# The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

For all of you Nodak political pundits, here is a link you'll want to bookmark for the next 4 years:

*The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises.*










It's followed by *26 webpages of individual promises*, just waiting to be kept (conveniently sortable by the categories above). All you need to do is click the hyperlink of the category, and it will drill in further to break down individual items.

Barack Obama is off to an excellent start (this'll help too), and I think he is going to get stuff done, posthaste. Despite lots of reporting on how ambitious and politically cold-blooded he was in Chicago, I think of him as a principled man, _one who believes in doing what he says he'll do_.

I also imagine him thinking, "I'm a black man, and I'm the president of the goddamn United States. There is no time to waste." I don't imagine him thinking about his second term.

Enjoy.


----------



## jgat (Oct 27, 2006)

R y a n said:


> Barack Obama is off to an excellent start


Freeing terrorists and limiting the ways that we obtain information from the slime bag's who hope to kill every infidel on planet earth. Excellent indeed.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I don't imagine him thinking about his second term.


I thought you said that stuff doesn't permanently affect your brain. 



> Barack Obama is off to an excellent start


If you are a radical Muslim he is off to an excellent start. Considering it's what I expected the attack on firearms can't be far behind. Will that make any difference to you? Maybe it will start with an attack on ammo. Me thinks Latte is a hallucinogen.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Thanks jgat. I think this fits here.

A Saudi man who was released from Guantanamo after spending six years inside the U.S. prison camp has joined Al Qaeda's branch in Yemen and is now the terror group's No. 2 in the country, according to a purported Internet statement from Al Qaeda.

The announcement, made this week on a Web site commonly used by militants, came as President Barack Obama ordered the detention facility closed within a year.

Are we having fun yet Ryan? :eyeroll: uke:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I may have taken the bait there. I'm not sure Ryan is serious.

Ryan, I think we have a difference of opinion about posts. I think a post is successful if it simply informs people. Better yet a post is wonderful if it convinces people. Often I post and don't even expect a response. We have spoken and I know you think a post that gets the most responses is the best. I don't agree with saying something dumb or controversial just to stir the pot. Firearms owners need to search for ways to come together, because we are going to need to fight soon.

I know you will not read my pm's, or I would have taken that route. I hope you do see the above. After reading your comment about a good start I decided there was no way it could be serious as I had first thought.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

> I know you will not read my pm's, or I would have taken that route.


I don't follow you plainsman. Why would you need to PM ryan because he provided a link to a site that keeps track of campaign promises either broken or kept. The main point was the web site. Or was it the fact that Ryan provided his own opinions on Obama (opinions, BTW, largely the same the world over)? Its reactions like this that make me :lol:


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

me thinks that Obama's moving legislation at blinding speed will surely show, once again, "haste makes waste"....or it may be by design....."ram everything through before they know what hit 'em."

i still say, he will take a big fall on his foreign policy moves....hang tight, let's see how much stomach his supporters have for mass casualties in Afghanistan.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

We don't jail people for crimes they _might_ commit. It's not "Minority Report". If we don't have evidence with which to try them, we've got to let them go. That's how the Constitution works. Good for Obama moving forward on the Gitmo problem.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I don't follow you plainsman.


I wouldn't expect you to. Ryan and I have had many private conversations, and he will understand.



> Or was it the fact that Ryan provided his own opinions on Obama


For a guy who didn't follow how did you manage to inject partisanship? I was making a point no one can understand unless they have read my PM's. Simply a private debate Ryan and I have had which has nothing to do with liberal or conservative.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

omegax said:


> We don't jail people for crimes they _might_ commit. It's not "Minority Report". If we don't have evidence with which to try them, we've got to let them go. That's how the Constitution works. Good for Obama moving forward on the Gitmo problem.


The only problem in gitmo is the terroists that are there(.45 would fix that). These people do not have constitutional rights they are not americans they hate us. They hate you and wish you were dead but you still want to give them rights. Think about this one of those pukes from gitmo captures you what rights will they extend you. Just a dull knife to cut your head off on camera. Once agin they have no constitutional rights they are the enemy of the usa.


