I know that many Obama supporters genuinely believed that he was going to bring change. But, look at what he is doing. All throughout the primaries, he and his surrogates called the Clintons the "old Democratic party" and tried to run them out of the party because they represent "old politics." Now, Obama is plucking every member of the Clinton administration up for his staff and cabinet. He is sending Madeline Albright out to talk to world leaders, Rahm Emmanuel is an old Clinton hatchet man, Larry Summers was a member of the Clinton cabinet, former Clinton Sec. of Energy Bill Richardson is up for a post in the cabinet, his national security advisers and transition team are all Clintonites. Obama used the same political cynicism he has used throughout his whole political career: say what the people want to hear and be what they want you to be until after the election. He does not and never did represent anything new. Now, the people who love him are being forced to see that.

Obama opposed the war in Iraq when he wasn't in the Senate. When he got there, though, he voted to keep funding it and keep it going. He voted in favor of FISA. What gave anyone the impression that his anti-war/pro-civil liberties speeches were based on his true feelings or were actual signs of how he would govern?

Obama is going to do what is politically expedient. He is not going to implement the change mandate. He is going to go to great lengths to prove that he is a "pragmatist" and "centrist." He will use that to justify continuing Republican policies. He will not roll back the laws that legalized the violation of our civil liberties, he will continue the bellicosity of the Bush Administration, he will bend over backwards to accommodate Israel's war mongering, and he will drag out the Iraq withdrawal. The Catholic Bishops have vowed to "confront" Obama on restoring funds for stem cell research and overseas charities that counsel abortion as an option for pregnant women. Will Obama back down from that when he promised his supporters he would do just that. I am willing to bet yes. Why? Because he does not want to seem liberal.

Obama and the Democrats have ignored the wishes of the people who voted them in in 2006. The promised to end war in Iraq, yet voted to fund it. They promised to get our civil liberties back, but they voted with Bush again. There was no meaningful push back by way of filibuster or votes to do what we asked them to do. They do not care about their base. Republicans have to place the biggest right wing nut they can find on their presidential ticket if they want to have a prayer of getting their base out.Democrats have to haul out the most wishy washy person to head the ticket and a right leaning person on the bottom to even have a prayer of being elected.

This Lieberman business is the worst. The Democrats of Connecticut did not want him. Why to the Dems insist on keeping him? He bad mouthed the Democratic nominee for president. He called him a Marxist. He bashed the party at the Republican convention. He praised Sarah Palin and called her qualified to serve as president all while saying Obama wasn't. He used his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee to block investigation into the Bush Administration's lawless behavior. Obama claims that he wants to investigate potential violation of the law. Is he pressing for Lieberman to keep his chairmanship so that he can break that promise by proxy?

One last thing on Lieberman. No one in the media has confronted an issue that bothers me and other Democrats: that he seems to represent the interests of Israel's over those of the US. I feel like he should be identified as Sen. Liberman (I-Isr). Either he conflates US interests with Israel's or he truly believes that we should subordinate the will and interests of the American people over those of the Israelis. He is an Israeli extremist and his involvement in foreign affairs destabilizes the Middle East and compromises us in world affairs. Lieberman is not the only person in our government that acts as if we should go down in flames with Israel. He is just more extreme. We should not have a senator who often acts like a representative for the government of Israel. We have to set boundaries. We use our seat on the UN Security Council to run interference for Israel (we essentially share that seat with Israel), we help Israel defy international law and be an apartheid state, and we obstruct the peace process in the Middle East. Obama promised to do this during the campaign and I am confident that that is one promise he will keep.

I can see how keeping Lieberman benefits Obama and the Democratic leadership in the Senate. Obama can covertly support the war in Iraq, the assault on our rights, the Democratic party can keep getting money from AIPAC, and look right wing enough to be palatable to the right wing media.

I had some hope that Obama would take back the word liberal so that the right could no longer use it as a dirty word. I was wrong. I hope Obama supporters will come around and we can all work on supporting Democratic candidates in the 2010 primaries who are proud of us and our views. I am willing to hope he will tilt the federal bench leftward with young judges, but who knows now?