Live data from Hacker News

Obama Promises Disappear from Web

sunlightfoundation.com

161–170 of 174 posts

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he still was re-elected. Which drives me to the conclusion that his voters are gullible enough to still believe in "we're going to change Washington" There were actually many who were disappointed by 2012, and I am not aware of anyone (even Obama) who still discussed or believed that the 2012 campaign was about "changing Washington", as was the 2008 campaign. Even his campaign slogan had changed to reflect this. Th…

Not to mention the striking contrast with W Really? Because I have trouble finding even a hair's breadth of difference between the two. I'm serious about this: if you eliminate rhetoric and presentation from the equation, and examine only the actions of the two men, I find it very difficult to discern any contrast whatsoever.

While I wouldn't go quite as far as to say "not a hair's breath of difference between the two", I will say that there hasn't turned out to be as much of a difference as I would have liked in some areas. And, certainly not as much as was advertised.

And, that advertising is the point here. The parent was arguing that people had no reason to believe that he was different at that time (without the benefit of hindsight). But, based on "rhetoric", "presentation", raw intelligence, proposed policy positions, etc., there certainly seemed to be a striking difference between Bush and Obama.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#162
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he still was re-elected. Which drives me to the conclusion that his voters are gullible enough to still believe in "we're going to change Washington" There were actually many who were disappointed by 2012, and I am not aware of anyone (even Obama) who still discussed or believed that the 2012 campaign was about "changing Washington", as was the 2008 campaign. Even his campaign slogan had changed to reflect this. Th…

>>>> to the fact that he would be the first African-American president, Exactly. The only thing suggested that he's in any way different is his skin color. Take that away, and he'd be the most regular politician, with nothing to distinguish him from hundreds of others that can artfully read calculated words from a teleprompter. I purposefully did not mention that because I think being of unusual skin color for a pres…

>However, it in no way, shape or form - unless you subscribe to a racist notion that skin color determines behavior - suggests that hispolitics would be in any way different than usual

This is a naive and remarkably shallow statement. His skin color has certainly contributed a great deal to his experience and experience informs our politics for all of us. Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. When people (of all races) felt he was "their guy" it is in part because of a certain "underdog" association we assign to minorities in a majority culture. And it is reasonable to expect a certain sensitivity from a person whose culture has experienced its share of struggle.

His work as a community organizer was more an indication of his character and concern for those who were struggling. It wasn't about his performance. It was about his heart. And, remember, in 2008 many people were struggling. They felt he related to them.

You stated that his background/experiene is unremarkable, then went on to list many of the reasons it actually is remarkable. I mean, you literally remarked on it. So, apparently we agree.

>And all his objections to Bush's expansion of the government on the wake of 9/11 turned to be purely partisan gamesmanship

That's hindsight. Your original point was that people had no reason to believe he was different back then.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#163
post #154
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>> to the fact that he would be the first African-American president, Exactly. The only thing suggested that he's in any way different is his skin color. Take that away, and he'd be the most regular politician, with nothing to distinguish him from hundreds of others that can artfully read calculated words from a teleprompter. I purposefully did not mention that because I think being of unusual skin color for a pres…

>>> I think being of unusual skin color for a president is a personal accomplishment I meant "is not a personal accomplishment".

Neither version of that statement is relevant to the discussion. We were talking about the reasons people might have expected him to be different.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#164
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>> to the fact that he would be the first African-American president, Exactly. The only thing suggested that he's in any way different is his skin color. Take that away, and he'd be the most regular politician, with nothing to distinguish him from hundreds of others that can artfully read calculated words from a teleprompter. I purposefully did not mention that because I think being of unusual skin color for a pres…

> However, it in no way, shape or form - unless you subscribe to a racist notion that skin color determines behavior - suggests that hispolitics would be in any way different than usual This is a naive and remarkably shallow statement. His skin color has certainly contributed a great deal to his experience and experience informs our politics for all of us. Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. When people (…

>>> Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict.

His comments on Zimmerman affair in general and the verdict in particular were a transparent effort to earn political scores on the tragedy by fomenting the racial animosity and injecting and supporting suspicions of racism in place where there were absolutely no evidence of it. This, however, is not a function of Obama's skin color - as such reprehensible behavior is unfortunately common among politicians of certain sort, of varied skin colors and other physical traits, but united in their persuasion that no good crisis should go to waste and no tragedy should go unharvested to promote a political agenda.

I see absolutely no evidence that Obama had been ever a victim of racial discrimination - even though he famously implied that his own grandmother was a racist as a "typical white person" is, I remember no evidence of him actually being victim of any racial discrimination that informed or influenced his politics.

So I see no evidence that his skin color suggested his politics would be transformatively different - or any different at all.

>>> His work as a community organizer was more an indication of his character and concern for those who were struggling.

