President-Elect. Also, his Web site, Change.gov, bears the words “Office of the President-Elect” at the top of its home page. Writer Larry Anderson referred to the “made-up little title” on the American Thinker Web site, and declared: “I nearly busted a gut ... “Once again, [Obama] can’t wait to invest himself with the trappings of office.” Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin wondered: “What other make-believe offices are they going to invent between now and Inauguration Day? I can’t ever recall in my lifetime any mention of such an office.” Technically speaking, Obama may not even be the President-elect, according to the American Sentinel Web site. “Megalomaniac Obama’s ego grows even more insufferable,” a weekend posting reads. “Yes, he will be [president-elect]. But he’s not officially yet, until the Electoral College votes. “The Constitution provides that on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December, electors convene in their respective state capitals. It’s then that they formally elect the President of the United States, based on the general election results.” The Nov. 7 news conference did not mark the first time Obama has created controversy with a podium. Back in June, he spoke at a podium bearing a new seal that altered the official presidential seal. The seal did include the American bald eagle clutching arrows and an olive branch, but the Latin phrase “E Pluribus Unum” was changed to “Vero Possumus,” a rough translation of the Obama campaign slogan, “Yes we can.” Obama’s seal also removed the shield over the eagle’s breast, representing the president’s oath to defend the Constitution, and replaced it with the letter “O,” presumably for Obama, and the image of the rising sun. © 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

If you pay attention to what Obama is doing right now this might make sense.  Obama is filling his cabinet not only with people who agree with him, but also people who disagree with him.  Presumably he's following the lead of Lincoln who did this with his cabinet members.  The conclusion I come up with is that just because Rahm said it doesn't necessarily mean it will be law.

    Wednesday 24 August 2005

    Memorandum for: The President

    From: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

    Subject: Recommendation: Try a Circle of "Wise Women"

    By way of re-introduction, we begin with a brief reminder of the analyses we provided you before the attack on Iraq. On the afternoon of February 5, 2003, following Colin Powell's speech before the UN Security Council that morning, we sent you our critique of his attempt to make the case for war. (You may recall that we gave him an "A" for assembling and listing the charges against Iraq and a "C-" for providing context and perspective.) Unlike Powell, we made no claim that our analysis was "irrefutable/undeniable." We did point out, though, that what he said fell far short of justification for war. We closed with these words: "We are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic."

    To jog your memory further, the thrust of our next two pre-war memoranda can be gleaned from their titles: "Cooking Intelligence for War" (March 12) and "Forgery, Hyperbole, Half-Truth: A Problem" (March 18). When the war started, we reasoned at first that you might had been oblivious to our cautions. However, last spring's disclosures in the "Downing Street Memo" containing the official minutes of Tony Blair's briefing on July 23, 2002 - and the particularly the bald acknowledgement that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" of war on Iraq - show that the White House was well aware of how the intelligence was being cooked. We write you now in the hope that the sour results of the recipe - the current bedlam in Iraq - will incline you to seek and ponder wider opinion this time around.

    A Still Narrower Circle

    With the departure of Colin Powell, your circle of advisers has shrunk rather than widened. The amateur architects of the Iraq war, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, seem still to have your ear. At a similar stage of the Vietnam War, President Lyndon Johnson woke up to the fact that he had been poorly served by his principal advisers and quickly appointed an informal group of "wise men" to provide fresh insight and advice. It turned out to be one of the smartest things Johnson did. He was brought to realize that the US could not prevail in Vietnam; that he was finished politically; and that the US needed to move to negotiations with the Vietnamese "insurgents."

    It is clear to those of us who witnessed at first hand the gross miscalculations on Vietnam that a similar juncture has now been reached on Iraq. We are astonished at the advice you have been getting - the vice president's recent assurance that the Iraqi resistance is "in its last throes," for example. (Shades of his assurances that US forces would be welcomed as "liberators" in Iraq.) And Secretary Rumsfeld's unreassuring reminders that "some things are unknowable" and the familiar bromide that "time will tell" are wearing thin. By now it is probably becoming clear to you that you need outside counsel.

    The good news is that some help is on its way. Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey has taken the initiative to schedule a hearing on September 15, where knowledgeable specialists on various aspects of the situation in Iraq will present their views. Unfortunately, it appears that this opportunity to learn will fall short of the extremely informative bipartisan hearings led by Sen. William Fullbright on Vietnam. The refusal thus far of the House Republican leadership to make a suitable conference room available suggests that the Woolsey hearing, like the one led by Congressman John Conyers on June 16, will lack the kind of bipartisan support so necessary if one is to deal sensibly with the Iraq problem.

    Meanwhile, we respectfully suggest that you could profit from the insights of the informal group of "wise women" right there in Crawford. You could hardly do better than to ride your bike down to Camp Casey. There you will find Gold Star mothers, Iraq (and Vietnam) war veterans, and others eager to share reality-based perspectives of the kind you are unlikely to hear from your small circle of yes-men and the yes-woman in Washington, none of whom have had direct experience of war. As you know, Cindy Sheehan has been waiting to get on your calendar. She is now back in Crawford and has resumed her Lazarus-at-the-Gate vigil in front of your ranch. We strongly suggest that you take time out from your vacation to meet with her and the other Gold Star mothers when you get back to Crawford later this week. This would be a useful way for you to acquire insight into the many shades of gray between the blacks and whites of Iraq, and to become more sensitized to the indignities that so often confound and infuriate the mothers, fathers, wives, and other relatives of soldiers killed and wounded there.