----------



## jgat (Oct 27, 2006)

KurtR said:


> These people do not have constitutional rights


Exactly!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

jgat said:


> KurtR said:
> 
> 
> > These people do not have constitutional rights
> ...


That is why they did not bring them to the United States. Once inside the United States they would have many more rights. You think we have economic problems now, start spending billions to defend terrorists in our courts. Personally I think constitutional rights should be extended to citizens only, and people in the United States legally.

I might also add these are not people we suspect of something, these are people that have been captured trying to kill our soldiers. They are enemy combatants. If there was any question of guilt of course they should be let go. However, there should be nothing protecting them from prosecution.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> I may have taken the bait there. I'm not sure Ryan is serious.


I'm frankly not shocked that once again my posts are taken out of context.

I was serious with my post in that I was providing a link that you could refer to keep "score", which it would seem to me that lots of folks on here would sure like to do. Hell this link could provide you the very fodder you need to point out Obama's failures. :eyeroll:

By an "excellent start", I think that the US and world concensus would agree with me to this point. He has been VERY transparent in all of his decisions to date. By excellent start, I mean he seems to be on track with following through with the campaign goals that he set during the election process. Those decisions, goals, and action items might not sit well with your politics, but they do point to him being a man of his word. I think Obama's convictions will make him a man of his word.

By "excellent start" I"m not saying that I agree with any one particular action to this point. I'm talking about the many little things he has done to this point. For example, I posted in another forum thread here that:



> Unlike the former President, whose team implemented _strict_ *rules on secrecy *and not being transparent with the American people, At roughly the same time as *PRESIDENT Obama* took the oath of office, change.gov became whitehouse.gov, taking the same "Web 2.0" design and principles from Obama's campaign and transition websites to the website of the new president.
> 
> Some noteworthy things about this change:
> 
> ...





Plainsman said:


> Ryan, I think we have a difference of opinion about posts. I think a post is successful if it simply informs people. Better yet a post is wonderful if it convinces people.


I think a post is successful if it informs people and provides a platform to discuss a narrowly defined topic without digressing into garbage partisan rhetoric. You've had many liberal leaning posters on this site point this out to you quite often as of late, but you still miss the point.



Plainsman said:


> Often I post and don't even expect a response. We have spoken and I know you think a post that gets the most responses is the best. I don't agree with saying something dumb or controversial just to stir the pot.


Gee I wish we played on an even playing field. I remember posting lots of articles back in the fall, that that would "inform" people about a particular topic. Often they would point out Republican shortcomings, and the growing dissatisfaction with the Republican party and/or their political candidates.

Soon people were complaining... err I mean "commenting" that my posts were simply "stirring the pot" or "trolling". I guess "stirring the pot" or "trolling" are simply in the eyes of the beholder depending on their political leaning.

You see.. you justify throwing up lots of posts as being informative with no expectation of replies. I try the same thing, and people start crying foul. Nice double standard.

Is this a Politics forum in general or a ultra Conservative Politics Forum?

(and no I don't care who the majority posting here represent. This forum is purported to be fair and balanced and objective... or so I am told)



Plainsman said:


> Firearms owners need to search for ways to come together, because we are going to need to fight soon.


Totally agree.



Plainsman said:


> I know you will not read my pm's, or I would have taken that route. I hope you do see the above. After reading your comment about a good start I decided there was no way it could be serious as I had first thought.


I do actually read your PM's Plainsman. Feel free to send me one anytime. There is only 1 PM I have not read that you have sent me and that was months ago. If I still have it I'll read it this weekend.

But I am growing tired at all the innuendo and veiled pot shots being thrown my way....


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

seabass said:


> > I know you will not read my pm's, or I would have taken that route.
> 
> 
> I don't follow you plainsman. Why would you need to PM ryan because he provided a link to a site that keeps track of campaign promises either broken or kept. The main point was the web site. Or was it the fact that Ryan provided his own opinions on Obama (opinions, BTW, largely the same the world over)? Its reactions like this that make me :lol:


Thanks seabass

That is exactly what I was simply doing. I was posting a link to a website that I felt many here would jump on..

