Fox news just noted that Obama has stated that he will rescind 200 Bush presidential orders.

A list of these would be interesting……

Borrow and spend, it’s all they know.

That and drain the treasury, grow the size of government, divide the country, alienate the rest of the world, undermine infrastructure, politicize justice, abandon our fellow citizens, torture prisoners, appoint inept cronies …

Agreed.

BO’s election was strong enough to be considered, “mandate” strong.
But.,
Good luck with it.
He was voted into office because he’s Black, not for a liberal agenda. Had he been white, “Hillary” would have beat him!

So. Again. “Good Luck” with that mandate.

IF anyone would dare say”Voodoo” economics about Obamas economic plans they would immediately be branded a Racist.

oops and all this time I thought it was Maxine Waters and Chris Dodd and barny fife , and Obama that caused all this to happen and the republicans and the administration tried 17 times ,to get regulation on it and the democrats said they really got pissed because they were harping on brother Raines .all the democrats were responsible for the melt down on wall street not the republicans, care to check it out or do you go on what you think is right. facts are facts so show me how the republicans caused the melt down and then we can discuss it . I can bring links to many videos that show these democrats defending Raines can you shop me one the shows a republican doing the same or one that shows a democrat demanding regulations on wall street I await your reply .

So there!

A ‘progressive mandate’? Link?

There wasn’t anything to link to at the time I posted the article, as the transcript had not yet been posted. But a five second Google search should lead a reasonably intelligent person to the transcript.
For Vermont public school graduates, the link is here.

Yeah, it’s a mandate.

The “Not Quite Seven Percent Solution”? Sorry! Until the liberals can admit that they are liberals without fear of political reprisal at the ballot box, there’s no chance of a liberal “mandate” with the American public, only a mere plurality.

What’s “progressive” about promising a massive tax cut?
Especially when he’s lying about it. He’s raising both taxes and spending.

Mr. mandate and his executive orders , I wonder how many of them will be unconstitutional?

A “Progressive Mandate“?

What’s progressive about “Mandatory Volunteer-ism”?
What’s progressive about “The Fairness Doctrine”?
What’s progressive about a “National Civilian Security Force”?
What’s progressive about “ACORN”?

This nothing more than attempt at pacifying the opposition. No less an attempt to codify the left and demoralize the right-wing.

It’s the feeding of the masses with the lukewarm pablum of propaganda….

It’s like watching dogs in the pound… a lot of butt-sniffing going on…. then the lap doggies will roll over, show their bellies, and wag their tails… some uncomfortably, but still tame while they watch the others…

The other dogs observe and will be encouraged to follow suit, lest they be struck by “the master’s hand”…..

Beware “Progressives“, some dogs bite…….

Yeah; record continued prosperity.

robert108 on November 9, 2008 at 11:33 am

To quote a commercial ad from the past: “Wheres the beef?”
And why we had to borrow so much for this prosperity?
Borrowing money and giving it away as a form of income tax cut,or income tax rate reduction, is voodoo economics. Reagan did it and Bush II did it. Our budget, trade deficits and national debt are soaring. Interest paid to foreigners on this, is money out of American pockets. It erodes prosperity.

Stop the presses a liberal dem thinks that NOBAMA won a mandate. Wow, that is funny.

A very accurate description of Dem economic policy.

robert108 on November 9, 2008 at 12:21 pm

I am so glad in that you can recognise bad policy even though you ascribe it to the wrong persons.

…what Reaganomics and freemarket economics can do to a national economy.

Yeah; record continued prosperity. Where did you lefties get all your social engineering money? Where did you get all your vote-buying money? Without real economics, you would have nothing. Socialism=economic stagnation.

As I thought puzzle feet is afraid of what he/she may see in the video , I know it is disheartening to see your hero’s slander them selves in such a manner . But the video is real and it was the democrats baby, the fall of the Freddie and Fannie , not only the one video, but the administration tried 17 times and the democrats would not hear of placing common sense regulations on their pet project. The mandate you all seem to embrace is one of failure and misery. you will find out that there will be no free gas and no mortgage payments made for you and no free lunch mmm? someone said that before .I do invite any one interested in who caused the melt down to visit the link . 338 more babies killed each day with the freedom of choice act and most of them will be black. The republicans were rejected because they left their conservative ideals behind and went for the money as the denmocrats are doing now.

