Obama, The Candidate for 'Change'

To all you 'enlightened' voters who think Obama is the candidate of change, I encourage you fully to look at how he, McCain, and madame Clinton voted on the recent Telecom Amnesty/Immunity Bill.

In fact, since 60% of Americans won't bother to vote in the upcoming election [and thus I believe wouldn't even bother looking] I will tell you right now.

Obama: Yea
Clinton: Nay
McCain: Abstain

For those of us in New Jersey I am glad to say that both Lautenberg and Menendez took a stand and voted Nay.

So. Where does your hero stand now?

I am sick of this shit. I've had enough of these games. The time for polite indifference is over.

 

4 Responses to Obama, The Candidate for 'Change'

  1. Justine Bienkowski Says:
    There are a lot of different issues that need to be viewed in order to chose a candidate; just because Hillary Clinton voted nay on that bill doesn't mean she is the overall candidate for me. There is a big issue with people being overly apathetic to what goes on in our country right now, but in my personal opinion, and from my personal research, I choose the lesser of a few evils.
  2. Mike Santangelo Says:
    I admit I did not like Obama from the beginning [I do not believe he has the necessary experience to run this country properly. Furthermore I do not believe he has the conviction to do what is necessary in terms of military action.]. I can understand how one issue will not change a person's opinion of a candidate, but my point is this: Obama bills himself as the Candidate for Change. So far his change has been:
    1) Taking money into his political campaign from Telecomm Interests as early as 2 weeks before this vote came into play, and then mysteriously having his vote change from Nay to Yea.

    and

    2) Saying that he did not agree with the entire bill but still voting Yea. I believe that unless you agree with the entirety of the bill you should vote Nay.

    While I wholeheartedly agree that this is not the most important facet of Obama, I must additionally say that I cannot trust Obama to vote properly on a simple topic [This telecomm amnesty bill is blatantly unconstitutional especially examining ex post facto law] since when he became a senator [and if he became President] he swore to uphold the Constitution.

    I hold all politicians to the same criteria.

    Thanks for stopping by! :)
    -M
  3. Justine Bienkowski Says:
    I see your point, and I agree whole-heartedly, but at this point in America's life, all politicians seem to say a lot they don't mean, but it's better to stick to one that seems to have more going for him than others, eh? It really is a battle of the "lesser than two evils," since most independent candidates have no real chance of being voted into office--to have an independent voted in would take a lot of soul searching for the American identity and for people to venture out of their comfortable everyday lives to band together for a revolution. But such a thing is impossible, because from my experience, most Americans would prefer to be more limited in their freedoms than fight for them, despite their "ideals."
  4. Mike Santangelo Says:
    Pont taken. However I would sooner vote 3rd-party in hopes to bring them to the forefront. We need to break the 2 party system down.