    Names and Faces

    Here are the names, ages, and hometowns of the eight soldiers, including Casey Sheehan, killed in the ambush in Sadr City, Baghdad on April 4, 2004:

    Specialist Robert R. Arsiaga, 25, San Antonio, Texas
    Specialist Ahmed A. Cason, 24, McCalla, Alabama
    Sergeant Yihjyh L. Chen, 31, Saipan, Marianas
    Specialist Israel Garza, 25, Lubbock, Texas
    Specialist Stephen D. Hiller, 25, Opelika, Alabama
    Corporal Forest J. Jostes, 22, Albion, Illinois
    Sergeant Michael W. Mitchell, 25, Porterville, California
    Specialist Casey A. Sheehan, 24, Vacaville, California

    Mike Mitchell's father, Bill, has been camped out for two weeks with Cindy Sheehan and others a short bike ride from your place. They have a lot of questions - big and small. You are aware of the big ones: In what sense were the deaths of Casey, Mike Mitchell and the others "worth it?" In what sense is the continued occupation of Iraq a "noble cause?" No doubt you have been given talking points on those. But the time has passed for sound bites and rhetoric. We are suggesting something much more real - and private.

    Questions

    There are less ambitious - one might call them more tactical - questions that are also accompanied by a lot of pain and frustration. Those eight fine soldiers were killed by forces loyal to the fiercely anti-American Muqtada al-Sadr, the young Shia cleric with a militant following, particularly in Baghdad's impoverished suburbs. The ambush was part of a violent uprising resulting from US Ambassador Paul Bremer's decision to close down Al Hawza, al-Sadr's newspaper, on March 28, 2004.

    And not only that. A senior aide of al-Sadr was arrested by US forces on April 3. The following day al-Sadr ordered his followers to "terrorize" occupation forces and this sparked the deadly street battles, including the ambush. Also on April 4, Bremer branded al-Sadr an "outlaw" and coalition spokesman Dan Senior said coalition forces planned to arrest him as well. In sum, before one can begin to understand the grief of Cindy, Bill, and the relatives of the other six soldiers killed, you need to know - as they do - what else was going on April 4, 2004.

    You may wish to come prepared to answer specific questions like the following:

    1. Closing down newspapers and arresting key opposition figures seem a strange way to foster democracy. Please explain. And how could Ambassador Bremer possibly have thought that al-Sadr would simply acquiesce?

    2. Muqtada al-Sadr seems to have landed on his feet. At this point, he and other Shiite clerics appear on the verge of imposing an Islamic state with Shariah law and a very close relationship with Iran. With this kind of prospect, can you feel the frustration of Gold Star mothers when the extremist ultimately responsible for their sons' deaths assumes a leadership role in the new Iraq? Can you understand their strong wish to prevent the sacrifice of still more of our children for such dubious purpose?

    Perhaps you will have good answers to these and other such questions. Good answers or no, we believe a quiet, respectful session with the wise women and perhaps others at your doorstep would give you valuable new insights into the ironic conundrums and human dimensions of the war in Iraq.

    A member of our Steering Committee, Ann Wright, has been on site at Camp Casey from the outset and would be happy to facilitate such a session. A veteran Army colonel (and also a senior Foreign Service officer until she resigned in protest over the attack on Iraq), Ann has been keeping Camps Casey I and II running in a good-neighborly, orderly way. She is well known to your Secret Service agents, who can lead you to her. We strongly urge you not to miss this opportunity.

    /s/
    Gene Betit, Arlington, Virginia
    Sibel Edmonds, Alexandria, Virginia
    Larry Johnson, Bethesda, Maryland
    David MacMichael, Linden, Virginia
    Ray McGovern, Arlington, Virginia
    Coleen Rowley, Apple Valley, Minnesota
    Ann Wright, Honolulu, Hawaii

    Steering Group Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Mr. President:

Are you proud of your accomplishments as president?  I have highlighted just a few for you below.  You and those you surround yourself with have:

