Glimmers Of Hope, Part I

In this Obama winter of gloom and doom there are flashing glimmers of hope.

In a just published interview Republican Chairman Michael Steele made some very sensible statements regarding abortion and homosexuality. Democrats who genuinely care about the issues of abortion and gay rights saw a glimmer of hope, a conversation starter to bridge the gap on these issues and help women and their families and Gay Americans and their families.

Obama Dimocrats and their PINO Big Blogs sneered. Obama Dimocrats did not put people first, they put their interests of keeping women and gays in the Democratic “tent” first. Usually sensible Governor Rendell made the mistake of telling the truth. Rendell thinks in time Chairman Steele would be effective for Republicans and he rejoiced that because of Chairman Steele’s positive remarks for women and Gay-Americans Democrats would be hurt and that Steele would be removed: “Michael Steele’s days are numbered. “Fortunately for us, his days are numbered.”

Heaven forbid that women and Gay-Americans might have better lives if the Republican Party was a bit more tolerant of opposing views. During the general election Obama Dimocrats waved the red abortion flag to get women to vote for the sexist and misogynist Obama that Dimocrat had forced on the grassroots of the Democratic Party. Bill Clinton Put People First. Obama Dimocrats put women and Gay-Americans last.

Here is what Steele said about abortion:

Steele called abortion an “individual choice” and opposed a constitutional ban on abortion in the Feb. 24 interview, which appeared online Wednesday night. He echoed the language of the abortion rights movement and appeared to contradict his own heated assertions during his campaign for chairman that he is a committed soldier in the anti-abortion movement. [snip]

“Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?” GQ’s Lisa DePaulo asked in the interview in his office.

“Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice,” he said, according to GQ’s transcript, which he did not dispute.

“You do?” he was asked.

“Yeah. Absolutely,” he said. [snip]

He told GQ, “I think that there’s a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that, uh, you just can’t simply say, oh, like, ‘Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being gay.’ It’s like saying,’Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being black.’”

“Chairman Steele’s comments regarding a federal marriage amendment reflect the traditional conservative belief in federalism,” Christopher Barron, a former political director for the gay GOP group the Log Cabin Republicans said in an e-mailed statement.

As a member of the liberal Republican Leadership Council, an organization composed largely of Republicans who support abortion rights Republican Chairman Steele just possibly might be someone who can genuinely help to open communications between two groups that have diametrically opposed views. But for Obama Dimocrats and their PINO Big Blogs the response was to put the interests of women and gays aside and attack Chairman Steele.

We are very aware that Republican Chairman Steele has made many statements against a woman’s right to choose and many statements attacking Gay-Americans. But we know John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis wisely responded to a positive and hopeful message from the Soviet Union and ignored a later message which was aggressive and not positive.

JFK when presented with two messages from the Soviet Union foe chose to respond to the positive message which moved the interest of peace forward and ignored the ugly message which only benefitted munitions makers and war mongers.

Obama Dimocrats when faced with the JFK choice helped themselves and put the interests of women and Gay-Americans last.

* * *

Barack Obama ran a race-baiting, and gay-bashing, and woman hating, primary campaign so we are not surprised that Dimocrats put their vote getting interests ahead of the interests of women and Gay-Americans.

Gay-Americans were particularly targeted by Obama in order to get votes from African-Americans in South Carolina. Gay-Americans, were failed by their own leaders in California who did not demand Obama reject homophobia during the Proposition 8 campaign even as Obama’s words were the chief weapon utilized by the anti-Gay campaigners.

Now Gay-Americans have yet another test for Obama even as they pathetically wait for Obama to do something, anything, for Gay-Americans on marriage rights, work rights, and the right to serve the nation in the armed forces.

In separate, strongly worded orders, two judges of the federal appeals court in California said that employees of their court were entitled to health benefits for their same-sex partners under the program that insures millions of federal workers.

But the federal Office of Personnel Management has instructed insurers not to provide the benefits ordered by the judges, citing a 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act.

As a presidential candidate, Mr. Obama said he would “fight hard” for the rights of gay couples. As a senator, he sponsored legislation that would have provided health benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees.

Now, Mr. Obama is in a tough spot. If he supports the personnel office on denying benefits to the San Francisco court employees, he risks agitating liberal groups that helped him win election. If he supports the judges and challenges the marriage act, he risks alienating Republicans with whom he is seeking to work on economic, health care and numerous other matters.

Obama words, already contradicted by his gay-bashing primary campaign, are being tested again. Expect the glimmers of hope for Gay-Americans to be dashed.

* * *

Republicans agreeing with Big Pink? That is one huge glimmer of hope. Karl Rove, a.k.a. Bush’s Brain, agrees with us that the Obama attack on Rush Limbaugh was a diversionary tactic because Obama is not ready on Day 1, 2, 3,….

