“Obama calls recession a disaster”
By NewHampster on January 31, 2009 at 4:05 AM in Current Affairs, Economy, Obamaisms, World News
This is how the BBC and Reuters hear President Obama and why he needs to learn to watch what he says. Damn it all, PITO* you are the fecking President and your words are not just words anymore.
Obama calls recession a disaster
FROM BBC Business:
President Obama has called the contraction of the US economy in the final quarter of 2008 a “continuing disaster” for the US.
Speaking at the White House, he also announced a new task force to help middle-class working families.
US economic output fell 3.8%, the worst quarterly contraction in more than 26 years, official figures have shown………
Notice in the graph how the economic tanking seems to follow the ups and downs since Obama came roaring on the scene. Obama up, economy down.
If I was a little more mistrusting than I already am, I’d swear that Obama wants to make the Depression Prophecy self fulfilling. After all, Great Presidents are made in the cauldron of strife and war. Boring times make for boring history.
* President In Training Obama
Cross Posted from my Partizane
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
During the general election campaign, John McCain repeated several times the economy is basically strong and I wondered, at the time, if that wasn’t the more helpful approach. Even then Obama sounded like the economic version of the fear card and if you keep repeating the same dire warnings every time you’re in front of a TV camera, it does become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
“They will call me if they need me ”
He only scurried back to DC after Bush asked him to.
That is one thing I never understood, McCain had the intiative to go back to DC and try and work on the economy while Obama was content to keep stumping. That spoke volumes to me about character of the two candidates. When all was said and done McCain was made out to be a buffoon.
I know — very strange — I never understood that either. I guess that the Press was willing to twist whatever happened to Obama’s advantage.
The argument was “How are Republicans not socialists when Bush and McCain are bailing out Wall Street? I want a bailout!” McCain caught heat for suspending his campaign, then “saying nothing helpful” and then voting for the bailout.
The problem was that McCain had built the rationale for his candidacy around the idea that he was the sure-footed, experienced, tested one, while Obama was too young, too inexperienced, too quick to fold under pressure. When McCain made the move to suspend his campaign, the Obama campaign capitalized with the jujitsu move of making Obama look more serene in a crisis.
Style trumps substance every time, huh?
I’m afraid you’re right. The trick is to finesse the substance with style. Substance alone doesn’t have a chance.
I thought that O just looked detached and unconcerned while McCain was the one who grasped the magnitude of the problem early on. Oh well….
Perception becomes reality.
McCain made the move out of sincere concern for our country. There was also another series of events that caused him to suspend his campaign. He should have been perceived as a hero for doing it. Of course our country rewards the loser who says “they can call me if the need me.” That should have been the end of Obama for voters with brains. So, if we have a nuclear attack in the US…can we “call him if we need him?”
Countless times on this blog I’ve read ridicule and insults about some of the statements Bush made after 9/11. When he was encouraging people to continue shopping, he was clearly telling people that if they deviated from their normal way of life, the terrorists would have won. 9/11 caused economic setbacks, but it would have been far worse if everybody ran to their panic rooms and huddled in fear of the next attack. Bush sounded the proper note by assuring us that we could live our lives as usual with the knowledge that the monsters would be dealt with, that our country was far too strong to be messed with again, and that he was going to make the war on terror his main priority. You may not like how he went about it, but the results were a very rapid recovery both economically and psychologically.
Like Bush, Obama is faced with a serious problem at the beginning of his term. How is he handling it? Complaining, blaming, fear mongering, pandering, and partisan politics. WHAT A LEADER!!! I’ve yet to hear him say that we have the most hard working, inovative, decent, determined, and resourceful country in the world, and that there’s a bump in the road that should be just a minor nuisance through the force of our will. Psychology is a major component of the economic problem. Obama is destroying our confidence. There is a better chance that we’ll recover just fine on our own if Obama would stop claiming that the government can provide the only solution, and that we’re doomed and helpless without him.
The whole world expects Obama to fix their problems. Look at those rioters in Paris. It’s bizzarro world.
Half Brother George Obama got caught selling pot in Kenya …. maybe he can help stimulate their economy?
He is adding to his qualifications.
Cash-based business, baby!
Source? Google has many repeats of the lie but lists not one reputable news source. Maybe you can do better?
Who cares? Every president seems to have weird relatives — drunk or drug-addicted or otherwise addled.
Obama’s Half Brother Arrested on Drug Charge
Saturday, January 31, 2009 10:00 AM (AP)
NAIROBI, Kenya — The half-brother of President Barack Obama was arrested for alleged possession of marijuana on Saturday near his home in a Nairobi shantytown, police said.
George Obama, who is in his 20s and barely knows the president, had one joint of marijuana on him, said Joshua Omokulongolo, the police chief in the area.
“He is not a drug peddler,” Omokulongolo told The Associated Press. “But it’s illegal, it’s a banned substance.”
George Obama has a court appearance scheduled Monday morning.
He and the president have the same father, who died in a car crash in 1982.
Several of President Obama’s Kenyan relatives went to Washington, D.C., for his inauguration, but George was not among them. He lives in Huruma with extended family.
Media reports about him surfaced over the summer, after a magazine article said he lived in a shack and earned a dollar a day. George Obama has called the reports insulting.
“I’m proud of how I live,” he told The Associated Press in an interview over the summer. “(The media) are tarnishing the family name.”
He also said he was studying to be a mechanic and works with a local youth group in Huruma.
In President Obama’s book “Dreams From My Father,” he describes George Obama as “a handsome, roundheaded boy with a wary gaze.”
George is the youngest of the senior Obama’s seven children, born six months before his father died.
© 2009 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
I hope he gets off with a slap on the wrist. Marijuana should be completely de-criminalized.
I agree with that. Weed is a non-issue.
Well, look at the illegal aunt. Look at the tax cheat at Treasury. Slap on the wrist?!! He’ll get a fist bump. “Choom Gang!”
This coming from a rube who thinks huffnpuffpo is a credible news source.
UKelele, those voices in your tiny little head are not delivering you the news, didn’t you know?
Sorry to be so late in posting an acceptable news source:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=6776007
They hadn’t had their fill of stories about octuplets and suicides for the morning and realized that other news sources were kicking their posteriors on this ….
Exactly what he did say during his inauguration speech. He presented the difficulties that face America and the World and said that, like the problems that have gone before they will be solved by hard work.
Prepackaged, prefabricated platitudes for the consumption of the herd. You got your fill, didn’t you?
“Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresposibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age.” BLAMING, and the irony here is that he blames everybody except the main culprits like B. Frank, C. Dodd, Franklin Raines, Himself, and a parade of greedy democrat politicians that all made millions from the CRA, a government scheme.
“Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered.” COMPLAINING, these things all go on even during good economic times. But it’s just more gloom and doom from the man of “Hope and Change”.
“Our health care is too costly;” COMPLAINING, and again, he fails to mention that our health care is the finest in the world, and if it weren’t for government involvement, illegal aliens, and lawyers like him, the costs would be much lower.
“our schools fail too many;” MORE COMPLAINING, our schools also have produced, and continue to produce most of the finest minds in the world, but he wouldn’t want to praise our schools, he needs an excuse to pay back the teachers union.
“and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries, and threaten our planet.” FEAR MONGERING. First, each day also produces evidence that man made global warming is a fraud, CO2 is not a significant factor in the greenhouse effect, and the war against global warming is much more costly than simply adjusting to the natural fluctuations in temperature that have been swinging back and forth for hundreds of millions of years. How many times has Obama dumped on reasonable solutions like nuclear, taping our own oil reserves, clean coal, and natural gas? More times than I can count. Who dumped on clean coal? (Biden). Who said he was going to bankrupt coal companies? (Obama) Also, most of our foriegn energy comes from freindly nations, not adversaries. That whole statement is a flat out lie.
“Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.” PLAGIARISM. This is a slightly modified line from an old song, and like everything else in his speeches, just another cliche.
Thanks for the post UK, it couldn’t have been a better proof of my earlier statement!
Poor Andrew191, you just made me laugh.
Why do you hate America?
It’s always a good indication when a person resorts to ridicule and ad hominem attacks, that they’ve failed to support their position with reason and facts.
Resorting to ridicule is an admission of failure, and it is the cowards way of shutting down the debate. There is no effective argument once ridicule has been introduced, and in this case, I consider it further proof and support for my primary statement. I’m done.
uk, shut the hell up about americans and how we feel about our country. i for one am sick of your attitude and bullxxxx on here.
By re-printing his speech, you’re making the economy tank even more. Stop it!!!
LOL Hank, That was my initial thought.
I agree.
Stop it!!
If he did that, and the economy tanks for the next three years straight, he’d be blamed for being out of touch, and rightly so.
I don’t believe he has that kind of power.
So it’s all about That One, again. Your concern for his potential appearance of being out of touch trumps any good he might do in the interim by making such a statement. Frankly I don’t give a tinker’s cuss about how it might make him look since it is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
I didn’t say I was concerned, I said he was concerned. Don’t confuse political analysis for support. I was merely explaining why Obama feels the need speak regularly about how he knows the economy is in the tank. If he didn’t, he’d end up looking like GHWB in 92, out of touch and unempathetic. He has enough problems politically with the whole “aloof” and “too cool” demeanor. He doesn’t want to further that image by saying how great everything is. It’s common sense for me to say so, not idolatry.
Reagan inherited a country in a far greater economic slump than what we have today (thankyou Carter), but his response was very positive (it’s morning in America), and I have no doubt that he would not have been concerned about how his statements affected his image. Like it or not, he spoke his mind without reservations, he didn’t float trial balloons, and the positive nature of his attitude and message put this country back on the rails. Obama is cynically using our current problems as a distraction so that he may break the government piggy bank, and give us all bread and circuses. He’s a very frightened little boy crying out to be adored.
It doesn’t really help that he has such disdain and hatred for America in the first place. I have never seen him, not once, say he loves this country. Why would he? He’s not American to start with. I miss having a President who loves America with all of his/her heart and who would lay down and die for us. What we have here is a petulant hater who spends more time laying blame than seeing anything good in this country. I don’t know how anyone could have voted for this guy, but it’s pitiful to watch him.
