We've been showing you for the past 2 months here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, AND
here...
how Obama has been lying to you, misleading you, me, everyone, everywhere, for MONTHS, and still is. (And those are just my posts on the truths the media refuses to report to you.)
[V]oters still know remarkably little about a man who is less than four years out of the Illinois state Senate. While he has already written two autobiographies, there are significant gaps in Mr. Obama's political resume. The nature of his relationship with onetime friend and political contributor Tony Rezko, a convicted felon, or with radicals Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright, not to mention Acorn, remains ambiguous or contradictory.They were all early supporters or mentors, yet during this campaign Mr. Obama has eventually disavowed each one. This is perhaps testimony to a ruthless pragmatism, or maybe opportunism, but what do those relationships say about what he really believes? He is fortunate the media have been so incurious about them -- as opposed, say, to Sarah Palin's Wasilla church or Joe Wurzelbacher's plumbing business.
...
[I]t remains unclear how Mr. Obama intends to govern...[F]or all his talk about reaching across the aisle, we can think of no major issue where he has disagreed with his party's dominant interest groups or broken with liberal orthodoxy. Not one. The main example he cites -- "ethics reform" -- is the kind of trivial Beltway compromise that changes nothing about the way Washington works.
...
If he is elected, Mr. Obama would immediately face the same kind of large, liberal Democratic majority on Capitol Hill that did so much to ruin Jimmy Carter and the first two years of the Clinton Presidency. Is there anything its liberal barons want that he'd oppose? He hasn't said so.
...
On national security, Mr. Obama is an even greater man of mystery...[H]e ran irresponsibly against the surge in Iraq and now has his lucky stars to thank that Mr. McCain prevailed in that debate, so Mr. Obama would inherit a far more stable Middle East. His belief that diplomacy can stop Tehran's nuclear ambitions is also naive, and we suspect would be shown to be so early in his Administration with an Iranian nuclear declaration, if not a test.
...
Americans certainly are eager for fresh start, and it is typical of periods of economic panic that they may even be willing to reach for the kind of alluring but untested appeal that so marks Mr. Obama. Sometimes these gambles pay off, and sometimes they don't.
~ from "Leap of Hope: Sometimes the gambles pay off, sometimes they don't," WSJ.


Gee ... I guess you have some backtracking to do. He's your president elect now. better get behind him.
Backtracking would only be necessary if the contents of this post were inaccurate. Obama is not the messiah by instead an elected representative who we need to be realistic about in order to hold accountable to the responsibilities of his office.
Doug, Congratulations! You are the first Obama supporter (that I've read here) to not be able to resist the smarmy gloating! I do not really have to "get behind" a liar even if he is my President, any more than you would have "gotten behind" McCain had he won.
plb is correct. Backtracking is only required if what I reported was wrong. It wasn't. You'll find that out, soon enough.
Boy, the audacity you display!