Did it do any good with voters not strongly tied to either party? I suspect not. With stock markets down, unemployment growing, banks tottering, consumers anxious, business leaders nervous, and the economy shrinking, the Obama administration’s attacks on a radio talk show host made it seem concerned with the trivial.

Why did the White House do it? It was a diversionary tactic. Clues might be found in the revelation that senior White House staff meet for two hours each Wednesday evening to digest their latest polling and focus-group research. I would bet a steak dinner at Morton’s in Chicago these Wednesday Night Meetings discussed growing public opposition to spending, omnibus pork, more bailout money for banks and car companies, and new taxes on energy, work and capital.

What better way to divert public attention from these more consequential if problematic issues than to start a fight with a celebrity conservative? Cable TV, newspapers and newsweeklies would find the conflict irresistible. Something has to be set aside to provide more space and time to the War on Rush; why not the bad economic news?

Rove agrees with us that reality will intrude:

Here’s the problem: Misdirection never lasts long. Team Obama can at best only temporarily distract the public; within days, attention will return to issues that clearly should worry the White House.

Not even Team Obama can forestall unpleasant reality. And among those America now faces is Mr. Obama adding $3.2 trillion to the national debt in his first 20 months and 11 days in office, eclipsing the $2.9 trillion added during the Bush presidency’s entire eight years.

Another reality is that Mr. Obama’s fiscal house is built on gimmicks. For example, it assumes the cost of the surge in Iraq will extend for a decade. This brazenly dishonest trick was done to create phony savings down the line.

Mr. Obama’s budget downplays some programs’ true cost. For example, his vaunted new college access program is funded for five years and then disappears (on paper); the children’s health insurance program drops (on paper) from $12.4 billion in 2013 to $700 million the next year. Neither will happen; the costs of both will be much higher and so will the deficits.

Mr. Obama’s budget also assumes the economy declines 41% less this year and grows 52% more next year and 38% more the year after than is estimated by the Blue Chip consensus (a collection of estimates by leading economists traditionally used by federal budget crunchers). If Mr. Obama used the consensus forecasts for growth rather than his own rosy scenarios, his budget would be $758 billion more in the red over the next five years.

Then there’s discretionary domestic spending, which grows over the next two years by $238 billion, the fastest increase ever recorded. Mr. Obama pledges it will then be cut in real terms for the next nine years. That’s simply not credible.

Then there’s his omnibus spending bill to fund the government for the next six months, laden with 8,500 earmarks and tens of billions in additional spending above the current budget. What happened to pledges for earmark reform and making “meaningful cuts?”

And glimmer of hope Sean Hannity is almost word for word repeating our posts on FDR and Boob Obama and History as a teacher.



In this Obama Winter it is almost as if every Friday is Friday the 13th. But Spring creeps ahead and the glimmers of hope pop out like crocuses.

Part II, tomorrow.

Share

71 thoughts on “Glimmers Of Hope, Part I

  1. It occurs to us that if Michael Steele wants to keep his job and keep the opposition at bay he should do what Obama does – get a friend to shout “Racism!”.

  2. Admin: the video clip is interesting. For Obama- like Hoover–but unlike Roosevelt, it is the agenda now, the economic crisis later–if at all. Are we quite certain that the H in his middle name isnt for Hoover rather than Hussein?

  3. Yesterday, for grins, I went to two well-known PINO sites, HuffPo and DailyKaos, hoping to find some mention of hypocrisy at Obama’s signing statements, the “I was against signing statements before I kinda made a little loophole while I think about them” (to make non-binding the protection of whistleblowers was the most obvious signing statement). But nary a word. They were concentrating on a whole range of issues, and Steele being a big mention.

    No mention either about Obama’s “I was against earmarks before I was for ….what are not *actually* earmarks”.

    I guess is was too much to ask for the rabid Left.

  4. # wbboei Says:
    March 13th, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    Admin: the video clip is interesting. For Obama- like Hoover–but unlike Roosevelt, it is the agenda now, the economic crisis later–if at all. Are we quite certain that the H in his middle name isnt for Hoover rather than Hussein?
    ***********
    Why the insult for Herbert Hoover?? :>) Hoover was a man of many accomplishments…Obama ???

  5. rgb: they are children. They close their eyes and believe the monster will go away. The monster is this case is the hypocracy of their Messiah.

  6. wbboei, continuing our exchange from last thread, I have heard that many classified positions of R&D in Govt go unfilled or can’t attract big names because big name scientists do want recognition for their big breakthroughs. They don’t want their inventions and discoveries sitting in some classified file where it does not see the daylight. Many budding wannabees can’t make a name for themselves if they can’t publish or make their work known to a large section of their research community. Anyway, these are generalities and there will always be exceptions and not everything is classified. DARPA has been very successful in bringing about remarkable technological inventions to the general public.

  7. Rgb44hrc, thanks for reporting on the latest goings-on in the Hopium dens. We’re not at all surprised that they close their eyes on the signing statements.