Ditto!
Ben Shapiro writing for Townhall called Obama out as an apologist, following the Krauthammer article along those same lines the day before in the Washington Post.
Uh oh, the silliness is back.
Hank please show me one quote of his that says he “loves” America. Nice try.
If he grabbed a microphone and said “I love America.” would that settle the issue for you? Of course not. These little patriotism tests are disgusting, and quite un-American. Obama was right to avoid wearing the flag pin for as long as he could. And you guys have the nerve to call him fascist, when you toss around “un-American” like you’re saying hello.
But the reason I wrote “the silliness is back” was in response to your pathetic “he’s not American to start with”. More of these lies are not what our country needs right now.
Hank, if and when you can prove it, let me know. Since Obama himself won’t prove it, I doubt you can. You trolls just flip your lids, blow blood vessels like lunatics and never PROVE anything you rant about.
Yes, it really would help this country’s morale if he showed us a little love, instead of hate. What’s the matter with you? And why was it a big plus for him not to wear the flag pin? You think the so called “President” flipping America the finger and pissing on our customs and traditions is a GOOD thing? Why? You spew all this hate for America but never tell us why. Kind of pathetic.
“And why was it a big plus for him not to wear the flag pin?”
Because patriotism is about a lot more than walking around with a flag pin and pointing at it. Because during the last eight years, real patriots like Max Cleland were smeared as traitors because they didn’t agree with Bush on every tiny little dotted “i” and crossed “t”. Because we had archcriminals running our country who were destroying it from within, all praising themselves as “patriots” and waving the flag as hard as they could the whole 8 years.
Obama’s choice was a public corrective to that jingoistic nonsense. If wearing a flag pin is all you need to believe someone loves their country, it’s pretty easy to be fooled, isn’t it?
“You think the so called “President” flipping America the finger and pissing on our customs and traditions is a GOOD thing?”
I can’t tell if you’re too stupid to know that these things never occurred, or if you do know, but just like repeating them because discussing reality gives you a big headache. Pres. Obama never “flipped America” off or anyone else. Anyone who thinks that actually happened has an IQ of between 2 and 5. As to these “traditions” he went “pissing on”, what exactly were those?
I’ve never spewed any hate for America here or anywhere else. I love my country. You just invent your own reality don’t you, like Karl Rove. Well buddy, I live in the “reality-based community”.
Oh, and I bet you voted for Bush both times, didn’t you? I bet you’d do it again, too.
Hank, that last rant was so full of idiocy and lies I don’t know where to start. Typical troll rant. You get caught with your pants down, saying something moronic, and you go on the personal attack. I don’t know why the admins here let people like you post. You show up to do nothing but try to deny the truth about your boss.
You people never prove anything, document it, or say anything of substance. No one listens to your troll blathering. Move on.
PS Do you get paid more for the LONGER posts? Because you do tend to go on nonsensical diatribes.
Someone says something you disagree with, that becomes getting “caught with your pants down”. The weird homoerotic allusions combined with your religious fundamentalism and jingoistic chest-thumping make you a classic case, sir. You should go see “Milk”. Study Dan White, as played by Josh Brolin. Come out before it’s too late, man.
Hank…Wow…what a sick rant that was. Get help buddy.
And it took several years before Reagan’s great economic plan began showing any signs of life and what was the end result of the plan? A MASSIVE deficit (this from the President who DEMANDED that Congress pass a “Balanced Budget Amendment” every year, yet NEVER presented a budget proposal that was remotely close to being balanced) and the single worst day in stock market history since the Great Depression, to say nothing of overseeing the beginnings of the “greed is good” policy that we’ve seen soooo much in the past couple of years (when workers are laid off while bad CEOs who helped drive their businesses into the ground get severance packages worth millions).
Reagan did NOTHING for the common man. He condoned union busting and xenophobic attacks on imports (yet he did nothing to demand the US auto industry improve its own products). Like Dubya would do 2 decades later, Reagan endorsed the idea that American deserved big gas-guzzling cars. Every proposal to require better fuel efficiency in American-made cars was flatly rejected by Reagan.
Sorry, but I’ll also point out that much of Carter’s economic woes were inherited from the Nixon and Ford Administrations. You remember the Arab oil embargo of 1973? That happened in the NIXON adminstration. The long gas lines. Stations running out of gas. Gas prices went from 36 cents per gallon in 1972 to 39 cents in 1973 to 52 cents in 1974 and 57 cents in 1975. (Gas prices would take a further hit during the last year and a half in the Carter Administration because of the Iran Crisis.) You remember Greald Ford’s great “Whip Inflation Now” plan? The one where everyone was supposed to wear a big WIN button? Carter made a conscious effort to get the people to conserve energy but that wasn’t what people wanted. They wanted their greedy wasteful ways, something which Reagan ENCOURAGED. (Of course, Reagan’s little illegal interference with the Iran Crisis during the 1980 elections played a key role in reducing the tensions which helped return lower gas prices–in spite of the 1980-1988 Persian Gulf War between Iran and Iraq–for much of the Reagan years.)
Sorry. Y’all can continue blaming Carter for all the woes of the era, but he was NOT the sole cause of the period’s problems. He inherited a bad situation and, like Clinton 15 years later, had to deal with a Democratic Congress that despised the “uppity Southern peanut-farming hick”.
So, in essence, only the GOP Presidents caused economic problems. No offense, but your post is sheer fantasy. As for the Dems, all I can say is Fannie and Freddie.
Thank you, JozefAL! Despite being young at the time, this is also how I remember Reaganomics. Lower GDP than either Carter or Clinton, spike in unemployment, high interest rates, government deficits as far as the eye could see (ultimately requiring a tax hike), regulatory changes that led to the S&L debacle, etc…
It isn’t that I condone what Reagan did but I have to explain the little logic. He noticed that by deficit spending he would stimulate the economy and get the numerical results he was looking for. And he noticed that the country had good credit and that borrowing made sense, THEN. THEN. Without speaking for him, or they, the idea is that you we would also do something different next time, not continue to repeat it as if we are dumb. But it seems we are. The idea is for us to find a different way to create wealth and growth, not through deficit spending. It seems we can’t.
Palin proposed “drill baby drill” but we reject it. That is different. We simply need to stop deficit spending and come up with something NEW. NEW. NEW. Is it that difficult?
First, the figures.
Reagan’s tax cuts, since we’re talking supply side economics here, accounted for GDP growth by 35.7% between 1980 – 1991.
Avg annual growth was 4.1%.
Real GDP growth per person was 26.7%.
Avg annual growth was 3.2%.
Real consumption per person was up 26.8%.
Avg. annual growth was 3.2%
Industrial production growth was 28.9%.
Employment total growth was 19.9 million.
The DJIA went up 14.5% during this period.
Reagan also passed amnesty in 1987, so I don’t get where this “xenophobe” charge comes from.
This worst day of the market you speak of occurred in 1981 when Reagan first took office. Funny how you let Carter slide on the gas lines and oil embargo, blaming it on Nixon / Ford, but Reagan couldn’t have inherited a horrible economy.
By 1981, inflation had soared by 25% over the prior two years, unemployment was heading toward 10%, the prime interest rate hit 21%, poverty was on a 33% upswing and real family income had decreased by almost 10% due to the stagflation of the late 1970s.
Reagan cut the top income tax rate from 70% to 50%, adopted an additional 25% across-the-board rate cut and sliced capital gains taxes in half. The 1986 tax reform left us with just two tax rates of 15% and 28%. Reagan slashed spending growth, lowered tariffs, reduced regulatory burdens and promoted anti-inflation monetary policies.
By 1989, the economy had grown by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany
to our U.S. economy. In 1984 alone, real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created in the 1980s, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989.
Spectacularly, inflation was slashed to 3.2% by 1983. The prime rate fell to 6.25% by 1992, even though opponents had argued that Reagan’s tax cuts would increase interest rates. Family income reversed its decline, poverty reversed its rise, and tax revenues actually doubled.
These figures are from the Heritage Foundation in an article by Jack Kemp and they are also cited by Oxford.
The hostage crisis interference that you mentioned was organized by Brzezinski to get Carter reelected, and it backfired by a counter movement in the CIA that put Reagan in office instead. It was the best thing that could have happened to the US. If you think Carter wouldn’t do something like that, Brzezenski admitted Carter had signed an executive order to “give the Soviets their Vietnam” and arm and train the mujahideen. This was believed to have happened much later than when it actually occurred.
What we see now is a return to Carter’s policies. Obama will follow the opposite of the Reagan strategy. Reagan cut taxes and increased the deficit so that liberals could not increase spending. Obama will raise spending and increase the deficit so that conservatives cannot cut taxes. And, when the economy is restored, he will raise taxes with impunity, BECAUSE HE WON.
Nixon dealt with the Arab Oil embargo of 1973 by creating the Dept. of Energy and making it a cabinet post. Fuel standards were created and cars were made smaller to comply. The speed limit was introduced and fatalities went down dramatically. Daylight savings time was introduced. Gas stations closed on Sundays and wouldn’t sell more than ten gallons at a time to a single customer. Tax credits were offered for businesses who implemented alternative energy technologies. The public kept their thermostats down to 65 degrees on average. The emergency national oil reserves were introduced. The result was that the embargo was lifted after a year, though Arabs saw how much money could be made by raising prices sky high.
andrew i could write a few paragraphs on the bad choices reagan made starting with regulation including the s&l crisis. but i agree his attitude and cheery speeches were very helpful. i think that is why so many loved him.
All presidents make bad choices, and of course Reagan was no exception. Amnesty for aliens comes to mind. Only when you consider the totality and long range effects of an administration can you make an accurate assessment of an administration. Reagan was on the whole very successful, Carter was like an acid trip nightmare that we still have flashbacks from.
When Reagan passed amnesty, there were really jobs that Americans wouldn’t do. Migrant workers were a boon to the economy then. Our immigration system should have been immediately updated at that time. It is tragic how outdated it is now.