And, unfortunately for them, Ms. Puzzlefeet, you have a larger pair than they! Heh.

a liberal dem thinks that NOBAMA won a mandate.

Knowing their constituency, they probably just left out the space: man date.
(Don’t tell Michelle! She won’t be pleased!)

I told you to ask for help with the big words, Spark! Try the words you didn’t bold:

I think that he feels like he has a real mandate for change.

Nothing “generic” there. Unless you have a problem with the words “real” “mandate” or “change”!

the question, of course, is what kind of change. I want to put up something that the liberal economist Paul Krugman wrote in a column in the New York Times this week. Let’s put it up.

He wrote, “This year’s presidential election was a clear referendum on political philosophies, and the progressive philosophy won.

Wait for it, Sparkie…

” Do you agree?”

Here’s the wind up and the pitch…

PODESTA: Yes, I do.

A logical person might infer that he was saying that Obama won a progressive mandate.

Let me break it down so that even public school graduates from Vermont can understand it: Podesta says he agrees that the mandate he thinks that Obama feels he has is one that “… was a clear referendum on” …the progressive philosophy.”

Tell me again how that’s “pretty generic”? Or are you going for the Clintonian meaning of “is” is thing here?

Spark: Your last response was pretty lame even for you!

Hey, poofie, I’m a proud liberal. ooogaboogabooga!

Most conservatives can’t face the fact that conservatives in congress and the Pres. caused the debacle that we have today. They now call them RINOs. So how about coming to terms with the conservative movement today, the one that ran this economy into the ditch the conservatism of today and the last 8 years.

There’s probably a 12 step program for this, poofie.

*Shrug*

Historically speaking, Obama’s win was a strong one. Not a landslide, but a definitive win. So he gets to pursue his agenda.

Which he would have done even if he’d one by one vote.

Arguing about mandates and landslides is kind of a waste of time. Though it is kind of fun to tease the Obama fan boys by suggesting that not everything involving their Messiah is inherently miraculous.

Oh, this:

WALLACE: Does Mr. Obama feel he won a mandate in this election?

PODESTA: I think he feels like there was a strong vote for change. And I think that if you look at that from the perspective of where he won across the board, his appeal to independents, to Republicans, which I think will be reflected in the kind of government he builds — and you saw not just red states turning blue.

You saw red counties turning blue. You saw young people embracing the Obama presidency in great numbers, a lot of people going to the polls and then voting for President Obama. Again, across the board, across the country, Democrats, independents and Republicans…

WALLACE: But the question…

PODESTA: … voted for him. So I think that he feels like he has a real mandate for change. We need to get off the course that the Bush administration has set.

WALLACE: But the question, of course, is what kind of change. I want to put up something that the liberal economist Paul Krugman wrote in a column in the New York Times this week. Let’s put it up.

He wrote, “This year’s presidential election was a clear referendum on political philosophies, and the progressive philosophy won.” Do you agree?

PODESTA: Yes, I do. I think that the program that that — again, that was — that — that the Obama-Biden ticket put forth in the campaign focused on providing opportunity for everyone, focused on the common good.

And I think that’s in the progressive tradition in this country. It was alive and well in both parties. It sort of got extinguished in the Republican Party over the course of the last couple of decades, but I think that that progressive vision of providing opportunity for people who work hard, providing for the common good, to helping people succeed in their own lives — I think was what he laid before the American people.

It’s in that great tradition of progressive politics in this country. And it’s a tradition of reform. And I think he’ll deliver on all those elements.

That’s pretty generic, IMHO. The interviewer baited him with the Krugman quote after he specifically said he would pay homage to the red support that he got when forming his new admin. Also, notice that he uses progressivism in a manner that captures republican politics as well, up until a few decades ago. Teddy Roosevelt? Also, remember Ralph Flanders.