Change? Why Not?

Well, today marks the 44th inauguration, and with that comes President Obama's rather ambiguous promise for "Change" in a world that many voters believed needed some. But without outlining what exactly was meant by the word, isn't it naive to assume that the change you've come to envision might be the farthest thing from the truth?
Call me crazy, but I think its potentially dangerous, and ultimately ignorant to elect a candidate on the merit of youthful appearance and charisma alone. But that's beside the point. It only takes an investment of five minutes on the internet to bring into view the voting records of all of the U.S. representatives, be they in the Senate or the House, federal or state. And with this simple search, Americans can see the "Change" for what it really is, Socialism. Like most reps. Obama has built his image out of a career of defending big government, welfare programs and, in general, the ever expanding bureaucracy. However, its foolish to think only left-wing politicians are heralding the so called "benefits" of big government.
Representatives from both sides of the aisle have collaborated in such ways over the years that its hard to distinguish the classic views of social progressive Democrats from their Republican counterparts. Its safe to say that with the failure of the anti-bailout stance comes the failure of Capitalism's traditional supporters, the Conservative Republicans. Right now, millions of Obama supporters are celebrating in the streets of D.C. But how long will the cheers of change last when people finally discover that our government is bankrupt? That tax increases will be instituted across the board? and that Obama's promise was no change at all?