Understood, but there was, and is, a legal procedure for immigration that should be observed, not waived when convenient. Amnesty may have had some merit at the time Reagan pushed it, but it set a bad precedent, and encouraged more illegal immigration, and helped create our current problems.
But on the whole, it is easy to argue that EVERYTHING Reagan did, he did with the firm belief that it would help the country, he wasn’t motivated by personal or political concerns. Placing the country he loved first is what made Reagan a great President. And using that simple calculus, Obama is the antithesis of Reagan.
The thing is that almost anything would work to get an economy going. I say almost anything. But it has to be different and NEW, NEW, NEW. What doesn’t work is trying the same old thing do more of the same. Nature and things don’t work that way. Period. Eating spaghetti every day and then serving more spaghetti will not raise a healthy family. What we need is anything, but NEW, DIFFERENT, SMART. Not the same stupidity over and over.
S&L’s were created by Democrats many years ago to provide loans for individual homeowners and to boost home construction. They enjoyed a point advantage on savings account rates for many years, by law and regulation. It was easy to run an S&L under this highly controlled environment and most were not as well managed as the more competition based banks.
S&Ls nonetheless wanted to get into the commercial real estate loans and lobbied to do so. That was Jimmy Carter and Burt Lance. The Savings and Loans people wanted in on the “junk bond” craze but were prohibited by law from doing so. They gave amply to Carter’s election coffers, and Carter rewarded them by removing those inconvenient restrictions. Burt Lance (a banker from Georgia and close Carter friend) lobbied for that with Carter, as well. Congress was ruled by Democrats then, as well, and they went along with it.
The S&Ls picked a bad time to get in this market with their inexperience. During the Carter years marginal rates were so high, almost everyone invested in tax shelters and huge amounts of money went into REITs. Most REITs were able to invest only in commercial real estate and so they built new buildings right next to the empty ones they built last year. Commercial real estate collapsed at one point the entire S&L industry had a negative net worth.
The deregulation of interest rates was part of a comprehensive reform of the fundamental way the FED did business. No longer would FED operate according to a “trade-off” of unemployment/interest rates but would measure and manage the money supply for growth.
So, to recap:
1) S&Ls always had much more than 5 or 10 % of their loans in residential.
2) FED allowed them to maintain 5% Capital, because they had made bad loans and were losing money fast. The FSLIC could not withstand the losses of so many see Keating Five.
3) It was Commercial Real Estate that crashed, and due to Carter’s high rates.
4) Deregulation has been a good thing for financial markets allowing rates to rise and fall with market conditions. Think of this the same as when Reagan ended price controls on energy, resulting in more production, lower prices and the end of gas lines.
5) In Capitalism, the weak fall to competition, and the S&L’s were created to require a crutch even at the beginning. The failure of many of them allowed better institutions to fill the void, and more robust growth.
Reagan might have made errors, but S&L and deregulation wasn’t one of them.
Carteh,
Many thanks for your long and informative posts. I usually don’t have the time or inclination to provide a history lesson every time I write something like “Reagan rocks, Carter sucks”, I just believe it’s a given. When I tell my children to keep their hands out of the fire or they’ll get burned, I don’t think it is necessary at that point to instruct them about the chemical process of combustion.
Obama is weak, the weakest “President” in America’s history…during one of our most turbulent times. He’s a mistake and one we will pay for dearly.
Iran says Obama’s offer to talk shows US failure
Jan 31 08:16 AM US/Eastern
Ahmadinejad Demands U.S. Apology For ‘Crimes’ Committed Against Iran
US President Barack Obama’s offer to talk to Iran shows that America’s policy of “domination” has failed, the government spokesman said on Saturday.
“This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed,” Gholam Hossein Elham was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency.
“Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change,” he added.
After nearly three decades of severed ties, Obama said shortly after taking office this month that he is willing to extend a diplomatic hand to Tehran if the Islamic republic is ready to “unclench its fist”.
In response, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched a fresh tirade against the United States, demanding an apology for its “crimes” against Iran and saying he expected “deep and fundamental” change from Obama.
Iranian politicians frequently refer to the US administration as the “global arrogance”, “domineering power” and “Great Satan”.
Tensions with the United States have soared over Iran’s nuclear drive and Ahmadinejad’s vitriolic verbal attacks against Washington’s close regional ally Israel.
Former US president George W. Bush refused to hold talks with the Islamic republic — which he dubbed part of an “axis of evil” — unless it suspended uranium enrichment, and never took a military option to thwart Tehran’s atomic drive off the table.
The new administration of Obama has also refused to rule out any options — including military strikes — to stop Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Iran denies any plans to build the bomb and insists its nuclear programme is solely aimed at peaceful ends.
Copyright AFP 2008, AFP stories and photos shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium
Yes, it is obvious that Obama places his image above his responsibility to this country.
During the Olympics, Obama didn’t flinch when he praised communist China for their infrastructure investments, and he couldn’t pass up the chance to trash our country in the same breath. Obama has demonstrated over and over again his general contempt for our country, any praise he gives belies his true feelings. Most people sense this (if only unconsciencely), and that HAS eroded and destroyed confidence.
Andrew, Well said!!
Thank you
You’re welcome!
I have to agree Andrew. Bush eventually blew it but the initial reaction was correct. Obama is almost forcing us into worse times.
Ditto, Andrew and the rest. I can’t believe anyone voted for him.
Snickers…It blows my mind that ANYONE voted for him. But, then again, we have to have some empathy for America because the media did absolutely ZERO truthful reporting. If the media had been honest, we wouldn’t be here.
Wake up and smell the coffee, elise.
World Economic Growth Grinds to a Halt: [stunning graph]
http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2009/01/imf_world_growt.html
It is a “Disaster”
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/
McCain also mentioned firing Cox the head of the SEC. A Minnesota Public Radio interview w/ the former head of Medtronic who teaches at Harvard, said Cox’s reign at the SEC and lack of oversight facilitated the collapse. Obama keeps calling it disastrous. Wonder where the FDR statements on hard work and optimism and not giving into anxiety and fear are?
Hard work and optimism don’t fit into their agenda, one which is based on distraction and fear mongering. That One is intent on finishing the job Shrub started.
Yes, I keep thinking he’s trying to depress us, maybe make us feel “dependent” on him. Instead of reminding us of our strength, of reassuring us that we’re going to be okay (as FDR did), he keeps talking about how bad things are, without any of the positive.
It’s hard to make “change” when you’re depressed. You have to have some “hope” that things CAN be better. A major way to identify a depressed person who may commit suicide is to find out if they feel hopeless. So by not reminding us of our strengths, Obama is keeping us on the dark side.
It really shows that “change” and “hope” were just pre-general election jingles, and nothing more.
Exactly, Elise. O’s behavior is right out of Naomi Klein’s book “Shock Doctrine” – looks like he played the race card to get into office and now he’s playing the fear card to keep everybody compliant.
Listen folks: “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself”? FDR
Rahm Emmanuel said, “never let a good crisis go to waste.”
Obama said, “it doesn’t matter who is right or wrong, it only matters who wins the argument.”
Yuri Bezmenov says (paraphrasing), first will come demoraliziation (done), then destabilization (in the works nearly complete), then manufactured crisis (Biden predicts soon), then comes martial law, executive orders, removal of constitutional rights, totalitarian clampdown, followed by a period of “normalization” where your rights and wealth are gone, if you’re still alive.
That is why Republicans were defeated.
heh. the economy sucks. that’s why repugs lost.
When did Bush or Republicans do anything to impose or move toward martial law, and when did Democrats, including Obama for the minute he served in Senate, do anything to oppose him?
What about a “manufactured crisis”?
It’s not just by chance that there hasn’t been another terrorist strike here at home since the 9/11 attacks at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and in the skies over Pennsylvania – more than seven years ago now. While far from perfect in execution, the Bush administration pulled out the stops in fighting terror at home and abroad, which, prior to 9/11, had been considered by many to be little more than a law enforcement problem.
Since 2001, the government has thwarted a number of plots, including conspiracies to blow up airplanes and fuel farms, assault an army base, and attack Los Angeles and Chicago skyscrapers – and surely others.
Internationally, in 2006, the Bush administration helped foil a plot hatched in Pakistan that aimed to bring down about 10 US- and Canada-bound airliners over the Atlantic with liquid explosives after taking-off from the United Kingdom.
If it had succeeded, the attack could have killed more people than the number who tragically died on 9/11.
The Feds have nailed more than two dozen terrorist wannabes right here in the United States since 2001. Treasury froze terror-related finances, making it tougher for terrorists to plan, train and operate.
I could go on and on. There are many things I am critical of regarding the Bush administration, but I am grateful to him for keeping the country safe and creating a democracy in Iraq.
For more on some of the unsung national security victories of the past eight years, I recommend you read the article by Peter Brooks of the Heritage Foundation “Bush’s Better World.”
Words of wisdom, former Pres.
If anything a fascist state will happen with Obama’s smiling face, not the GOP.
Wake up, UKforDems. If there is a conspiracy creating this, they aren’t just backing ONE political party. They’d be too smart for that.
dang uk, thanks for showing your true colors. i wish there was an ignore button where your rantings were hidden.
They are running ahead of schedule.
Oh, let’s not hyperventilate, now. Does anyone here actually believe anything like this is on its way? Let’s get serious, people.
Just move along folks, nothing to see here, it can never happen here…
Never mind it HAS happened elsewhere…
It’s attitudes like yours that let Hitler and Mussolini into power. My friend is from Venezuela, and Chavez has done a number on that country, actually taking private property from people and shutting down the media.
Who thought the Wall Street titans would fall? Who thought the government would propose multiple big trillion dollar bailouts? Remember when Americans complained about the cost of the war?
One thing I believe you’re missing in these historical parallels is that that the racist/fascist/Marxist programs of those dictators were very popular for some time with the people they ruled. Hitler was openly ant-Semitic, Mussolini openly fascist, Chavez openly Marxist. Obama didn’t run on any of those platforms. If he made moves anywhere close to what those men did/are doing in their time, he would be run out of office faster than you can say Barack Obama. Our democracy, while deeply flawed in many ways, is a lot healthier than you give it credit for.
