was back in 2005, when he entered the Senate and disappointed quite a few folks here with some cautious rhetoric and votes. I mean, frankly, it is your fault if you didn't do your homework on the man who is in the White House today.

I'll never forget when Sen. Obama voted against the Kerry/Feingold amendment in the summer of 2006 which called for a timetable for withdrawal. Obama said it was a "precipitous" withdrawal, and voted no. That was a lie, of course, and lo and behold, Obama came out for the same exact plan in December '06 when he was preparing his launch for the presidency.

Here's the thing: I still like Barack Obama despite many disappointments in the Senate. I volunteered for and donated to his campaign, and have no regrets. But the guy is a centrist with some liberal tendencies. That is how he has always operated.

So, his presidency has not surprised me at all ......

It is ironic that during the Bush years, I had HOPE. Because I knew his reign would end some day and a candidate might come along that I could get behind.
I didn't expect miracles from Barrack. I have been around American politics long enough to know that much. But I didn't expect an escalation of Bush's war from this guy less than a year after he took his oath of office.
Seeing Obama send another 30,000 kids off to war made me feel a lot of things but HOPE was not one of them.

than Obama's plan for Afghanistan is Cheney whining about how long it took to make that terrible decision, what did he get done in seven friggin' years of war beside snuff-out a lot of Afghans and few hundred of our guys? The true left had been saying six months before the election "follow the money" and they were EXACTLY right, BO is another corporate shill, he's proved it again and again.

Sarah Palin in the White House - as Cheney's VP.

my point donna
pols are pols -- they do what they do

When we were down to the last three candidates for pres in the primaries, this moderate was optimistic. We had three strong candidates but each also had a serious flaw. Hillary was experienced & strong willed but would keep us mired in the politics of past. McCain would balance the obvious shellacking pending in the Congressional elections, an experienced Legislator and a real hero. Obama had a fresh view, the ability to communicate as an adult TO adults and to inspire, and did not shy away from ancient issues we've swept under the carpet until they filled the room.

By the election it was clear that Obama was the best choice, aside from the sideshows of Palin and Joe the Plumber, McCain imploded on the financial crisis at EXACTLY the wrong time, never hit his stride as a communicator - arguably the President's REAL job, and couldn't run his own campaign effectively.

Now that we're a year on, Obama's team and talents can only get us so far, particularly since it's been a long time since this country pulled together WWII style and EVERYONE made a serious effort work on ANYTHING. Compunded by hitting the "Iceberg" during W's last days, switching Captains is not necessarily going to save the ship. That we were already on an unprecedented spending binge before the "bailout" further limits our options.

So now we look to him to "win" a War on Terror that is no different than our previous pseudo wars on Poverty or Drugs. Participants and innocents will die and, until the base problems are addressed, will continue as before. There is no chance of a clear "victory" against a social condition and the term war is counter-productive since a victory in real war would require sacrifice, unity of purpose, realistic goals to assure success, and a clear idea of what what constitutes success.

The choices in Afghanistan are not in or out, but how to best stabilize the situation at the least cost and do it efficiently. The $160M we spend each day there is a massive amount of money in one of the world's poorest countries. Is it serving the Afghanis or our needs at all? "Charlie Wilson's War" or "Three Cups of Tea" were pretty clear on how easy it might be to create bottom up change. If it creates another "Duchy of Grand Fenwick" it's still better than blowing each other up. I hope that in 18 months we'll be moving towards that goal, hopefully before our economy follows the USSR's path down the Afghan bottomless pit.