From both/all sides.

I also agree... these reactions are ridiculous. :lol:


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

KurtR said:


> The only problem in gitmo is the terroists that are there(.45 would fix that). These people do not have constitutional rights they are not americans they hate us. They hate you and wish you were dead but you still want to give them rights. Think about this one of those pukes from gitmo captures you what rights will they extend you. Just a dull knife to cut your head off on camera. Once agin they have no constitutional rights they are the enemy of the usa.


What he _would_ do is irrelevant. I'm not willing to sacrifice values that people have died for because of hypotheticals! If you toss your values out the window when they're tested, they're not values. They're suggestions!


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

R y a n said:


> For all of you Nodak political pundits, here is a link you'll want to bookmark for the next 4 years:
> 
> *The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises.*
> 
> ...


*ahhh....well, i guess he has pi$$ed backwards on this pledge already...that didn't take long, now did it??* :lol: :eyeroll: :lol:

McCain disappointed by ethics waiver
Buzz Up Send 
Email IM Share 
Digg Facebook Newsvine del.icio.us Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks Print 15 mins ago
Featured Topics: Barack Obama Presidential Transition Play Video Barack Obama Video: Yo-Yo Ma at inauguration taped, not live AP Play Video Barack Obama Video: Obama asks lawmakers to back stimulus bill AP Play Video Barack Obama Video: D.C. goes Hollywood for inauguration AP WASHINGTON - Sen. John McCain says he is disappointed in *President Obama's decision to waive a new ethics requirement for the man picked to be the No. 2 at the Pentagon.*

McCain, the ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee, said in a statement late Friday that he won't endorse William J. Lynn III until he has more details. Specifically, McCain says he wants to know whether Lynn, a former Raytheon lobbyist, would disqualify himself from certain issues.

*The administration delivered a waiver to Capitol Hill late Thursday exempting Lynn from the requirement that people must wait two years before working for an agency they once lobbied.*

:lol: :lol: :eyeroll: :lol:  :lol:


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Two suspected U.S. missile attacks killed 18 people Friday on the Pakistan side of the Afghan border, in the first such strikes since the inauguration of President Barack Obama.

Welcome to the KILL ZONE! This happened under the Obama-Biden Administration!

Prosecute Obama/Biden for war crimes!

BO and Joe got to go! 1456 days and counting


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> By "excellent start" I"m not saying that I agree with any one particular action to this point.


Whew, glad to hear that. I think he is off to a terrible start taking the side of murdering terrorists.



> I was serious with my post in that I was providing a link that you could refer to keep "score", which it would seem to me that lots of folks on here would sure like to do.


Oh, absolutely. I think gun owners need to make a list of their own. You know, the things we have said we think he will do that liberals say he will not do. Actually that would interest me more.



> He has been VERY transparent


Actually there were many questions during the campaign that he still has not answered. Liberals try put us off, but why would he go to court to keep his official birth record secret?



> Unlike the former President, whose team implemented strict rules on secrecy and not being transparent with the American people


That's simply a guess right? If not do you have memo, tape, any records that substantiate that? I doubt anyone does. Somewhere along the line this stuff was made up, just like the Palin cool-aid.

When it comes to intelligence and military movement I hope Bush did keep secrets, and I hope Obama does. It's a heck of a lot better than having the media meet the guys on the beach like during the Clinton years. You had to be talking about more than that when you talked about secrets didn't you?



> You've had many liberal leaning posters on this site point this out to you quite often as of late, but you still miss the point.


Your right, I must have missed it. If so could the authors please point it out again. Sometimes I look at things differently, so if the authors to those posts would be so kind come right out and explain the point for me. Thanks.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Tonight on FOX O'Reilly and Geraldo Rivera were talking about Obama's executive orders. Both thought Obama has made a huge mistake. I didn't know it, but another aspect, he is telling the world what methods we will use to extract information. Geraldo made the point that now terrorists will train to withstand those methods. what a naive man Obama is when it comes to terrorists. Well, naive or worse.

God save our troops.