    It’s a shame that no-one has extended a hand to Steele. Maybe if gay leaders in California welcomed the Steele statements, instead of defending Obama, there would be some progress on gay issues.

  8. Hillary Clinton to visit Mexico

    WASHINGTON (AFP) — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has scheduled a trip to Mexico March 25-26, the State Department said Friday as worries about a bloody drug war has prompted talk about sending US troops to the border.

    Clinton was expected to discuss US counter-drug cooperation with Mexico under the Merida Initiative, a program under which the United States has shared intelligence with its southern neighbor and provided it with training and equipment. “While in Mexico Secretary Clinton will discuss a broad range of bilateral and multinational issues of mutual interest including cooperation under the Merida Initiative,” said State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid.

    President Barack Obama told US newspapers in an interview published Thursday that the United States is considering deploying national guard troops along the long southern border to prevent a spillover of drug violence.
    “We’re going to examine whether and if National Guard deployments would make sense, and under what circumstances they would make sense,” Obama told 14 regional US newspapers in an interview. For the moment however, the US leader said the spiraling border violence does not warrant “militarizing” the region. “We’ve got a very big border with Mexico,” Obama said. “I’m not interested in militarizing the border.”

    The violence flared after Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon declared war on drug cartels nearly two years ago, prompting armed resistance from the country’s drug barons and setting off a pitched turf warfare between rival gangs.
    More than 1,000 people have been killed so far this year alone in suspected drug attacks amid the government’s crackdown on warring cartels, while last year saw more than 5,300 killed in drug violence.

    google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ggRweWUj91BEG4SqA_-S1svI_v0w

  9. Day 53: Obama’s Pick Woes

    Adam Boulton; March 13, 2009 5:12 PM

    Yet another senior nominee has pulled out of the confirmation process to join Barack Obama’s government.
    Wall Streeter H. Rodgin Cohen, was tipped to be Tim Geithner’s deputy at the Treasury but has withdrawn – apparently because his connections to top financiers may have been just a bit too close. (Bankers and Fund managers can be toxic acquaintances in this age of the credit crunch and Bernie Madoff.)
    A previous Treasury Deputy pick, Annette Nazareth, pulled out last week because she was on the SEC which failed to spot the Madoff Fraud. Another nominee, Caroline Atkinson dropped out of consideration for undersecretary for International affairs be because of a Tax problem.

    All of which means that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner remains a lonely and over-worked figure as he tries to implement the stimulus, the bank bailout, the budget and G20 negotiations, almost single handed. 17 out of the 19 top Treasury posts have yet to be filled.

    Today he was back testifying before Congress before flying to Britain for the G20 Finance ministers summit, joking that he’d like his team to be “the many” rather than “the few”.
    Meanwhile Cohen is just the latest senior casualty of the gruelling appointment confirmation process which, elsewhere in the Administration, has already claimed Bill Richardson, Tom Daschle, Judd Gregg and Charles Freeman, amongst others. Obama still has three vacant Cabinet level posts, a worse record than his recent predecessors. But overall with just 34 out of the nearly 500 jobs which need Senate approval filled, Obama so far is doing roughly as well as Bill Clinton and Bush.

    President Obama is trying to turn around accusations of drift this afternoon by talking optimistically about economic prospects. It may be Friday 13th but the modest rally on global stockmarkets has come to his aid.

    news.sky.com/boultonsobama100/Post:5f64ae24-0852-40f4-9628-c85a8fe3808d

  10. Why the insult for Herbert Hoover?? :>) Hoover was a man of many accomplishments…Obama ???
    —————————
    SHV: well there you going getting technical on me. I agree with you on both points. My reference was more to the common understanding that when the Depression first hit, Hoover failed to take the steps required to get it under control, thus it took his successor to take the bull by the horns, and restore public confidence. That may be a myth as it related to Hoover and his failure to act in the manner Roosevelt ultimately did was the direct result of his faith in free markets. I do not think he was a proponent of Smoot Hawley but he must not have vetoed it.

  11. They are still “vetting” churchs. My ASS.

    h t t p : //w w w.mcclatchydc.com/politics/story/63940.html

  12. I am not interested in militarizing the border either mr obama. So what exactly ARE you prepared to do to protect Americans in border states from spill over violence, beside just bloviating.

  13. President Obama is trying to turn around accusations of drift this afternoon by talking optimistically about economic prospects. It may be Friday 13th but the modest rally on global stockmarkets has come to his aid.
    ——————————-
    Is Obama now saying that the stock market should be the barometer of his peformance in light of this modest rally? Does he believe that the agenda now crisis later is the answer.