It's indication that we wanted to be a politician and needed a launching pad. Since he was late for the great civil rights movement, he had to find something else to get him started, and Chicago CCRC needed someone who was black to lead projects in black communities, so Obama was a perfect match. But as soon as he could move on, he moved on.

>>> It wasn't about his performance. It was about his heart.

No it was not. It was about making himself into a political figure, at which he succeeded. As for his heart, I do not know his private life and how he is when he is among his family - it may be that he is a very warm, open-hearted, charming and overall nicest person around. But one can be sure that when he's on the political stage "heart" has absolutely nothing to do with anything, and any time he talks about any emotional matters - it is a calculated attempt to manipulate audience into agreeing with him. It is what politicians do. It is for what their speechwriters get big bucks paid. He may be one thing or another, but he is certainly not example of open-hearted sincerity. One can see it plainly, but if you can not - look up what people that knew him early but have no reason to cover for him tell about him. He's a politician, and that says it all.

>>>> then went on to list many of the reasons it actually is remarkable. I mean, you literally remarked on it.

Come on. Describing somebody's experience does not make it remarkable - everybody has a biography. Remarkable biography should have achievements that raise one over the others.

>>>> Your original point was that people had no reason to believe he was different back then.

Because to anybody that is not blinded by the "first African American president" thing it was quite clear that he has neither abilities nor qualities nor desire to bring any change beyond saying the words that need to be said to manipulate gullible people into believing him. He was never a transformational leader he was presented to be and absolutely nothing in his career or history pointed to him as a transformational leader. So no wonder he didn't become one.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#165
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, it in no way, shape or form - unless you subscribe to a racist notion that skin color determines behavior - suggests that hispolitics would be in any way different than usual This is a naive and remarkably shallow statement. His skin color has certainly contributed a great deal to his experience and experience informs our politics for all of us. Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. When people (…

>>> Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. His comments on Zimmerman affair in general and the verdict in particular were a transparent effort to earn political scores on the tragedy by fomenting the racial animosity and injecting and supporting suspicions of racism in place where there were absolutely no evidence of it. This, however, is not a function of Obama's skin color - as such reprehensible behavior…

You are changing the subject here to all of the reasons you don't like Obama. Your original point was that there was no reason for people to expect that he'd be different from any other politician.

Every piece of information that I give you to that effect is turned into a rant about how Obama is a racist, opportunist, etc. OK, we get it. You don't like Obama.

Beyond that, you are simply backing into your conclusion that he was no differerent. Sure, if you take every piece of anyone's life and look for a cynical explanation, you can find it. I mean, John Kerry's Purple Hearts were turned into badges of shame. And, you see no evidence that Obama has ever been the victim of racial discrimination when he told you he has. You just see what fits your conclusion. But, you haven't been with him every day of his life. Of course, if he did share more of such details, you would accuse him of "fomenting more racism" and of being an "opportunist".

And that was my point in bringing up his Zimmerman comments. He was sharing some of his experience with all of us, with regard to what it is like to be an African-American man. Of course this is a different set of experiences from any other president we have had. That was relevant to the original point. Again, you missed that point and started ranting about why you thought he made those comments.

You say you don't know Obama's heart, yet you are certain that he became a community organizer for fully political purposes and didn't care about the people in the community. You say that every emotional utterance that comes out of the man's mouth is political. He is a sociopathic robot (although he may be "warm" in his personal life). You offer no evidence to support this and, in fact, state yourself that you cannot know the man's heart. Yet, you are so certain that you're right because you and Fox News say so. You bring no evidence. Just conjecture and conclusions.

Look, I cannot know what's in his head or heart, and I certainly have had my own disappointments with this president. But, it is ridiculous to assert that there wasn't anything different about this man or that it was unreasonable for people to have a hope that he was actually different. Again, even in giving his "biography" you magically hit upon everything that makes the man different, but say it is unremarkable. I didn't choose the items you ticked off. You did. And, in doing so, you outlined the same rationale as the "believers". You just drew a different conclusion AND you're aided by hindsight.

Even his opponents fed into the notion with all of this fear mongering about socialism, "taking their country back", etc. They painted him as this "other" of which we should all be afraid. Of course, it backfired as it helped to sell the idea that maybe this man really would be transformational. Hell, they even tried to trot out those same tired lines about socialism, etc. in 2012 when it was clear that he wasn't the bogeyman they made him out to be.

You can stick your head in the sand and pretend that the atmosphere in 2008 was other than what it was. But, I wouldn't be surprised if you were one of those who was scared out of your mind of what a difference this man might actually make.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#166
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, it in no way, shape or form - unless you subscribe to a racist notion that skin color determines behavior - suggests that hispolitics would be in any way different than usual This is a naive and remarkably shallow statement. His skin color has certainly contributed a great deal to his experience and experience informs our politics for all of us. Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. When people (…

>>> Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. His comments on Zimmerman affair in general and the verdict in particular were a transparent effort to earn political scores on the tragedy by fomenting the racial animosity and injecting and supporting suspicions of racism in place where there were absolutely no evidence of it. This, however, is not a function of Obama's skin color - as such reprehensible behavior…

BTW, if anyone was unreasonable about their expectations that he'd be different, it was those who were afraid. They believed he would take their guns, was a Communist, not born in the U.S., raised taxes when he actually lowered them, etc.