Lets all hope Obama makes a half decent decision on what to do with these guys.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

omegax said:


> KurtR said:
> 
> 
> > The only problem in gitmo is the terroists that are there(.45 would fix that). These people do not have constitutional rights they are not americans they hate us. They hate you and wish you were dead but you still want to give them rights. Think about this one of those pukes from gitmo captures you what rights will they extend you. Just a dull knife to cut your head off on camera. Once agin they have no constitutional rights they are the enemy of the usa.
> ...


People have died and you want to let the people from another country that have killed them the same constitutional rights that they hate. Have you ever served and do you understand anything about war and what it takes to win a war. That is the problem with the PC crowd today. Had a drill sgt tell us at basic training that we have the hardest job in the world we are supposed to kill but do it in the most politcally correct way. How do you do that? Boy i am glad that when pearl harbor got bombed we were not a bunch of pussies that worried more about the people trying to kill us than our own country. We would be eating sushi and bratwurst everyday. They are not americans they are enimies they are lucky they are still breathing i think


----------



## szm69 (Apr 28, 2006)

England didn't think we were fighting "fair" in the Revolutionary war either. Part of the reason why we won is because England thought you needed to get in a line and take one shot then stand there for your enemy to take a shot like at you. I am glad we didn't fight "fair" then and I don't think we need to now. We need to defend ourselves.

Terrorists have no morals or rules of engagement, that requires that anti-terrorism measures are extreme. Lets not stand in a line and wait for the terrorist to take a shot at us!


----------



## Bustem36 (Feb 5, 2008)

KurtR and szm69

I couldn't agree more. As I see it when we are protecting ourselves/defending our nation than we need to do it 100%. We can't worry about the feelings/rights of our attackers.

omegax...my values must be different than yours. I value my life, the life of my family, and the life of this nation. If my values are not "politically correct" then I guess I'm the wierd one. You mentioned hypotheticals...look at it from both side hypothetically these guys may not return to terrorism but Im going to error on the side of caution when it comes to either him feeling discomfort or me being dead.

One of my favorite quotes:

"Political Correctness is about turning a blind eye to painful reality because your comfortable feelings are more important to you than saving lives and providing quality of life to people who work their *** off to be productive and are a benefit to this great American Dream." 
-Ted Nugent


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

R y a n said:


> He has been VERY transparent in all of his decisions to date.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first10 ... fing-room/

Oh yes, Very transparent. Just dont ask any tough questions...


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

It is at the very best hypocritical to whine about Obama closing gitmo and then whine about him keeping up the attacks on Pakistan. All the senior military and intelligence personnell have stayed the same, including their leader Gates.

Have you heard what is going on inside pakistan? Our supply lines robbed, tribes providing cover and supplies to the terrorists/taliban, and last but not least senior pakistani military leaders helping the taliban. Taking the war right to them is what you want right? Closing gitmo may seem bad on the surface but it will help get the rest of the world back on our side. Which we need if we are going to be successful in this and other conflicts whether military or diplomatic. The US is not just going to give these guys a free pass, as I posted in another forum, we are going to keep the high value guys and most of the rest will be sent to prisons in other countrys or tried here in the US. To hold these people indefinetely and keep the rest of the world be against it is a win for the terrorists, after all they want to change our way of life. It is also very costly to run this facility, which is another goal of the terrorists, to fight us from the financial/economic side of things.


----------



## Dak (Feb 28, 2005)

Ryan,

Will keep this simple instead of silly. Thanks for the link.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

TK33 said:


> It is at the very best hypocritical to whine about Obama closing gitmo and then whine about him keeping up the attacks on Pakistan. All the senior military and intelligence personnel have stayed the same, including their leader Gates.
> 
> Have you heard what is going on inside Pakistan? Our supply lines robbed, tribes providing cover and supplies to the terrorists/taliban, and last but not least senior Pakistan military leaders helping the taliban. Taking the war right to them is what you want right? Closing gitmo may seem bad on the surface but it will help get the rest of the world back on our side. Which we need if we are going to be successful in this and other conflicts whether military or diplomatic. The US is not just going to give these guys a free pass, as I posted in another forum, we are going to keep the high value guys and most of the rest will be sent to prisons in other countries or tried here in the US. To hold these people indefinitely and keep the rest of the world be against it is a win for the terrorists, after all they want to change our way of life. It is also very costly to run this facility, which is another goal of the terrorists, to fight us from the financial/economic side of things.