  14. Ummm, yeah.

    When the stock goes up, Obama says:
    “You know, you can just look at the market to see that my ideas on topic X are just what the doctor prescribed”.
    “Aw shucks, I guess I have the Midas touch”

    When the stock goes down, the list of scapegoats is long and can vary:
    “This is left over from Bush”
    “This is left over from Clinton”
    “This is left over from Bush (42)”
    “This is left over from the Tyler administration”
    “Things have to get worse before they get better”
    “The plummeting market will not deter me from doing ”
    “It’s the banks fault”
    “If only the Republicans would stop stonewalling on my proposal, the market would bouy up”
    “I inherited this bad economy, a president can only do so much”
    “Vote for my proposals, because a president CAN fix an ailing economy”
    “It’s raining”
    “The Washington team jinxed me”
    “Dog ate my homework”
    “The is affecting the markets”.
    “I think Hillary has some hand in this”.
    “The press is needlessly pushing the negative story line on the economy”
    “Things are bad, things are going to get worse; I need to remain popular to get re-elected, so let’s talk about Diversion #342: Fixing Our Dilapidated Ski Slopes”

  15. CJ…… you’re welcome……let me know if you decide you can make it

    Is anyone watching Glenn Beck now? I am , and he is doing a great show tonight “we surround them”

  16. The parsing gizmo didn’t like my brackets:

    “The plummeting market will not deter me from doing _____”
    “The Washington (baseball, basketball, football) team jinxed me”
    “(some foreign country)’s actions are affecting the markets”.

  17. Obama is starting to strike me as the Neville Chamberlain of economics – unwilling to stake out a principled position and diluting his own cure by inviting the people in who caused the catastrophe in the first place. He’s a pussilanimous little twit, that’s for sure.

    As Shakespeare once wrote, “Infirm of purpose!””

  18. Benny boy……you can do better than this….but it is a start…you know we are not a “fringe” at all…..Hawaii did not release a official copy of BHO’s birth certificate…..obama released a forged certificate of live birth……not the original birth certificate……hawaii made a statement that there is indeed a “registered birth record” on file but did not state that barack was born in hawaii only that they have a hawiian record of live birth for obama……

    this certificate issue is a powder keg getting ready to blow up [metaphorically speaking of course] and it ain’t going away
    until the TRUTH IS TOLD……LOUDLY

    oh and benny boy smith…… here is how the REAL JOURNALIST REPORT
    worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91649

    March 13, 2009
    Categories: Barack Obama
    Congressman explains birth certificate bill

    A spokesman for Florida Republican Congressman, Bill Posey, sends over a statement from the Congressman explaining his bill to require that presidential candidates submit birth certificates is aimed at dousing the controversy — though he said the Congressman himself thinks Obama could do more to put the issue to rest.

    Says Posey:

    Opponents of President Bush used the 2000 election results and the court decisions to question the legitimacy of President Bush to serve as President. Opponents of President Obama are raising the birth certificate issue as a means of questioning his eligibility to serve as President. Neither of these situations are healthy for our Republic. This bill, by simply requiring such documentation for future candidates for President will remove this issue as a reason for questioning the legitimacy of a candidate elected as President.

    You can read the full text of the bill here. It echoes the concerns of the fringe movement that believes, without evidence, that Obama is somehow foreign and ineligible to be president. They’re unlikely to be satisfied by this legislation, though: By requiring that candidates submit “a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate” it doesn’t actually satisfy the fringe, which claims that the official copy which is the only document the state of Hawaii will release is not sufficient.

    Posey’s spokesman, George Cecala, seemed to reference that line of reasoning when asked whether Posey believes Obama is in fact eligible to be president.

    “I think he’s willing to take the President’s word for it,” Cecala said. “If the President wanted to put an end to the whole thing he could order Hawaii to release the authentic birth certificate. That’s up to him.

    politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0309/Congressman_explains_birth_certificate_bill.html

  19. Eligibility bill hits Congress
    Representative files law requiring candidates show birth certificate
    Posted: March 13, 2009
    3:09 pm Eastern

    By Drew Zahn
    © 2009 WorldNetDaily

    U.S. Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla.

    A freshman representative has introduced a bill to the U.S. Congress that would require presidential candidates to provide a birth certificate and other documents to prove their eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

    Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., filed H.R. 1503, an amendment to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which increased required campaign fund disclosure and was later amended to establish the Federal Elections Commission.

    According to the Library of Congress’ bill-tracking website, H.R. 1503 would “require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of president to include with the committee’s statement of organization a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution.”

    George Cecala, a spokesperson for Rep. Posey’s office, told WND that constituents had been calling, questioning whether Barack Obama – who has publicized a Certificate of Live Birth, but not his official birth certificate – has demonstrated that he meets the Constitution’s requirement to be a natural-born citizen.

    “Those are legitimate constitutional concerns,” Cecala said. “Folks have brought the issue up, and the court really hasn’t clarified. And I think American citizens have a right to have answers from their government.”

    Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 325,000 others and sign up now!

