It's understandable when a person or party elected to bring change takes time to implement the platform of changes campaigned on. When the same people have priorities even the parties running against them were in favor of it's understandable. The economy and getting things right on the wars are important. Putting other things on hold during the first year is just prudent.
When a person or party elected specifically to bring change gets elected by those who lean in their direction, those they previously did not have or those they once lost it would seem smart to at least keep some of those promises at some point. The democrats elected in 2008 and to some extent 2006 were given power to bring about a change in direction for the entire nation. They were expected to fix the economy, deal with orchestrating the pullout of troops in Iraq and finish the job in Afghanistan. But, they were also handed a mandate for real change voters on the left, right and center expected.
The previous administration spent a great deal of time betraying the trust of so many who looked to them after 9/11. So many believed the Bush administration could put aside partisanship and bring us together through crisis. Americans believed they could turn over the reigns of National Security fully and the White House would do the responsible thing.
After all the Bush administration specifically said they would not engage in nation building. We knew Afghanistan would need stabilizing after their government had been toppled. With the help of other nations in our fight not only were we not going it alone we had the advantage of outside perspectives.
The invasion of Iraq took us down a path that ruined the trust Americans had in the administration once the facts came out.
Halliburton, a company the vice president at the time was a former CEO of, got no bid contracts to deal with oil fields, troop care (such as food, laundry potable water and more) and even hiring private security companies including Blackwater. This added up to an initial contract awarded them worth more than $20 billion being awarded to them. Some of the main problems here were taxpayers missed out on the best quality for their dollars, and friends of the administration were the exclusive recipients of those contracts. There were plenty of other companies who could have bid on those services. Yet all contracts were awarded to one company and the vice president at the time just happened to be the former CEO.
Many voters from all sides and all parties were upset. It reeked of government corruption and a nation being taken advantage of by its own government and vice president. Not only could we not trust them with National Security it turned out, but they handed nation building over to their buddies to get fat off from taxpayer dollars.
The unconstitutional surveillance of ordinary Americans and sweeping post 9/11 powers granted the government was another sore spot. When Democrats initially attempted to look into this the White House refused to turn over records and refused to allow members from their administration to testify asserting they had immunity. Voters felt burned there as well.
So many more issues including lying about the premise for going into Iraq itself were involved. There were the lies of evidence linking Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein and claims of nuclear ambitions and attempts regarding such on the part of Iraq. There were lies on top of lies on top of falsehoods.
The current administration got into office in large part by specifically saying it would address these issues and ensure they would not happen again. No sooner had they taken office than they begin rattling off the list of things promised during the campaign they immediately changed their minds about or were now unsure of. It just seemed kind of soon.
Accountability is something those who ran on change claimed we would see. We have not.
Actual prosecutions are not even necessary, though it would show a level of credibility. What is needed is some level of guarantees these things will never reoccur. This should be more than empty promises it should be actions. Laws should be put in place ensuring Americans are not taken advantage of again. These are not things to be scared of, but to be touted.
Otherwise, the whole premise for change was a sham and voters were hustled again. Then what would change really have been about? Just getting elected? If so opposition candidates saying don't believe it would have been actually telling the truth.
Of course the jury is still out, but so far much of the change promised has been absent. The message sent reads although it was promised and asked for by voters in the end the leaders did not have enough faith in their supporters to follow through. After all the high spending measures proposed some accountability and safety measures would be nice to see. Some assurance of changes from the past are needed.
To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.
e-mail:: 
Homepage::