I actually know Obama supporters who are Marxists and want capitalism to fail.
For the hardcore Obama supporters, the bogeyman isn’t the Jews or some other racial group, it’s conservatives, the red state people, people like Sarah Palin.
A savvy Machiavellian leader could easily take those red and blue state divisions and put us into a civil war where he comes out on top.
You mean most Obama supporters–being Democrats, don’t like conservatives, being Republicans? Get outta here!
We’ve had these divisions for well over two hundred years. You think Jackson, TR, FDR, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan & Clinton weren’t Machiavells in their own way? Any of the many “Machiavellian leaders” we’ve had could have done the same thing, but they didn’t. Why? Because we have constitutional machinery in place to prevent that from happening.
We have checks and balances, and we have a democracy to fuel them, if we so wish to use the tools our founding fathers gave us as a peopole.
We’ve had one civil war–over SLAVERY. I don’t think Obama is going to usher in a civil war over his love of Jay-Z and exotically flavored teas.
that’s supposed to be people, not “peapole”. LOL…
“Because we have constitutional machinery in place to prevent that from happening.”
A constitutional machinery weakened by Bush and a media that has not done its job.
You think order is going to rein in America if the economy truly collapses? No jobs, no food, riots in the streets? Our modern democracy is predicated on PEACE AND PROSPERITY. We will not have it if we fall into chaos and ruin.
I agree, if the economy truly collapses, even worse than the Great Depression, our constitutional machinery will be in real danger. But we’re not even close to that. Let’s hope we keep it that way.
Obama surrounded himself with antisemites such as Gen. Tony McPeak and Samantha Power, not to mention so many NOI and radical black liberation “theologians” as part of his Muslim outreach or faith-based initiative advisers, it was hard to keep track. His Bush-bashing and not wearing a flag pin and phony war criticism were calculated to appeal to certain group. Likewise, all his populist rhetoric was faintly disguised Marxism that was unveiled by Joe the Plumber, launching an investigation into this man’s private life that can only be described as fascist. Make no mistake those orders were top-down, just like, “Get in their faces” and the smear campaign on Sarah Palin which was traced to Axelrod.
McPeak and Power are antisemites? News to me. Or perhaps you equate criticism of Israeli policy and support for a Palestinian state with antisemitism?
So, Hank, we won’t “hyperventilate” LOL. But, considering your comments I would imagine you are one of the people who don’t believe the Holocaust happened either.
That is beyond disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself. I understand your reflex to reach immediately into your grab bag of smears has become involuntary at this point, but I am pretty amazed you keep “Holocaust revisionist” in the hate-bag on a discussion site about American politics.
Just for the record: The Holocaust indeed happened. At least 6 million Jews were executed in a horrific genocide that rightly shocked and changed the world forever. Anyone who plays this card in a silly debate on an internet forum about Pres. Obama is according the Holocaust neither the gravity it deserves nor understands the premise from which it sprang: that vicious lies and hatred can kill millions.
You are a sick person for going there. Shame on you. You really should get offline for 4 hrs, watch Schindler’s List, and think about how stupid it was that you so casually tossed out “Holocaust revisionist” in a chat room about economic policy under the Obama Administration. Grow up, and read a frigging history book while you’re at it.
Wow Hank…Angry much? You’re the one that insists nothing like that can happen again, right? Did you read your own quote that I responded to? Instead of ranting on and on, and doing the troll thing, why don’t you take comments in the spirit they were intended.
PS I worked on Schindler’s List troll.
Another lie.
HAHAHHAHAHHA Troll. I’m an editor and was an assistant editor on SL. Man are you trolls idiotsADMIN NOTE: Craig, this comment accidentally ended up in the spam filter because it’s being over-active. I’m restoring your comment, but unhappily, but this is the kind of comment we’d prefer not to see — name-calling. Yes, trolls are awful, but try to ignore them and freeze them out, and instead be part of the conversation about the story. Since you have journalistic skills, as an asst. editor, I’d like to see what you have to say about an important topic. What you think of trolls is unimportant. Just report them to me if they’re being obnoxious or spamming a thread, please. E-mail me at susanunpc at gmail dot com. Thanks. – Susan.
Troll, I don’t have anything to prove to losers like you. But I am a film editor. Was an assistant editor on Schindler’s back then. Grow up. Not all of us are welfare cases like you, blogging for Obama for a penny a post. Some of us actually work. You should think about that some time soon.
More lies. That’s all you do all day, isn’t it?
Hank, what possible reason would I have to lie about my work? WTF is wrong with you nuts? Unlike you trolls, the rest of us are decent people conversing about our horrifying experience the last two years. The only lying that goes on around here is from you freaks. Give it up troll. I’m not answering you anymore. I tried to answer you with respect, but clearly you don’t deserve it.
The same reason you have no hesitation to call those who disagree with your prediction of Obama creating a fascist state “Holocaust deniers”. That’s because you totally demonize anyone and everyone who disagrees with anything you have to say. You’re suffering from a personality disorder, a mental illness that requires you to dehumanize your opponents, and create alternative realities where you are right about everything. So in a discussion of the Holocaust, it’s only natural that when someone like me suggests you see Schindler’s List to gain perspective on how wrong trivialization of that genocide is, you respond with “oh, well I worked on that movie, so there!”
It’s the type of lie told by a child in a schoolyard. “You don’t know anything about G.I. Joe, my father WAS the ORIGINAL G.I. Joe, and we went on MISSIONS together!”
it’s not good for obama to be unnecessarily trashing the economy, but at the same time, i take strong disagreement with the idea that the present economic troubles are all just a matter of perception and people being spooked, etc.
most people aren’t hoarding their money out of fear; they don’t *have* any money because the cost of everything has been rising faster than people’s salaries for decades. i think that reality is setting in that people can not continue to live on credit forever, hence the reduction in spending, and subsequent impact on production requirements.
I couldn’t agree more, excellent point.
Obama acts as if all world affairs, including the US economic situation, happen on a remote plane far away from his existence. He may comment upon these affairs, but they are not really important to him.
He is so incompetent and so egocentric that he won’t even think of these affairs as a backdrop for his words. He lives in his own reality, and we will suffer the consequences.
Times shape the president, not the other way around.
Maybe the US press will give him a pass, but the rest of the world won’t be so easy on him.
I’ve said before here that when Obama is givig a speech, no matter how long or short it may be, he’s only reading words. He doesn’t comprehend the full meaning of the words he says, and has no interest in the subject matter. The only thing he now cares about is being re-elected in 2012 and everything he does now is geared towards that.
At no time during his campaign did I ever get the feeling that Obama really cares about this country, or that he has any deeply-held convictions about anything. If you don’t have strong beliefs about what should happen and noting is important other than winning, then it’s easy to say all the stuff he says. Watch him now when he’s speaking. Everything is written for him, he doesn’t say anything spontaneously, at least nothing serious. He can’t go off-script because he just has no idea what he’s talking about.
I have noticed that, too. He really does not feel connected to any of his words. There is no conviction behind them. I am wondering why more people don’t notice this.
hate to bring up the “Manchurian Candidate” thing again, but didn’t the manchurian candidate do the same thing? because was hypnotized or whatever and really was not mentally connected with what he was saying and doing.
… I’d swear that Obama wants to make the Depression Prophecy self fulfilling. After all, Great Presidents are made in the cauldron of strife and war. Boring times make for boring history.
If you don’t watch out, NewHampster, you’re gonna become a feckless “boo bird”… trashing the President’s every utterance just to puff up your own pretenses to punditry.
Corporations are lopping off jobs by the tens of thousands… and you belittle the president for calling this “a continuing disaster for working families”? How would you rather he phrase it?
I didn’t think that there was anything wrong with the phrasing. Obama’s affect bothers me – he seems too passive and bored. He does not inspire confidence.
I just don’t have any confidence that Obama wants to handle the situation. He seems to want to become a Santa Claus figure and have everyone sit on his lap. But there are no goodies in the bag.
“Obama’s affect bothers me – he seems too passive and bored. He does not inspire confidence.”
I know what you mean, Arabella. It’s an intangible quality that even his supporters have had to cope with. Remember that little spasm during the campaign when McCain-Palin moved ahead in the polls and Obama’s supporters on the left urged him to “fight back” and not be so passive?
The one thing, for me, that inspires confidence? His hiring decisions.
I can make no judgments about Obama’s leadership style less than two weeks into his presidency. Six months down the road, it should be plain for all to see whether President Obama’s affect represents diffidence or a statesmanlike reserve.
I find it hard to see him as a “statesman.” Where is the experience we usually see in people we call statesmen?
I am sorry to bring this up all the time, but my major experience of O on a more personal level came during the primary caucuses. It does not bring to mind the word “statesmen.”
I agree with Arabella completely about his apparent personal disconnect from all that is happening.
Hiring decisions? Like Bill Richardson, involved in a FBI investigation for pay to play? Or maybe Tim Geitner, who ignored the fact that he signed a contract to use money given to him to pay taxes, and only did so when it became public and he was forced to? Or Tom Daschle, who has both the lobby connection as well as a failure to pay some income taxes? Or Joe Gaffe Biden as VP. And now, to have hired Thain’s decorator to re-do the WH? Why does he need to spend money to re-do the WH when people are losing their homes?
He does not have good judgement, period. His arrogance will be his, and sadly, our downfall.
“Why does he need to spend money to re-do the WH when people are losing their homes?”
Goodness gracious, Clara. You begrudge him even that? Decorating his family’s living space?
Yes, I do. Coming on the heels of the expenses of the coronation? You betcha. He has yet to show any ability to be sage or produdent in his own spending of money that isn’t even his. Perhaps leading by example should return to fashion?
That would not be “his family’s” living space, bot, but that of the American public. That One and his family are nothing more than temporary residents. The White House belongs to the American people so if Michelle wants to “redecorate” it to 21st-Century chic excess, we should be asked first. Frankly, her deplorable taste in clothing bodes ill for any redecoration she might undertake.
Every administration has redecorated the White House. Including the curtains and rug in the Oval Office.
http://www.blnz.com/news/2008/11/19/Will_Obamas_turn_White_House_7408.html
Sorry Barfly – I think there will be a lack of klan stuff so whatever they do you will not like it. (Are you still defending bigots like LoonieH?)