    “When seven-year-olds play soccer in Brevard County, to be in Little League they have to prove their residency,” Cecala said. “To be president there are three requirements: one is citizenship, two is the age of 35, and three, you have to have been a resident for 14 years. We’re simply saying when you file your statement of candidacy with the FEC, you should also file documentation that you fulfill the three requirements to be president.

    “There’s two standards here,” Cecala told WND, “one for Little League and one for president.”

    “Opponents of President Bush used the 2000 election results and the court decisions to question the legitimacy of President Bush to serve as president,” explained Rep. Posey in an official statement. “Opponents of President Obama are raising the birth certificate issue as a means of questioning his eligibility to serve as president. Neither of these situations is healthy for our republic. This bill, by simply requiring such documentation for future candidates for president will remove this issue as a reason for questioning the legitimacy of a candidate elected as president.”

    Cecala further told WND that there’s no political motivation in proposing the bill, and the Congressman hopes passing the bill will help clear the air for the president, enabling the government to get beyond the election controversy to dealing with the nation’s other important issues.

    “Once we pass this bill, we can be assured that future elections won’t have this problem,” Cecala said. “It’s not an attack on President Obama; it’s just clarifying for future elections.”

    Cecala also explained that if passed, the amendment to election law would require Obama, just like any other candidate, to provide a birth certificate in any future presidential elections.

    H.R. 1503 has been referred to the House Committee on House Administration

    worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91649

  20. Obama is starting to strike me as the Neville Chamberlain of economics – unwilling to stake out a principled position and diluting his own cure by inviting the people in who caused the catastrophe in the first place. He’s a pussilanimous little twit, that’s for sure.

    As Shakespeare once wrote, “Infirm of purpose!””
    —————————–
    Agreed. Tentative and always vascillating.

  21. BBIC = BIG BOOB IN CHIEF

    Obama to skip Gridiron for Camp David

    At first, the word was that President Barack Obama would skip next Saturday’s Gridiron Club dinner because he’d be out of town for spring break with his daughters.

    But the White House confirmed Friday that the Obamas actually will be at Camp David next Saturday — and in Washington terms, Camp David isn’t really considered out of town, or at least not the sort of out-of-town destination from which a president couldn’t escape if he actually wanted to get back to town.

    Friday’s announcement of the president’s travel plans is likely to make the Gridiron snub seem like, well, more of a snub — especially as Obama would be the first president since at least World War II to skip the event in his first year in office.

    SNIP

    Of course, skipping the Gridiron is already sparking the inevitable questions: Does Obama’s version of change in Washington mean not taking part in some of its oldest rituals? And if the president doesn’t show up at a dinner whose guest of honor is usually the president, what happens to the dinner?

    There isn’t much more of an Old Washington institution than the Gridiron, an exclusive club of journalists whose members don white tie and tails and perform song-and-dance numbers for an A-list crowd — and where everything, ironically, is off the record.

    And it’s not like Obama hasn’t been before — but that was in 2006, when he was only thinking about running for president. He’ll send Vice President Joe Biden in his place this year.

    politico.com/news/stories/0309/19984.html

  22. djia Says:

    March 13th, 2009 at 6:13 pm

    ——————————

    obama is making a habit of screwing around with tradition and ethical behavior. Lest we forget the slap in the face (figuratively speaking) that he gave the British prime minister and his family for example.

    What is important to obama and wife…wednesdays with the stars, late workday starts, early workday endings, basketball games, trips every other week to soothe his stress levels…teleprompter/arugula addiction and on…and on…

  23. remember how they all questioned Palin and her kids and how could she possibly do it all if she was to become vice president or Shreeeeeeeek!! god forbid president?? LMAO!!!!

    perhaps they should have asked that question of obama!!

  24. Buffet encourages us to be optimistic because “we” have faced tougher challenges in the past, specifically world war II.

    Yesterday, I took issue with that statement on the grounds that the we is different–different generation, different software, etc.

    The more important point however I failed to mention then, so I really must mention it now. It is the obvious fact that we had a great leader as president in World War II and the only similarity between Roosevelt and this clown is neither one of them is named John.

    It is a great misfortune, at a time when all arrows are pointed in a down direction, to be “ruled” by a man like Mr Obama who as basement angel accurately describes as a “pussilanimous little twit” who is manifestly infirm of purpose at a time. At this watershed moment clarity of purpose, boldness and exection are required.

    AObama is starting to strike me as the Neville Chamberlain of economics – unwilling to stake out a principled position and diluting his own cure by inviting the people in who caused the catastrophe in the first place. He’s , that’s for sure.

    As Shakespeare once wrote, “Infirm of purpose!””

  25. The far left who continues to ignore or make excuses for Mr Obama as violates every principle which they claim to stand for are exceedingly weak people. You can be sure he laughs at them and holds them secretly in contempt for how easily they roll over. And when it comes to him they hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil–just like the three little monkeys. Reverse evolution.