*yep, **any sign of weakness, on our part, only encourages these a$$holes to attack us more.......the point of Pakistan is well taken. Obama is stupid if he thinks taking the war to Afghanistan is going to work. shutting down Gitmo is not going to rally support for an invasion of Afghanistan, you would have to be naive as hell to think so........Afghanistan is not winnable, not even remotely so, at least in Iraq we have a chance. Afghanistan is constantly destabilized by the porous border between them and Pakistan and those folks totally resent us violating their borders, even their airspace with our drones......you pick the battles you can win and have a reasonable chance to prevail and make a difference, that would be Iraq. trying to win Afghanistan is a joke, we will be mired in a battle we can never win, geographically and politically, Afgahanistan is a whole other animal.......Obama will fail miserably there......and yes, Gates and the military remain, but now O is calling the shots......the killing is now, undeniably, on his watch.....no other flimsy excuse is needed! * :eyeroll:


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

Will not hear me whine about any attacks on hadji anyhwhere. We could have this all taken care of in 3 months if the politicians would give the UN terroists group (because the un in no better than the talliban) the miiddle finger and lets drop the hammer on these hadjis. we need to show the rest of the world we are not f)*)(*ing around any more. Tell me what we need the rest of the world on our side as long a britian and isrieal is on our side i dont care what the othe 3rd world countries think and here is another middle finger to the rest of europe. But now we are all pc and pretty much a country of big fat peple who care more for the enemy than our great nation. To all these people who worry about what is happening to the innocent terroists in sand how bout we get a fund together and give you a one way ticket. Go try and preach peace to the killers over there.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

I am not preaching peace to anyone, if it was up to me after 9/11 we would have started at pakistan and blazed a trail right to the mediteranean.

Right now the taliban and al-qaida appear to be running things from pakistan, we have to control that border if we are going to win in afghanistan.



> yep, any sign of weakness, on our part, only encourages these a$$holes to attack us more.......the point of Pakistan is well taken. Obama is stupid if he thinks taking the war to Afghanistan is going to work. shutting down Gitmo is not going to rally support for an invasion of Afghanistan, you would have to be naive as hell to think so........Afghanistan is not winnable


You apparently forgot that at one time we were doing very well there. It is not weakness to close down a prison that is deemed illegal by many, it is a prudent move to prove his ability to make things happen and make the hard but correct decision. The fact that you say that I am naive shows your lack of understanding of our place in the world right now, with Russia, Iran, and China causing trouble for us every chance that they get we need the support of the rest of the world like we had after 9/11 to remain the true superpower that we should be.

We need the support of the Europeans, the moderate arabs, and our neighbor canada to win the war on terror. We have strained relations with all of them right now and closing gitmo will help that greatly.

I have one friend in Afghanistan now and one that is leaving shortly, I wish them the best and pray they get all the resources needed to kick a$$ and come home.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Thanks for the link RYAN, it'll be interesting to see what he does.



R Y A N said:


> I think of him as a principled man, one who believes in doing what he says he'll do.


This phrase has me a little puzzled though, since he was backpeddling on his campiagn promises even before he took the oath. Copy and paste this into google, obama campaign promises backpeddling 
and spend some time reading.

I honestly don't believe much of anything the man says. But we'll see I guess.

huntin1


----------



## JustAnotherDog (Oct 16, 2005)

Obama's version of 'transparency" means Obama's definitions and Obama's administration will investigate and Obama will tell you what Obama thinks you need to know.

Obama has already done it. Obama investigated Rhamy's relationship with Blagojevich and then told everyone "Life is good, I'm in charge and everything is fine concerning Rhamy doing no wrong."

Obama's lapdog media lapped it up and now all is forgotten.

I think if you watch his executive order's you will see they will all be written in such a way there is no way they will "fail." Even the Gitmo order has ways of explaining why it will still be in existence 3 years from now.


----------