Wow are you an unpleasant, angry soul. You do know that we have the right to Free Speech in OUR country, right? Where do you get off attacking everyone here for telling the truth about Obama? It might be best if you start listening, rather than show your fangs all day. You’re going to appreciate the education some day soon.
Why would he pass on the redecorating privileges that every First Family has had going back ages? So he can get absolutely zero credit for the gesture from No Quarter? If he took a pass, you guys would probably crack that he doesn’t respect the traditions of the office, that Michelle has such lousy taste she wasn’t allowed to do it, on and on, etc., etc.
Please. Don’t decide what anyone else would think. We think for ourselves. I would have liked to see this progressive who talks about tire pressure and making do, actually make do a little himself. Organizations that succeed are led from the top, not from the bottom. Examples are set from he who is most visible and able to rally, not he who is waiting to be led. Pull your head out of your rump from time to time. Fresh air and clear thinking would improve your outlook at least 10%.
You’re the one who has turned the bitter feelings of a primary loss a year ago into an all-consuming lifestyle choice. Maybe you shouldn’t be lecturing others about “fresh air and clear thinking”.
Honey …. my only interest is not seeing 0bama finish off what Shrub did to my 401k. As for bitter, not me. I’ve moved on. But that doesn’t mean my standards have lowered to the point of embracing a caucus crook. Shrub cheated. 0bama cheated. Same thing. I’m still waiting for a Democrat(sic).
Ferd, do you know what the word “living space” means?
Like it or not, my friend, 1600 Penn. Ave. is the HOME of Barack and Michelle Obama and their two kids. To knock them for redecorating the living space says more about you than it does about the president.
Also, say what you like about the First Lady’s personal taste… but her clothing choices are an economic stimulus unto themselves. Ask J. Crew.
I have a suggestion for you, UBM …
There is an open thread at ABC where they are kicking your Master’s ass about new and bigger problems that Daschle has — deductions that were lies and income not reported — why don’t you grace them with your presence for a while and pump up the ratings for the big “O” over there? Reading those comments, 100 days is not as long as it used to be!
If McCain won, he would have toned down the Inaugural nonsense out of respect for our country and probably would have put the spending on the WH on hold too. It’s called being a grown up and fiscally responsible. No one says the Obamas didn’t have the “right” to do what they want to the White House. It just would be nice if Obama could show some financial responsibility, stop the insane spending of OUR money, and pay attention to the fact that it’s time to tighten the belt. The problem is that he just doesn’t give a damn about us anyway.
He would not have needed to have toned it down. No one would have come. The only way he could have won was by the GOP tactics employed in Florida and Ohio – that is why 69 million turned out to get Obama in. It was not happening again.
So now they’re unemployed? Do you think they’d feel the same way today? Do you think that all of those people who thought that milk and honey were going to cover their mortgages and car payments feel the same way?
The point UK is this,
If McCain had won it would have been because of a Movement which viewed America as winners. The inauguration would have been a huge event with patriotic symbolism and a roll up your sleeves nationalistic attitude.
Instead we see a gutted and listless America where a movement views this country as one that needs punishing and defeat..The preparation for this happened months ago with the constant drum beat of class warfare and scapegoating of American business.
UKforDems…you can spin it any way you want, and spew your lies. 69 Million people were conned and the White House was bought by corruption. We don’t really care what you think or say because you’re a troll anyway.
I love how so many Nobama-ites own crystal balls. So many of their shots at the President are phrased in a future tense — McCain “would have”… Obama “will never”…
Unfalsifiable claims that add nothing to our understanding but clouds of dust and sand.
So, Craig (whoever you are)… a President-elect McCain “would have toned down the Inaugural nonsense out of respect for our country”? Maybe. But how many people would’ve attended the inauguration festivities under your alternate history?
Likely nothing close to the estimated 1.8 million who attended Obama’s inauguration. How many of those attendees were bussed in at government expense? And how many travelled by planes, trains and automobiles… spending their own cash to do so?
And how many of those 1.8 million celebrants were housed by the government while in Washington? And fed via government subsidy? And how many stayed at hotels and ate in restaurants and drank in bars?
You feel me, brah?
UBM…Nothing you are talking about matters. The Presidency isn’t about a party. And it was still watched by LESS people than Reagan’s.
You miss the point because you wear blinders. It wasn’t the time to spend that money, and a lot of us are outraged that the same people who can’t pay their bills, and want a handout, are the ones defending spending almost 1/2 Billion on a one night party. That’s ridiculous. You can’t disrespect us for wanting financial responsibility. Obama has already shown that he’s irresponsible with spending. I guess you selfish people, who only care about your own interests, don’t realize that the word “broke” means “broke.”
On TV you hateful losing Republican. It was streamed all over the World via the net.
Aren’t you proud of the records set by President Obama? Can you say why you hate America?
No, I am not proud of the record lies, cheating, fraud and criminal activity by Obama. I never will be. I love America more than life and I am very sad that people like you exist. Does that answer you troll? Look around you, not a lot of people here on your side. Why do you post here, just to insult people? You would probably have more fun at the Daily Kook or HuffPoop. WTF?
UBM,
Back in June (look it up) I predicted the Obama collapse because of the constant threats of tax increases and class warfare which has led to the self fulfilling prophesy being realized.
Now that they have caused the collapse they will end up owning this mess started by Dodd and company and perpetuated by the America hating Pelosi cabal.
PS UBM…On January 20, 2009, 9 Million children went without FOOD. You feel me “brah?”
Cleveland schools can’t take a snow day because if the schools are closed, the kids don’t get the two hot meals that the school provides. So when those funds get cut further, then what? How many meals would those expensive events have funded, hummm? bro?
“But how many people would’ve attended the inauguration festivities under your alternate history?”
First, I read that this year’s numbers were less than those for Reagan’s first inauguration.
Second, the people who flocked there this year were celebrating identity politics, not much else.
Americans should be proud of their President regardless of who wins the election. I find the sunshine patriotism of most Obama supporters and the childish behavior toward the outgoing Bush administration (booing and shoe throwing) an embarrassing statement on our electorate.
yeah, i do just like i begrudge the cost of the ignauration. damn right i do.
You’re kidding, undercoverblackman, aren’t you? I think even you sees the absurdity in your comment!
You’re forgetting the biggest hiring screw-up that went virtually unnoticed. Mark Patterson will serve as chief of staff to Geithner, which means deep involvement in the bailout money — unless Geithner won’t be involved in it himself, in which case the entire raison d’être of confirming Geithner evaporates. Goldman Sachs will get a big chunk of that money, and might come back for more. It appears that Patterson will by definition unavoidably violate the “new code of ethics” in the Obama White House. There is such a thing, too, and it’s spelled out as:
3. Revolving Door Ban Lobbyists Entering Government. If I was a registered lobbyist within the 2 years before the date of my appointment, in addition to abiding by the limitations of paragraph 2, I will not for a period of 2 years after the date of my appointment:
(a) participate in any particular matter on which I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment;
(b) participate in the specific issue area in which that particular matter falls; or
(c) seek or accept employment with any executive agency that I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment.
Three strikes, and YOU’RE OUT … Just messing with you!
Front page of Washington Post 1-31-09
Of course he accepts “full responsibility” but this is getting to be a worn out phrase.
These tax scofflaws that Obama is hiring “accept full responsibility” but suffer no consequences–what’s up with that.
UBM. His hiring decisions inspire you ? Does that mean that Obama himself does not inspire you but his decisions do? How crazy is that reasoning? The man knows nothing about nothing of substance. He does seem to know a great deal about rap artists and other musical people. Dud, he had no choice but to hire almost the whole previous Clintonin administration. But remember during the primaries he wanted to “TURN THE PAGE ON THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. He just didn’t tell his supporters that he meant to TURN THE PAGE BACKWARD TO THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. Looks like he was lying about that too, dud!
“UBM. His hiring decisions inspire you ? Does that mean that Obama himself does not inspire you but his decisions do? How crazy is that reasoning?”
Perfect reasoning, Wisewoman. He’s the Decider. His job is to make decisions.
UBM, you are “inspired” by the criminals that Obama selected? Richardson, Geithner, Daschle all seem to have some serious problems paying taxes or accounting for contributions. That’s called “illegal.” Rambo Rahm? Even the most hard core libbies think he’s an odd one. Holder? Eh. Hillary? Yup, that might be a good one, but then again, she should have had HIS job. I don’t know how you find this so “inspiring.” My friends are all less than impressed and they voted for Obama and realize that it’s nothing but the Clinton retreads. Yawn.
“I didn’t think that there was anything wrong with the phrasing. Obama’s affect bothers me – he seems too passive and bored. He does not inspire confidence.”
That’s because he’s a classic sociopath – he has no conscience and he literally does not care!
You can talk – are you having one of those “purely rational and calculated” moments of hatred?
1 in 25 people are sociopaths – it’s very common. Anyone with a clear head can tell that man has bad mojo.
The way I see it, the really dangerous one is running the country and not bloggin here at NQ … but hey, that’s just an opinion …
beebop…you got that right. The most dangerous one ever.
Of course, corporations are lobbing off jobs by the tens of thousands. Their taxes across the board are being doubled during an economic crisis.
Obama does watch what he says. That’s the problem. He watches it right there on the teleprompter and then he says it.
I blame it on the teleprompter. Once can hardly find fault with a robot, its the programmer that is to blame. Obama is just doing what all robots do; following the script to the letter without deviation. Any improvisation one his part is likely to be mangled into non sequiturs that only Obots can understand.
Favreaux is Cheney to That One’s channeling of Bush.
The little pipsqueak speechwriter is Cheney, now? Come on, folks…
Go back to Hooterville, Hank, you are a tidal bore.
It’s funny how more often then not, the BOBOweenies want to be on a first name basis.
Nicely done Winston.
Before he became president, Obama had worms to explain What Obama Really Meant. Maybe now we need PODS to explain what President Obama Didn’t Say.
Excellent!