  26. Trade Post Nominee Clears Hurdle March 12, 2009

    WASHINGTON — Ron Kirk was endorsed by the Senate Finance Committee on Thursday to be United States trade representative, putting to rest a minor embarrassment over back taxes and virtually assuring his confirmation by the full Senate. The panel endorsed Mr. Kirk, the former mayor of Dallas, by voice vote and without opposition by the senators who were present. But the panel’s ranking minority member, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, said a fellow Republican, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, would have voted “no” if he had been able to attend.

    The full Senate is expected to vote soon to confirm Mr. Kirk. While the committee’s endorsement of Mr. Kirk was not unexpected, it was good news for President Obama, given the problems over underpaid taxes that helped to derail the candidacy of Tom Daschle to be health and human services secretary and that created some awkwardness for Timothy F. Geithner before he was confirmed as Treasury secretary.

    Investigators on the Finance Committee found that Mr. Kirk had routinely asked that his honoraria for speaking be donated to a scholarship fund at Austin College in Sherman, Tex., his alma mater. The investigators found that Mr. Kirk assumed incorrectly that because he did not keep the money, he did not think it was counted as income. The investigators, who perform I.R.S.-like audits of major presidential nominees, also found that Mr. Kirk deducted too much for his season tickets to Dallas Mavericks basketball games, since he could verify only part of the ticket costs as a business expense. Altogether, the errors meant that Mr. Kirk, who was a lawyer at Vinson & Elkins in Dallas, was obligated to pay an additional $9,975 to the federal government. “A minor issue,” the White House called the brief episode.

    Senator Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who heads the Finance Committee, agreed. On Monday, as the committee held a hearing on Mr. Kirk’s nomination, he described the tax issues as “regrettable but, I believe, honest mistakes.” Mr. Baucus ticked off the problems Mr. Kirk will face: “Our economy is in recession. Our consensus to advance international trade is frayed. And our faith in the international trading system is badly shaken.”

    Opening new international markets through trade negotiations “is essential to American workers, firms, farmers and ranchers who struggle in today’s economy,” Mr. Baucus said, urging Mr. Kirk to use his post “to help establish the kind of world that Americans want to live in.”

    nytimes.com/2009/03/13/us/politics/13kirk.html?_r=1&ref=us

  27. Forgiving me for asking but is Ron Kirk and AA…

    If so, I think the senfate does not want to stop any AA appointee……they are being biased on the race issue vs. the qualification and issues related to a nominee/appointee!!!!

  28. Don’t think that Barky has been “infirm of purpose”. Rather, he has been sadly successful at his true purpose – which is to “Shuck and Jive”. Any objective observer must admit that, with his utter lack of achievement over 47 years, he sure has come a long way on a very slender resume’.
    The truly amazing thing is that so many could be so deceived by such a transparent phony – and continue to remain transfixed even as he proves his incompetence with every passing day.

  29. I hope Hillary is getting much needed R and R as well as time with Bill, Chelsea and her Mom. Unlike our POTUS, who spends more time at basketball games, cocktail hrs, and private concerts with our taxc payer money, Hillary works 24/7 to save our country. It is like that line in the Simon and Garfunkel song, except I would say “Hillary, ‘ our nation turns it’s lonely eyes to you’……..

  30. Blue – shuck and jive is racist rhetoric when used with an African American. It comes with baggage that it does not come with when used about a white person. There is no upside, no noble purpose, in declaring the equality of words, because humans simply do not operate that way. You can call him, quite accurately, a shmoozer that lacks accomplishment – no one can disagree.

    Obama is quite infirm of purpose. He has no principles, save political self-preservation, by which he operates. And self-preservation in the short run is likely to be self-immolation in the long run. His administration will be a .laser show of criscrossing ambitions because he has nothing that he stands for save himself.

    Nevilee

    Neville

  31. Unlike our POTUS, who spends more time at basketball games, cocktail hrs, and private concerts with our tax payer money,
    and jbstonesfan..your correct some friends kids told me this..go to that nick cannons site he wants to be the full time dj at the white house for obama this is absurd..i bet it goes thru..this President Ob liar is bringing people in for him so he can be entertained ,ever night ..he isnt doing one damn thing for the American people.

  32. jbstonesfan Says:

    March 13th, 2009 at 3:58 pm

    ———————————–

    Thank you for your response on the other thread about Hillary and Israel.

  33. basement angel Says:
    March 13th, 2009 at 5:58 pm

    Obama is starting to strike me as the Neville Chamberlain of economics – unwilling to stake out a principled position and diluting his own cure by inviting the people in who caused the catastrophe in the first place.

    ================

    I agree that Obama is an idiot. However, this catastrophe is so big and so complicated and so long in building, that just about everybody with any experience at all has been involved in something that could be blamed as a partial cause.

    Better people who have some knowledge and experience and can now correct their mistakes.