They were so made afraid about the difference he would make that they formed a party to "take their country back". And, they continued to believe in wild conspiracy theories, even in the face of plain facts to the contrary. This wasn't some small fringe, but a fairly broad swath of the opposition, fueled by fear-mongering politicians on the right.

Maybe you should look into that.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that was what Daily Show was.

no, that was only when Bush Light was in office.

I've noticed this too, to some extent. and I don't think its purely because of the President's party. TDS writers and Jon used to work hard to hold politicians feet to the fire no matter their party, and in the past few years I've seen them become increasingly outright liberal.

Sure, that change happened around the same time as Obama, but I argue that the Daily Show of old would have been less coddling to the current administration.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#168
post #9

This is a simple discovery, but an important one. Change.gov was the President's official transition website, and included a vision for his presidency. It's a central piece of the historical record of the US, and they yanked it from the Internet. It doesn't matter whether or not the Administration was trying to remove something specific: taking down the content at Change.gov is un-American and un-Internet.

I'm curious. What's un-American about it? I can see the whole "un-internet" aspect, becuase after all "cool urls don't change", but un-American?

Side note: does this mean xkcd's "Time" is un-internet?

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#169
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. His comments on Zimmerman affair in general and the verdict in particular were a transparent effort to earn political scores on the tragedy by fomenting the racial animosity and injecting and supporting suspicions of racism in place where there were absolutely no evidence of it. This, however, is not a function of Obama's skin color - as such reprehensible behavior…

BTW, if anyone was unreasonable about their expectations that he'd be different, it was those who were afraid. They believed he would take their guns, was a Communist, not born in the U.S., raised taxes when he actually lowered them, etc. They were so made afraid about the difference he would make that they formed a party to "take their country back". And, they continued to believe in wild conspiracy theories, even i…

>>> They believed he would take their guns

He's still trying to undermine both gun ownership and self-defense rights. He is now vocally opposing Stand Your Ground - the principle he himself supported and helped strengthening while in the state senate by sponsoring a law: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/354059/obama-voted-stre...

He is still advocating severely limiting and restricting access to guns. It's not his fault that it is politically impractical right now. He is trying as hard as he can.

>>> raised taxes when he actually lowered them, etc.

He did raise taxes. It took him a while but you can't say he did not - it's just not true. What is true he didn't raise taxes for everybody - but he did raise taxes for some. And he's and his party still are advocating even more tax raises. Again, the fact that it yet didn't happened is not his fault - he did all he could to raise taxes even more, but he is not a dictator, so the Congress did not allow him to go further.

>>> And, they continued to believe in wild conspiracy theories, even in the face of plain facts to the contrary

Now you are equating people who oppose Obama due to disagreement with his politics (a tiny bit less than a half of a country) with a tiny minority that believes in conspiracy theories. Do you really think it will go unnoticed? When you attempt sleight of hand, it should not be this obvious.

Re: Obama Promises Disappear from Web

#170
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> Listen to his comments on the Zimmeman verdict. His comments on Zimmerman affair in general and the verdict in particular were a transparent effort to earn political scores on the tragedy by fomenting the racial animosity and injecting and supporting suspicions of racism in place where there were absolutely no evidence of it. This, however, is not a function of Obama's skin color - as such reprehensible behavior…

You are changing the subject here to all of the reasons you don't like Obama. Your original point was that there was no reason for people to expect that he'd be different from any other politician. Every piece of information that I give you to that effect is turned into a rant about how Obama is a racist, opportunist, etc. OK, we get it. You don't like Obama. Beyond that, you are simply backing into your conclusion t…

Believe me, if I wrote all the reasons I dislike Obama, it would be comparable in size to a George Martin novel. Yes, I dislike him. But that does not make what I say about him untrue - in fact, the reason I dislike him is exactly because these things are true, I don't have any personal animosity towards him. But these not all the reasons - these are only the reasons why anybody who is willing to look clearly into things and go beyond propaganda should have expected Obama not to be a transformational leader. Which he is not. If you persist in the opinion that all signs were pointing at him being transformational, but it somehow didn't work out (I'm sure it was Bush's fault or Tea Party fault or anybody else's fault but not his) - well, feel free to believe it. I only hope next time next Obama tries to sell you a bill of goods you remember how well you did on this one.

>>> Yet, you are so certain that you're right because you and Fox News say so.

No, because people who knew him say so, e.g.: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/03/harvard-law-classmate-law-... And it's not the only place, just try to find somebody who was around him when he wasn't yet a big politician and ask them, or read accounts of those who did.

Post reply on HN