I really hope things aren’t as bad as Obama paints the picture. I feel sometimes he wants American people to lose their confidence in the our country and then he will be like Mighty Mouse and come in and save the day. I am so tired of hearing Doom and Gloom. We haven’t yet started to ration gas, tires, coffee, and sugar or have bread lines—And if we do I feel as nation we will pull through just like our forefathers did regardless who is running the government at the top.
He was so good at the great race speech, perhaps he can grace us with a great economic speech and pull all of those American flags out of storage and look inspiring? Where’s that guy? And was it just me, or was that tie he was wearing a little distracting?
Please NOOOOOOOO!
Can’t handle another “major address”
I hate to say this but Obama is not making a mistake when he slams the economy. He wants things to go sour. Much like what George W. Bush did after nine eleven, when he wanted to manipulate them, the terror alert would go up. Our entire economy is based on the faith people have in the money, there fore anyone that runs around screaming fire WILL effect it. Obama and the dems want to SCARE people PERIOD. They have an agenda, they want to ram it through, and hey don’t care how much chaos they have to create to do it. And while i can not prove it, i have a very strong suspicion that they faked the Home Mortgage bust, for their own purposes as well. I do remember clearly that McCain and Palin were leading up until that little fiasco went down. and the $700 billion dollar bail out did more to help than harm, And i have even heard democrats try to blame Republicans for that, even though it was dems screaming for it. This is not me paranoid, this is about learning a lesson the first time a round. Obama and his democratic sect are a mirror image of Bush and his neocons. Their philosophy may be different, but the measures they are willing to go through to get what they want are the same. One thing i learned growing up, is to identify bullies who pretend to be your friends only so they screw you over.
Uh, I really disagree with you on this one, NewHampster. Obama’s characterisation is accurate; the best thing he can do now is to be honest about the situation. This is a disaster that is not only affecting Americans, it is sweeping the globe. Hundreds of thousands on the streets in Greece, Iceland, France, Germany; governments collapsing [Iceland] or on the verge of collapsing [Ireland]. Trying to be upbeat about it is foolish; the American people already know the truth–fully 1-in-7 Americans are now out of work. We are at 17% unemployment and it is only going to rise significantly.
The truth is, this economy, as we’ve known it for the past 30 years, isn’t coming back. Americans need to be prepared for that fact. Calling it a “disaster” isn’t fearmongering in the least. It’s simply a statement of fact.
Now, having said that, I don’t think Obama is on the right track in dealing with this epic disaster, but that’s a topic for another comment.
Well I take the other side. I don’t think the situation is a disaster at all. We had a fake economic boom based on deception and lies that affected the economic power of everyone by insisting that everyone mortgage their future. The exposure of all the deception was something that needed to happen. God demands it every time. What is wrong is for the Administration to try to correct the problem by vouching for criminal and wrongdoing and wanting to pardon treachery. If the government would stay out, banks would need to auction their foreclosed properties at a going market rate. Families will be able to stabilize their living because a deflationary process will level people’s income with purchasing power. The pain would be felt hard by those who bought into the opulence and lust of living beyond their means and even harder pain by those who banked on profiting and gaining from marketing schemes. We will return to an economy that reflected the true nature of our society. Government wants to prevent that because they cannot live with retraction. They want to enslave people by holding them accountable for the deception of those in power. Capitalism knows how to punish wrongdoing.
God demands it every time. He demanded it from Bush who ended his terms in shame. He is putting to shame the barons of the economy showing to all how filthy dirty and immoral they are. This is all about immorality and injustice. The problem is we elected a complete vulgar and immoral person to be President. Now we have to pay for that too.
I really don’t think the economic crisis is the result of God punishing us.
I do, in a perverse way. Our culture has steadily deteriorated since WWII. The whole 20th c. was a wash, but the 60s was when it started going down hill, and I mean radicals like Ayers. Post-modernism. Nihilism. The Me Decade. Sloth. Apathy. Amorality. Regardless of whether you believe in God, the scale of this decline merits his invocation.
Beyond not believing in God or his/her wrath, I also don’t think assuming this crisis is God’s just punishment is going to help us dig our way out of it.
I don’t say that the crisis is a punishment as such. I say that it is consistent with the religious idiosyncrasy that says that wrongdoing has consequences and it reveals character flaws that are against God’s principles and requirements.
The punishment is something that we don’t really see or won’t see. It will be after the judgment and it is in the afterlife. How that works I have no idea. But I know that life is better for everyone if honest is the rule and dishonesty is avoided.
Trust me, there are a lot of religious people asking God why he would have subjected America to something as horrible as Obama.
Craig, while I’m not religious I still find myself asking God why That One is the new Resident.
It seems to me that we have two factions in the country right now: those who believe that God (or Obama) will provide and those that believe the Lord helps those that help themselves. I’ve always lived by the latter and, therefore, am not much interested in financing the former.
Sorry, lark. My grandfather was a blue-collar worker in the factories of Cleveland. His wife was a stay-at-home mom. Yet he managed to own his own home. I don’t think it’s a “lust for living beyond your means” for average folks to expect to own a modest home. As my grandparents did, my parents did, and I don’t.
I agree with you there. Nothing wrong with wanting to earn and grow and have more from honest work and honest trading. You and me have to pay because so many people choose to make dishonest and unjust trading that in the end taints us all as untrustworthy, raising interest for loans and credit, and giving us little chances to repay if we get in trouble. Religious people would rather be trusted and give their family the best life can offer.
The problem with That One is that he isn’t inspiring unless you’re into the expelling of hot gas, an activity which is much more exciting in Albuquerque in the spring. And he isn’t exciting because he really does not care, irrespective of his constant yackety-yack to the contrary.
That One certainly is no FDR, who could turn a phrase, had a comforting mien, and guided us through the dust bowl, the Depression, and WWII, all the while suffering from the affects of polio, which was no small feat. He understood the gravity of what he had to do, rolled up his sleeves and went to work.
Well said, Ferd.
I clearly remember Carter’s “malaise” speech, hearing it on the radio. I remember thinking, “He’s right. There IS a sense of malaise in our country.”
But then look what happened to him for telling the truth.
People seem to want leaders to face the truth but give them confidence that they can get us out of the terrible situation.
Again, I do not have confidence in a man who never budgets on things that involve himself and his family. I remember the extreme difference between the Democratic National Convention and the Republicans’ convention. McCain’s clearly seemed more American hometown and more appropriate to me even though the major bad economic news had not hit yet. We knew during the DNC that it was getting bad, but not one person thought the whole thing was excessive.
I just wonder if most Americans really do believe that it’s o.k. for “stars” (and I think they see O that way) to live extravagant lifestyles and spend money as if it never matters.
It’s a mystery to me.
Thank you. I love to be disagreed with.
But I ask you one question. What would FRD have said?
FDR
mountainaires, you are the most pessessistic person i know. please take your doom and gloom and hot foot off nq.
the american economy is essentially sound and we don’t the negative bull posted all the time. obama needs to shut his mouth and open it to encourage people. go read churchill. that might give you an idea.
You get screwed over a lot don’t you UBM?
Let me restate that… You’ve been watching obama for an entire year, so why don’t you know what kind of leader he is? The American people did not elect this man after a 1-2 hour long interview, this is a prossess that has gone on for almost two years, and you have his years as a state senator, and as US senator of Illinios to look back on. I had Obama’s leadership figured out, back in June, which is why i refused to vote for him.
Isn’t it obvious? BBC and Reuters clearly must hate black people.
/snark
Obama calls for 10% Reduction in Pentagon Budget:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/30/defense-official-obama-calling-defense-budget-cuts/
But he’s giving money to ACORN? Seem a little odd to anyone else?
There is nothing common sense about the Obama administration. The next 4 years will be sadly lacking in anything realistic.
Good news. The Pentagon has a painfully bloated budget. And Obama will get no political points for doing what needs to be done–slashing pork out of the Defense Dept.
At the same time he does this, Defense manufacturing jobs will be lost. Since the US government has a direct line in creating jobs in that sector as well as in infrastructure, it seems odd that he would pick this time to make sure that a whole lot of people get laid off.
Just today, our local newspaper announced the elimination of several hundred jobs in our small town due to this decision. Sounds ass-backwards to me.
Can you name any others, Hank or is that the only department on your list for the chopping block? I’d be curious to see just what you consider bloat to be.
Good work New Hampster, and I agree with your assessment!
Your graph speaks volumes. The business community took one look at this one-party administration and gave it a “thumbs-down”!
We are not likely to see an upswell of confidence from around the globe either.
Corruption and incompetence…bah!
Drudge has an unflattering picture of Obama on the front page. he looks high. Everytime Obama opens his mouth with negative tlak on the economy stocks drop. When he called the Bonuses on wallstreet “shamefull”, the arket went in a nose dive.
What is shamefull is Obama cuttign the defense budget in the midst of 2 wars.
What is shamefull is Obama promise 95% middle class tax cuts but yet he has a Stimulus bill full of spending to help people quit smoking, use condoms, etc
What is shameful is we were expecting a stimulus package NOT a spending Spree on Washington.
If Obama really wants to help the economy now, he will admend that STimulus package so that more is dedicated towards infrastructure and creating jobs withun a year. Get rid of the spending plans for 2010, 11, 12. This is an emergency not a free for all fat piece of PORK.
Get with the programme
The PUMA now say dropping the condoms is an affront to women. They are asking their 5s of supporters to send letters of objection.
I’m all for condom use. It is a distinct shame your Uncle Dad and Aunt Mom didn’t use them, UKelele. Those of us who have to suffer your blighted blather would have been a whole lot better off.
Yeah, the criticism of the reproductive rights funding has been a little schizophrenic in the PUMAverse. Here at NQ, the funding has been mocked relentlessly. But over at New Hampster’s Partizane, they trashed Obama for getting the funding pulled.
I think the funding should have stayed in, because it was good policy, and Obama should be criticized for having it pulled. But some people just wanted to crack jokes about “$300 million worth of rubbers” instead.
The money was for family planning, but opponents want to characterize is as only condoms so they can mock it.