I also still feel optimistic about Obama, but certainly not unreservedly or unrealistically. I just know we're short on lifeboats and I don't swim as well as I used to. It's a big pile here and the financial mess is unbelievably just now being DISCUSSED. (tempted to Spoonerize that word to disgust)

"Should I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
An' if I stay it will be double"
-The Clash

when hillary went to karzai's inauguration - the signal was clear as to what the administration's intentions for afghanistan were

second -- chezking -- you are spot on

America has watches". We had bin Laden cornered and the boots on the ground were not allowed to take him out. Ain't it grand to listen to Darth Cheney's words when he was Sec of Defense under Bush 41 on how invading there would lead to a, b, c and d, so don't do it. He laid out all the reasons not to that we now face. Funny after 41 lost and Cheney didn't have a government job he was appointed to and went to work at Halliburton that all changed. Blood for oil. About the only thing I won't forgive Obama for is if he extends another 6 months of secret service protection for the 5 deferment Dick. The dude craps hundred dollar bills - make him pay his own way.

on "Three Cups of Tea" but you might want to take another look at "Charlie Wilson's War."
it seems pretty clear that playboy Texas Democrat Charlie was duped into his covert activities helping the Afghan mujahideen by a pretty blonde socialite working for oil interests.

from the American government?
-First, it is entirely controlled by the military-industrial-banking complex.
-secondly, America's mission is seen from the right as having a divinely inspired mission to fight "evil" in the world and to spread freedom and democracy, and from the left as having a morally inspired mission to fight evil in the world and spread freedom and democracy...all of it with guns and coercion, of course.
-thirdly, wars have always been about resources ever since the rise of imperialism, of colonialism...I love to see people going to protest wars driving in their giant SUV's...the American government is not imposing these outrageous and destructive living standards on us, but responding to our common greed for ever more wealth and ever more cheap stuff, and of course ever more energy.
So isn't it totally hypocritical to criticize US policies while living a typical American mainstream lifestyle?

What started as a way to tie up the Soviets in an un-winnable Tar Baby of a war and drain their economy ended sadly in the Taliban and Al-Qaeda taking over in the vacuum left behind when the war was "won". While I admit I don't know more than the movie version of the story, it's obvious that the true victory was stolen from us as well as we forgot the lesson the Marshall Plan taught us and now fight the same combatants that were once allies. It actually should be a lesson in all our conflicts - that it's not over until we win not just the "mission accomplished" victory ... that is relatively easy as we've shown in conflict after conflict, but the victory that comes from long term functionality and success.

The frustration as CW watched what minimal monetary investments that could have secured those goals were refused by suddenly frugal strategists, just as real stability might have been achieved was the real point of the movie. We continue to short change long term goals with short term tactics. Thus, funding prisons instead of schools, or bombing people in order to convince them that we're looking out for them.

I didn't mean to imply anyone writing here was a hypocrite...not at all, but I meant that it would be pointless to try to "unify" a nation in "truth, love and intelligence" when the population of said nation is mostly composed of people who are still addicted to the ideas of privilege, of unlimited wealth and consumerism, of a strange American superiority complex and of pathological competitiveness, of supreme military might and superpower status, and addicted to a fantasy land lifestyle based on obscene waste and complete denial.
How can you wake such people up, whose main worries are to shed an extra 40 to 80lbs of fast food fat or unclutter their garages or basements, in a world where 90% of the population lives in poverty according to American standards?
America is currently as the Roman Empire in the last days: decadent, not because it has lost any "values", but because it is no longer grounded in reality, if it ever was. It is culturally isolated and generally hostile and rather paranoid towards other cultures (particularly European cultures), running on empty (culturally) because greed, fame and fortune cannot feed the soul, neither can compulsions (consumerism, religious fundamentalism and other legal and illegal opiates).

Obama is not going to get any more done than anyone else that has invaded Afghanistan in the past century. The only armies that have conquered these peoples didn't do it with modern weapons. One army stopped the import of food, and starved them into submission, and the other killed every man, woman, and child, in their largest city, and they surrendered. We are not brutal enough to win this war.
The military industrial complex is driving this war, as it has since Viet Nam. All the presidents involved have preached the same message. we are just too stupid to check the records. We listen to the politically controlled news, which controls us. Check it out!