• KILLED over 3600 AMERICAN TROOPS. 
• MAIMED over 25,000 AMERICAN TROOPS.
• KILLED nearly 70,000 IRAQI CIVILIANS and 650,000 IRAQIS TOTAL have died as a result of US INVASION. 
• Orchestrated WAR on IRAQ when the 9/11 TERRORISTS were MOSTLY SAUDI. 
• Allowed NO-BID CONTRACTS for IRAQ war reconstruction and MONEY UNACCOUNTED FOR.
• DESTABILIZED MIDDLE EAST, now wanting TO SELL WEAPONS to Arab “allies.”
• Incurred the LARGEST NATIONAL DEBT IN OUR HISTORY, nearing 9 TRILLION.
• Shown INCOMPETENCE and INEFFECTIVENESS in response to HURRICANE KATRINA.
• Shown DISRESPECT FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL, initially attempting to reduce veterans’ benefits for those who put their lives at risk for this country in the past and leaving those who serve in Iraq without needed supplies.
• Done nothing about NEARLY 50 MILLION AMERICANS UNINSURED.
• CUT EDUCATION LOANS and REDUCED PELL GRANTS.
• Shown DISREGARD for THE CONSTITUTION of the United States of America with the so-called Patriot Act. 
• Shown DISREGARD for the SAFETY and HEALTH of our ENVIRONMENT, for example, withdrawing the US from the Kyoto Protocol agreement and opening public land for oil drilling. 
• Shown HYPOCRISY and FAVORITISM by COMMUTING SCOOTER LIBBY’S SENTENCE.  July 19, 2005, Washington Post: “PRESIDENT BUSH SAID yesterday that he will fire anyone in the administration found to have committed a crime in the leaking of a CIA operative's name.”   
• ALLOWED Attorney General ROBERTO GONZALEZ, a representative of truth and justice, TO REMAIN in government office AFTER HE LIED about his presence at a meeting regarding the questionably-timed firings of eight US attorneys.

Past presidents during my lifetime have not always behaved admirably, but your behavior and record in office reveal a decidedly un-Christian lack of ethics and morality exceeding that of any except perhaps Richard Nixon. Where did you leave your oft-professed Christianity?  I pray the nation survives your destructive administration, and I pray you begin to live a truly honorable life from this day on.

Sincerely,

Please DO NOT REPLY to this message. Replies will not be seen. Use the information at the bottom for e-mail address changes, subscription issues, and to contact GOPUSA.

-- The following e-mail comes from one of our sponsoring advertisers. Through their support, GOPUSA can continue to bring you the best array of conservative news, information, commentary, and discussions. Please see the sponsor content below, and note that the content does not constitute an endorsement by GOPUSA. For questions regarding the content of this e-mailer, please contact the advertiser directly.

Dear Friend, During his recent speech in Berlin, Barack Obama tried to ingratiate himself to the foreign crowd by claiming loudly that he was “a citizen of the world.” The problem is Obama’s self-proclaimed global “citizenship” appears to go well beyond just a rhetorical device to gain favor with a European throng full of pie-in-the-sky utopians. It seems the Democrats’ would-be president of the United States of America really believes that the rest of the world’s problems, and approval, trump the interests of Americans when it comes to how we live our lives and where our money is spent. While stumping for the support of his party’s leftist base, Obama proclaimed, "we can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK." And now he’s putting your money where his mouth is. A bill he has sponsored in the U.S. Senate, the so-called Global Poverty Act (S. 2433), would raise the amount of American tax dollars allocated to United Nations’ redistribution efforts to $845 billion. That’s $2,500 from every American taxpayer, when many in our country already are struggling to make ends meet. And if you think taxes and energy costs are high now, wait until Obama’s global energy and production taxes are made law by the Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid-run Democrat Congress. Is this what Pelosi meant when she said, “I’m trying to save the planet!  I’m trying to save the planet!”? Senator Obama and the Democrats don’t seem to understand that American prosperity is a result of the hard work of American citizens in a free market economy.  And that the American people already are the most generous in the world when it comes to global aid. Help us show Barack Obama that Americans don’t need foreign approval to lead their lives as they see fit, and that he ought to remember that he is running for president of the United States, not the United Nations. Please make a secure online contribution of $2,000, $1,000, $500, $100, $50 or $25 today to provide Republican candidates with the resources they urgently need to tell voters about the Obama Democrats’ plans for America. The future of an America whose government makes its own citizens its first priority may depend on it. Sincerely, Robert M. "Mike" Duncan Chairman, Republican National Committee P.S. Friend, powerful leftist forces will spend whatever it takes to elect Barack Obama and Democrats up and down the ticket to impose their radical utopian agenda on America.  Help us make sure they don’t succeed by making a secure online campaign contribution of $2,000, $1,000, $500, $100, $50 or $25 to the RNC today.  Thank you. Contributions or gifts to the Republican National Committee are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.  Republican National Committee | 310 First Street, SE | Washington, D.C. 20003 p: 202.863.8500 | f: 202.863.8820 | e: info@gop.com Paid for by the Republican National Committee. 310 First Street, SE - Washington, D.C. 20003 - (202) 863-8500 www.gop.com Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Copyright 2008 Republican National Committee

GOPUSA Friends E-mail List This message was sent to GOPUSA subscribers on behalf of a sponsor. Please note that this list is different than our daily news and commentary list. For more information about the GOPUSA Friends List, please click here. ++ Follow this link if you no longer wish to receive the GOPUSA Friends e-mail update. ++ Need to change your e-mail address? Click here.

Copyright © 2000-2008, GOPUSA.com A division of Endeavor Media Group, LLC P.O. Box 891354 Houston, TX 77289 ++ Contact Us

Dubya are making us socialist -- this is what you have harped on for years.  We even get to take over the debts of foreign banks thanks to Phil Gram, John McClain's right hand man.