Women cannot contribute to the economy if they are getting STDs or are continually pregnant. And this family planning was targeted for poor women, who otherwise often don’t have doctors or money for protection, or men who would supply their own condoms.
Which helps the economy more – providing family planning assistance to poor women now, or providing years of welfare to them as poor moms later?
UKfor dems. Stop lying on the PUMAs attributing the concom backlash problem in the stimulus package to them. Attribute it to NOW and the other women organizations who supported Obama instead of Hillary. Most PUMAs are somewhat fiscally conservative, most of the women organizations think that the world begins and ends with the abortion issue, WE DO NOT!!
What does the availabiity of contraception have to do with NOW’s endorsement of Obama?
I agree most PUMA bigots are Ultra Conservative.
Anyway this is from the PUMA Pac front. Durrgh Murphy wrote it. This same attitude appears on many PUMA sites. So are you glad it was removed or are you changing your mind?
thanks for posting that UK: quite enlightening.
Still waiting to hear how condoms stimulate the economy. This is just a big liberal goodie bag of policies they’d hoped to pass. Now they are passing these spending programs off as the cure and to the tune of a trillion in tax dollars. It is shameful!
Don’t complain to us: complain to PUMA leader Darragh Murphy!
Heh. Gives new meaning to “Rubber Stamp Congress.”
You are mischaracterizing the issue, twisting it. That money was allocated for family planning, only part of which is condoms. Family planning is primarily concerned with women’s health – not having unwanted pregnancies, not contracting STDs, among other things.
Why would you, as part of an oppressed minority, want to contribute to the oppression of the MAJORITY?
And men’s health is ALSO protected by the use of condoms, by the way. And you should know this.
Explain how family planning belongs in an economic stimulus package.
Let Obama and his minions lobby for, work for, write, and propose all the goodie bills they want ASIDE from their proposal to stimulate the economy.
Besides being wasteful, irresponsible and selfish, the whole thing is insulting to the American public.
Awwwwww… shucks.
FAMILY PLANNING AND OTHER BULL DOESN’T BELONG IN THIS PACKAGE. SAVE IT FOR OTHER BILLS. I FOR ONE PRAY EVERYNIGHT THAT PELOSI IS SHOWN THE DOOR. THAT WOMAN IS A FRIGGING DISASTER. HOW I DESPISE HER.
I guess MEchelle is also preaching a no smoking message. This is her cause as first lady. It’s really pathetic to me for them to preach about smoking when PITO himself smokes. Hypocrites.
Poor old bitter bigots. Barfly you are just simple. Czueck or however you spell it, you are seriously bat shit crazy. Your bitterness comes over in your tag name. Do you have an inability to spell the name of The First Lady?
I have no need to name names but there is definitely one bigot who should be paying attention to this story.
http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/37746999.html
I can spell her name S-A-S-Q-U-A-T-C-H.
You “WC” are nothing but a squashed turd.
UK…Really mature response by YOU!
ROFLMAO. You trolls suck.
Mememememichelle should take care of her own house before she starts telling other people not to smoke in their house! But again … just one woman’s opinion!
Yep, instead of timely, targeted, and temporary, the dems rolled out their old pork-barrel polka!
WHOOAAA! Who said BO can’t ad lib?
Here I thought a “Recession ” meant “good fortune” or “prosperity”. He is smart!
That One’s sudden epiphany is a wonder to behold. What have we done without him all these years?
Look, I know some people here don’t want to believe in conspiracies, or they are selective in their conspiracy beliefs (i.e., only the Bush administration was behind 9/11 but the Democrats were beyond reproach)…but…
Should folks like Alex Jones be right, if there is a global elite trying to create a fascist one world government, this is precisely how they’d do it.
They’d manufacture an economic crisis as they put an extremely charismatic leader into power using vast propaganda. Then when the depression hit, along with the resulting chaos and rioting, boom, instant dictatorship.
This is my main opposition to Obama at this point and I only hope that his being elected at this very crucial time is a coincidence, and not a part of a master plan.
Of course the conspiracy stuff is true. My God, how can you know that George Soros is behind this mess and not think there is a bigger plan? I think the pitiful voters in this country ignore the big “machines” behind candidates like Obama, a man who came from nowhere, had no experience, no reason whatsoever to be President, but 1 Billion Dollars in money we can’t trace got him the job. If you can’t buy there’s a conspiracy behind this disaster…there is no other explanation for this hoax. And Soros likes to destroy currencies, like England’s. We’re next.
I would love to know why, after years of being given large donations by all kinds of strange people, Republicans constantly raise Soros.
The list of Republican millionaires and billionaires that have abused their position of influence is immense (cigarette brands for example), yet they and their PUMA front keep pointing out Soros as some kind of bogey man. Why?
Because he is one of five hedge fund managers who admittedly (before Congress) played a major role in the financial crisis. Because he broke the Bank of England. Because he was convicted of fraud in France. Because he collaborated with the Nazis to confiscate property from other Jews. Because he is widely credited as having orchestrated and financed the Rose Rebellion in Georgia. Because he owns the Democratic party. Their various leftwing programs provide tax shelter for his organization, and they carry out his political agendas faithfully while he is extremely critical of our government and ruthlessly greedy. That’s why.
what’s the deal with you uk about pumas. did someone reject you? your mom must be a puma? oh that’s right you aren’t even an american. i wonder why in the hell you are even here. why don’t you go attack your prime minister on a blog over there? i have seen some ugly comments about him. that’s right stop attacking people you aren’t even in the same country with, uk.
Anyone who thinks Bush was behind 9/11 is retarded. He never had the competence to pull that off.
That would be Berg. LOL. Now Republicans love him? Wow.
ROTFL.
I feel that a balance between being honest while offering encouragement rather than primarily pushing the alarm button would be the best approach for any President. Once again Obama seems to want to have it both ways. By emphasizing the “disaster” aspect, he simultaneously tries to frighten everyone into passing his kitchen sink stimulus while trying to wash his hands of whatever its result will be i.e. “No one could have fixed this bugger”. Golly gee, whatever happened to HOPE!
Through use of symbolic gestures, Obama presented himself as messiah material, but as Victor David Hanson states in a recent column, “Obama should decide quickly whether to beam back down to earth. If he doesn’t, at some point even a sympathetic media won’t be able to warn him that his all too human actions are beginning to make a mockery of his all too holy sermons”.
If his first 100 days sets a weak template and poor precedent for the entire administration, we will see the beginnings of another ascendent Congress that think they can roll over the White House.
A serious blow to dreams of bipartisanship and failure condemned by history, perhaps…but
in the disillusionment of the next few months, Republicans will also benefit from the possibility of getting back to a small government/fiscally responsible message that proves themselves once again able to govern. What I hope is only a limited period of anxiety and insecurity before a new political mood is realized, not a devastating blow to the continuity of the American way of life.
Excellent comment.
Ever since it became clear that Obama and his movement were going to win there has been a mass exodus from the markets..30 Trillion thus far and the loss of 30 million jobs world wide.
I go back to that SFP (self fulfilling prophesy) and why I switched to voting republican for the first time in 24 years.
The democrats have made Business public enemy No1
Talk of wealth redistribution
Capital gains taxes
Companies shouldn’t make profits if others are not
Companies should not buy personal jets.
Tax increases on businesses
Carbon taxes
Corporate tax increases
Punishing small business for not having health care
The worst thing Obama and Pelosi have said is that We are in a Great Depression!
The day Pelosi said those words was the end of the world economy as we know it.
The Canadians seem to be smarter when it comes to words..No talk of depression
They say repeatedly that there will be slow down in 09 but a rebound towards the end of the year.
Obama is bad for business!!!
We need a cheerleader not a doom and gloom pessimist
Well said SM. Can you imagine how different this country would be, and how much happier, if we had McCain? Someone who would get us up in the morning CHEERING for our country? Instead we got this dud. Very sad indeed.
One thing is for sure..The markets would be up and capital gains taxes cut.
Probably the Dow would be at 11000 with a McCain victory.
McCain also would have a stimulus bill…Drill for oil and complete the transition to natural gas.
Between McCain and Palin, and Palin’s incredible knowledge of the energy situation, this country would be turned around but fast. I know it. This was the biggest mistake America has ever made. I only hope we survive it so we can fix it in 2010 and 2012. Might be too late by then.
Craig,
Movements win elections not just one person.Obama led the defeatist America haters who wished for defeat and retreat in Iraq and the collapse of the American economy so that they could force feed this nation their view of a European socialist utopia.
Nobody told these Obamabots that if you damage America and business you end up with no jobs and abject poverty. 200 million people thrown into poverty have just recently found out why America is so important to their lives.
Now if McCain had won he would have been part of a movement that looked at America as great and strong which does good on to the world by liberating Stalinist countries from dictators and leads the world for good and against the evil of terrorists and countries seeking our harm. The economy would be viewed as a glass half full and not empty like the defeatists.
We have the America defeated crowd firmly in control of our destiny.
Yeah, great assessment SM. Very sad that the “movement” that “won” was the movement of hate cloaked in “hope” and “change.” Oh, it’s going to be “change” all right. Really big, bad destructive change and the farewell to our unique Republic. I wonder what Ben Franklin would say about now. Our forefathers are probably rolling over in their graves over Obama.
One day, historians will ask “Where was VOLDEMORT when America died?” and the answer will be “Present.”
ROFL Zeke.
Now the Obama criticisms are dependent on Harry Potter analogies. Quite sad.
Ben Franklin would say…
Get up fight and save this country from the enemy within!
Yes SM you are right. That’s why I am glad to see so many people doing their best to fight the Pelosi/Obama/Soros monolith. Kind of surprised by the uprise in mass patriotism.
I know – 69 million voters throwing off years of Republican misrule; fear and hate leading to an illegal war, War Crimes, putting our Security Services at risk, Republican Senators abusing school boys more often than Catholic Priests, leaving people to drown as part of ethnic cleansing. 69 million Americans went out and said America is better than that. It makes you proud of America again.
Amen, UK!
It’s amazing how trolls can spin lies. And how proud you are of the biggest hoax on America ever. You won’t be gloating long. The bloom’s off the rose already.
