Wednesday, January 21, 2009

The New Era Begins Today

The new era begins today. President Obama is said to be meeting with military leaders today on his first full day on the job. As I remember his campaign promises, one was to create a concrete withdrawal program for Iraq. That we should get out of there was said many times in many different ways. Now we'll see.

Other promises were about health care at home and the lessening of taxes for most Americans. But perhaps today's schedule at the White House is indicative of the priority. HuffPo writer Stephen Schlesinger wrote an interesting piece entitled, Obama and the Use of Force.

There were heartening echoes of the words and thoughts of several of our most distinguished presidents in President Obama's Inaugural address today. One I found most interesting was Obama's reference to "earlier generations" of Americans who faced down fascism and communism "not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions." Obama added: "They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please."

What do you think about that? Does it indicate a new direction for the United States of America? Could this mark the beginning of a return to the standards that were once synonymous with America? Or, are you concerned that this could be a grave mistake, that military might and world-policing is what is needed in these difficult times?

Please feel free to leave a comment.


  1. William "Perjury" Jefferson Clinton Pt III

  2. Weer'd Beard- living in the past? Move forward, pal, into the brightness of a whole new America.

  3. I'm living in the past? I'm not the one apointing most of Clinton's staff in the white house.

    Maybe you need eyeglasses troll-boy!

  4. What's wrong with Clinton's staff, Weer'd? I remember once before I accused you of being a one-issue guy. You had a pretty thorough answer, as I remember, but I can't help but thinking it again. Your main problem with Obama often seems to be his attitude on guns. Your problem with Clinton is what, the famous Assault Weapons ban? Please don't tell me you agree with Barb that lying about getting a blowjob in the White House was a grave offense.

  5. Nothing is "Wrong" per-se. But note that Muddy accuses me of "living in the past" and somehow that's a dark idea.

    Meanwhile our new president, Promicing hope and change essentially re-constructs the cabnet of a former president.

    That hardly seems to be the brave new beginning, nor much of a "Change" at all.

    I tossed in the grounds for Mr. Clinton's impeachment beacause of all the Chicago Shinanangans going on already.

    As for my fears for the President I'll just bullet away:

    -National Security

    I could write a post on EACH one...and likely have

    Guns just happen to be the political issue I do the most work on. You should understand why, Mike. You constantly point out we toss your more atrticles, blogs and reading meterial than you can possibly cram into your schedual (and you do a damn good job at at least making the effort from what I can see), and I won't be a hypocrite for pointing out other's ignorance on the gun issue...then go off half-cocked on say heathcare, because I didn't bother to read all 170 pages of a proposed bill, and cross-referenced it with the policy in Canda and the UK, as well as doing in-depth research on the strenths and weeknesses of said issue.

    I do this because it's moral to know what you stand for, and be committed on your position, and know it well enugh that if anybody challenges you, they either wish they hadn't (because they're to arrogant to admit they're wrong) or they're glad that their eyes were opened.

    I dabble in many things, but I only have time to do a few issues properly.

    Guns and Alternative fuels/cars are my pets. The wife really eats up heathcare and the problems with foods and drugs imported from I glean a little of her research there.

    So hardly a one-trick pony, but I see why you might suspect that.

  6. Troll-boy? Funny stuff, pal. I would have written several paragraphs on your 'purjury' comment but it would have been wasted on you.