  34. Yesterday, a number of us noted the rather strange statement by Mrs. Obama to Hillary that she loves to call her secretary clinton. I believe it was intended to be an insult. I further believe it was intended to mean not that Hillary was not President, but to demean her status by implying that she was nothing more than an assistant to the President who is of course her husband.

    We the people have a right to expect a certain level of decorum from someone who presumes to serve in the august role of First Lady of the United States. We do not expect them to be talking trash about senior cabinet officials in a public ceremony. Such behavior is bizarre, catty and disfunctional. It ill serves the nation and the presidency.

    From what I understand, Hillary ignored the statement and marched through the ceremony with testicular fortitude, as turndown noted. We on the other hand have an affirmative duty to ask why Mrs Obama would embarrass herself and her office in this crass manner. I believe she was motivated by two factors: jealosy and racism. If that is the case, then we need to be aware of these factors and call her on them when they reassert themselve in the future.

    Mrs Obama is without question a jealous woman and an overprotective corporate wife. She has always been jealous of Hillary because Hillary has represented at times a mentor to her husband (a role she fancies for herself) and at other times a credible challenger to who he really is and what he supposedly stands for–which is unnerving. Moreover, as Secretary of State Hillary commands the world stage and steals thunder from her husband as foreigners respond to Hillarys celebrity. And of course Hillary is herself a former First Lady against whom Mrs Obama will be compared and she realizes she does not have the charm, wit, poise, beauty and competence Hillary has and never will.

    Beyond that I firmly believe that Mrs Obama is anti white people. I say that with reluctance because that is not a quality to be desired in a First Lady of the United States. And I would not presume to assert it without evidence. I would not rest my case on the whitey tape, since it has never been produced. Nor would I rely on the Princeton thesis, because my own sense of academic freedom values an exploration of controversial subjects. Nor would I rely on the fact that she and her husband attended the church of Reverend Jerimiah Wright where anti American, anti-white and anti-semitic screaming was de rigeur. Nor would I rely exclusively on the racial attacks on the Clintons in South Carolina and the campaign website because others had a hand in those abuses as well.

    But there is one thing I do not doubt–and no one who lives in the same world as most of us can doubt and that is this: no mother in her right mind would take her two young daughters to a church which preached this kind of racism from the pulpit UNLESS she herself held those views or was sympathetic to them. In my mind that more than anything else marks her as a racist.

  35. Admin,
    As a young gay man and Hillary campaign worker, from the bottom of my broken heart I thank you! I thank you for this story and revealing how my community has been used and ignored by this sham of an administration! The continued silence by this administration as Prop 8 in my home state is set to be upheld is not a shock because I have known who Obama is since South Carolina and no I will never trust him.

    I am proud to have cast my ballot twice against him and will do it again in 2012.

  36. Wbboei-
    I would have to agree with your statement above, I do believe Mrs Obama is insanely jealous of Hillary and her success and still fears her. I will never get over the crass statement made to multiple campaign audiences regarding “keeping your house in order and running the white house” to say it was low would be an understatement.

  37. A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released last week found that 59 percent of voters now have a favorable opinion of Clinton, with only 22 percent viewing her unfavorably – “an all-time high” for her, as the newspaper put it. By removing herself from the partisan warfare of the Senate and instead traveling the world as a representative of the United States, Clinton is giving voters an opportunity to view her in a much more unifying, and far less polarizing, light. The position, at least six weeks in, is elevating her stature at home.

    via Hillary 2016 | Politicker NY

  38. basement angel Says:
    March 13th, 2009 at 5:58 pm

    Obama is starting to strike me as the Neville Chamberlain of economics – unwilling to stake out a principled position and diluting his own cure by inviting the people in who caused the catastrophe in the first place.

    ================

    I agree that Obama is an idiot. However, this catastrophe is so big and so complicated and so long in building, that just about everybody with any experience at all has been involved in something that could be blamed as a partial cause.

    Better people who have some knowledge and experience and can now correct their mistakes.
    ——————————————-
    Turndown: to me the issue is not how did we create the problem, but how do we solve it. With respect to the latter, Bambi wants to enact the pork now and solve the crisis later. That approach will only exacerbate the crisis. The responsibility for that will be his and his alone.

  39. wbboei,

    I was just arguing with the part about “inviting the people in who caused the catastrophe in the first place.”

    If we left out everyone who might be implicated, we’d be left with … 17 out of 19 Treasury posts empty and no one answerng the phones?

  40. The position, at least six weeks in, is elevating her stature at home.
    ———————————————-
    Turndown: that has been my operating assumption from the beginning. So far so good.

    A friend of mine told me the Chinese newspapers are saying Obama promised far too much in his campaign and will not be able to deliver.

  41. If we left out everyone who might be implicated, we’d be left with … 17 out of 19 Treasury posts empty and no one answerng the phones?
    ————————-
    sort of like now?