Your thinking is SOOOO simplistic. The Republicans = Bad, the Democrats = Good.
Grow up and get a brain that understands complexity and nuance. Both Democrats and Republicans are the problem!
Politics to you is like a football game – you just cheer for your side no matter what.
And your politics is like fantasy football. You don’t like the game being played, so you invent one to play out in your head.
You and your fellow troll run around this board calling anyone who doesn’t agree with your batshit politics names. Really adult. You two probably aren’t even old enough to vote in the first place. But, a job’s a job, right?
“Illegal war.” No one has ever said how.
The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so little that is so. Ronald Reagan
It was a Democratic government in Louisiana that let people drown. That’s why they were voted out of office. Gov. Bobby Jindal responded much better to Hurricane Gustav. Your comments about ethnic cleansing are disgusting.
LOL.
In what respect Charlie?
Dimwit…She governs the largest oil producing state in this country. She was the oil and gas commissioner, which is a huge job. She took on big oil and her state is run at a surplus, with a budget of 11 Billion Dollars. She has more brains, common sense and love of America than Obama will ever have. Spin it anyway you want, liar, but she’s a success on her own. Unlike Obama.
Charlie Gibson didn’t even know what the Bush Doctrine was. Krauthammer, who coined the term, wrote about it in his WaPo column. There are about four different aspects to the Bush Doctrine, and none of them are what you thought, based on the ignorance of your other comments.
I am with you 100 percent.
Recession is defined Seattle as two Quarters of negative growth. So Canada can still talk of slow down. (The difference between a recession and depression, is best defined by comedy a recession is your neighbour losing your job, a depression is you losing it).
Is this going to be worse than 1929? No as Democrats have been in since then they have ensured that people will nt be starving to death. There are however far too many Americans who need food kitchens.
I personally do not think any of the banks should have been bailed out. Had the money that has been handed to the banks been handed to those with mortgages, most would have been cleared. That would have been a kick start.
UK,
Now that this collapse has been realized I do take the compassionate position that the democrats will provide a better safety net.
I just think that we didn’t need to get to this point..I’m a realist so here we are.
I have been part of a soup kitchen at my church for 15 years. Being concerned for every single person is a hallmark of my life and have given greatly to those in need.
Great Post New Hampster!
Can you picture FDR or Ronald Reagan as Chicken Littles?
Where is the LEADERSHIP?
BO has never had to face adversity, so he likens the state of the economy to either a bad hair day or the end of the world depending on his mood and how much he wants to pick our pockets.
I wanted to barf when I read a headline about him “encouraging” some BS public service.
He spends taxpayer dollars like Monopoly money.
BO has never had to work for a living, or enter the real world at all.
His universe is a fantasy land, but we’re stuck paying for it.
Obama started running for president the day he said that he lacked the experience on election night after gaming the senate seat.
Back then it was all about Bush hate and Iraq.
The democrats thought they could have socialism with a roaring capitalist economy.
What a change few years make..Now we have victory in Iraq and a tanked economy because of the SFP of Obama’s movement.
Now because of their movement we have neither socialism or capitalism…Only Darwinism prevails now!
I wonder if Milhouse Obama would have even run for president if he had known the mess he was getting into.
Be careful about what you game in life..Winning is one thing governing another.
Interesting post Mossy. I’ve been trying to figure out what type of gov we have now. By the way, what’s the “Milhouse” refer to? Nixons middle name?
Mark Levin calls Obama
Milhouse and it cracks me up every time…
Seattle Moss –
I was thinking “The Simpsons”! Mark Levin is a hoot.
BO couldn’t care less about governing. All he needed to do was win.
Now he can write more of his crappy faux autobios and live gaily ever after in mansions all over the world with the Sasquatch version of Jackie O.
He could be the luckiest dude if he could stop his pathological lying. But I do not expect him to shred that awful disease. Like some other diseases, this one tend to remain for life.
Hey JulieD
I hope it sticks..Barack Milhouse Obama
Wellllll Lisa!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61kHpm
Obama did not retracted out of inexperience because I think he doesn’t care one way or the other. His agenda is simple, imo, the more chaos the more opportunity for authoritarian overtures. Now that he is President, he will come on top one way or the other. The only ones who will suffer by witnessing the softening of our institutions will be us.
It is a disaster, the full magnitude of which hasn’t generally registered yet. Economists probably have a better understanding than they’re publicly stating. They’re showing restraint because they know there’s a psychological flash-point. Obama has to perform a delicate balancing act. He’s got to alert people to the full extent of the danger without worsening the underlying psychology. That’s not an easy balancing act, when people are trying to knock you off the wire by prodding you with poles and generally trying their damnedest to turn the entire audience against you.
Consider comments such as those accompanying the chart up above, for instance. (And I don’t mean this as a personal attack on their author.) Are they helpful? Are they logical? They’re pushing the psychology of the situation, but to what end?
It’s clearly in our nation’s best interest to do everything in our power to discredit its elected president and undermine his every effort to deal with one of the most serious and dangerous situations we’ve ever confronted, right?
And those who disagree with this proposition are blindly partisan and hate their country, right?
It’s clearly in our nation’s best interest to do everything in our power to discredit its elected president and undermine his every effort to deal with one of the most serious and dangerous situations we’ve ever confronted.
And those who disagree with this proposition are blindly partisan and hate America.
Interesting.
That sort of thinking may suggest more about the future of America than the economic crisis.
Thank you. You said it better than I could have.
Imagine this country’s founding fathers being taken to task by supporters of George III’s for attempting to “undermine his every effort”. Leaders in the United States are supposed to be watched carefully. We are the descendants of those who refused to just let their leader have his way, and we should keep a very watchful eye on our current One, who seems to have none of the passion for liberty that our forefathers had.
We’re talking about our elected president, not a foreign tyrant.
I wasn’t objecting to constructive criticism or thoughtful dissenting opinion. Such things are central to the workings of the democratic process.
I was objecting to people who seem to have forgotten that we’re part of one team; who seem to hate the new captain so passionately that they’re willing to throw the game to get rid of him.
Priceless. He’s been on the job 11 days and you’re already blaming him for the tanking economy, never mind that the disaster started months ago.
american –
The economy started tanking while he was a do nothing Senator, and according to his own statements after the Kerry convention –
was not ready to be Prez.
Next thing we knew THE ONE would (according to his minions and PR machine) bring world peace and prosperity.
If God created the Earth in 7 days, why can’t THE ONE fix the US economy in 11?
LOL.
Obama sure took a lot of money from FNMA and FMAC, too. Raines and Johnson advising him. His early days helping ACORN sue banks who refused to lower their lending standards. Obama rose through the ranks of a party machine, not our government. He helped bring on this financial crisis in a mad power grab.
He was elected with a $billion from whom? Nobody knows. Low security settings. Doodad Pro. Small $200 or lower contributions.
I expect Obama will serve the Office of President much like he did in the Illinois and the US Senate. “Present” and hungry!
So by your own statement, he would have had even LESS to do with the tanking economy.
You guys should take the afternoon off to sort out your logic.
You silly little trolls … have to hang your pointy caps at the end of deserted threads where you think no one will come back and slap you for stupid …. as if you had a relevant or intelligent point to add!
George –
No, by my logic, “Do Nothing” BO did nothing to PREVENT the economy from tanking.
Nothing!
NO insisting on reasonable audits of Fannie Mae and Freddie MAC.
NO proposals to PREVENT disaster.
Thanks for the assist Beebop.
Via: Hot Air
$83 billion in welfare payment
$81 billion for Medicaid
$66 billion on education, more than the entire Department of Education required just ten years ago
$36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits
$20 billion for food stamps
$8 billion on renewable energy projects, which have a low or negative return
$7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities
$6 billion on urban transit systems, dominated by unions and which, almost universally, lose money
$2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects
$2 billion for child-care subsidies
$1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that run in the red for 40 years
$650 million for digital TV conversion coupon (on top of billions already spent)
$600 million on new cars for government (added to the $3 billion already spent each year)
$400 million for global-warming research
$50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts
Zero for Defense!!!
If our economy needs emergency help now, I think Obama should focus on creating jobs now. Leave the Pork Bill for another Budget year.
It’s interesting how many things on the list help people who are in desperate need due to the economy, while injecting stimulus money into that economy. How do such things meet the definition of pork?
I suppose expanding rail transportation infrastructure–one of the most cost-effective and enery efficient ways of moving people and products–makes no sense? (The fact that the industry has strong unions is a secondary matter. Personally, I prefer strong unions to having workers treated by corporate America as a disposable commondity.)
I kinda thought republican would like to maintain the myth of clean coal. Apparently they don’t believe in their own propaganda enough to put money behind it. I’d cross it off, myself. It’s one of the points I disagree with Obama on.
I could happily see digital TV coupons get dropped, also. Keeping in mind that the program was originally passed in the 2006 Budget Reconcilliation Package, which 100% of the democrats in the House voted against.
I favor the global warming funding, even though I agree the economic stimulus effect is very questionable. I’d probably dump the digital coupons to keep it.
Dumping National Arts Endowment Funding is hardly worth debating. $50 million bucks is what we spend every two hours in Iraq.
Defense spending is simply another part of our annual budget considerations. It’s too important and requires too much detailed analysis and bipartisan discussion to simply be lumped into the stimulus package.
Oh yeah… Renewable energy.
I’d double or triple that stimulus package investment.
That’s the one that could change everything.
It could free us of dependence on the Middle East for oil, end our petro-dollar funding of hostile foreign governments, free us from the threat of military conflict with China and possibly India over diminishing global supples, and provide all the cheap energy we’d ever need to fuel an American industrial and economic renaissance. Thousands of permanent American jobs would be created as we set up the infrastructure.
Not to mention the fact that it would automatically solve our greenhouse gas emission issue without any separate investment.
I’m definitely in favor of funding that one.
I am all for renewable energy, but we have had a government organization since Carter that costs us billions and I thought their whole point was to help us achieve energy independence. I am wondering what exactly the have been doing all this time.
Believe me, there is plenty of blame to go around for both Republicans and Democrats.