  42. Good morning all:Am I hearing correctly,that truth squads have been set up by the whitehouse backroom boys.A special group to organize and explore the MSM,talk show hosts,internet blog sites,cell phones,ipods and just about every source of information,that is enlightening the public about the Telebama agenda and the damage and danger he is inflicting on this country and it’s people.Some info may be due to stupid mistakes and some due to quest for power and complete control plans for this legacy of ‘Restitution and Retribution” that I keep pushing out there.It is a slow growing and frightening game of racial cards that he is unfolding and as usual blames his staff and his ardent supporters.Next thing we know the truth squads will be knocking on our doors.Ah dr.josef goebbles I presume? What Next Folks?

    BY ABM90..Fellow bloggers for now we must stay anonymus and alert to continue our fight for our beleaugered country.Hillary must be protected at all cost from this disaster that Telebama has created.

  43. ‘next thing we know the truth squads will be knocking on our doors.Ah dr.josef goebbles I presume? What Next Folks?’

    Agreed, ABM.

    I think it’s about time I went to the local rifle club and learned how to operate the one I bought a couple of months ago.

    Not to mention stock up on foo and birdseed. (for my parrots)

    (only half-kidding)

  44. Today is the St. Patrick’s day parade here in the ‘Burgh. Last year, HRC and BHO both marched. HRC was way better received here. I really thought that she was going to win. I still can’t believe that she didn’t.

  45. My $$$ responses inserted.

    djia Says:
    March 13th, 2009 at 5:59 pm

    …..Hawaii did not release a official copy of BHO’s birth certificate…..obama released a forged certificate of live birth……not the original birth certificate……hawaii made a statement that there is indeed a “registered birth record” on file but did not state that barack was born in hawaii only that they have a hawiian record of live birth for obama……

    $$$ State of Hawaii: “We certify that the person currently knows as “Barack Obama” was born alive, on this planet, and had a first and last name. We hope this puts this little issue behind us. Please leave, we have important work to do.” More important than proving the eligibility for the most powerful office on the planet???

    A spokesman for Florida Republican Congressman, Bill Posey, sends over a statement from the Congressman explaining his bill to require that presidential candidates submit birth certificates is aimed at dousing the controversy — though he said the Congressman himself thinks Obama could do more to put the issue to rest.

    Says Posey: “Opponents of President Bush used the 2000 election results and the court decisions to question the legitimacy of President Bush to serve as President. Opponents of President Obama are raising the birth certificate issue as a means of questioning his eligibility to serve as President. Neither of these situations are healthy for our Republic. This bill, by simply requiring such documentation for future candidates for President will remove this issue as a reason for questioning the legitimacy of a candidate elected as President.”

    $$$ Nice to know that this guy thinks it is important enough for future presidents…But if the current guy is not eligible, his rulings and signatures are not valid!!

    $$$ Opponents of Bush thought that he “won” the election only by having the Supreme Court help steal it for him. But he was ***eligible*** to run for president, as he met the criteria (although I don’t recall if he provided an official stamped version, or even a copy, of his birth certificate).

    $$$ Obama, on the other hand, appears not to have been eligible to even run for the presidency. He could settle it in a heartbeat. It would take me two minutes to walk into my office in the firebox, and pull out my official stamped birth certificate. I have to do that every four years when I renew my driver’s license. And I need to show my DL any time I accept a job, even when I worked at a gas station (during one of my unemployment stints a few years ago when groovy high-paying tech jobs were drying up and going over to India). So to work at McDonald’s, you have to prove who you are. But to be president, we just have to take every candidate at their word? Or was it too touchy of an issue because of Obama’s race????

    $$$ Additionally, if Obama has been willfully duplicitous in covering up his identity when he ran for and won seats in the State Senate, US Senate, then he has committed a crime. And having a criminal record is something that the voters should have known about.

    You can read the full text of the bill here. It echoes the concerns of the fringe movement that believes, without evidence, that Obama is somehow foreign and ineligible to be president. They’re unlikely to be satisfied by this legislation, though: By requiring that candidates submit “a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate” it doesn’t actually satisfy the fringe, which claims that the official copy which is the only document the state of Hawaii will release is not sufficient.

    $$$ Again, DL, McDonald’s, you need a REAL birth certificate. A copy is not good enough for the states anymore, after 9/11 and the increased security measures. Nor can I say, “look it up on my website, rgb_is_wonderful.cum”.

    Posey’s spokesman, George Cecala, seemed to reference that line of reasoning when asked whether Posey believes Obama is in fact eligible to be president. “I think he’s willing to take the President’s word for it,” Cecala said. “If the President wanted to put an end to the whole thing he could order Hawaii to release the authentic birth certificate. That’s up to him.

    $$$ That’s very nice. He can take anybody’s word for any matter. He can give all his money to a con man. But more is demanded for legal matters like employment. It’s not good enough for this slick operator to say, “I’m cool with whatever Barack has done to become President. I’m just concerned that future presidents may not be eligible. This is very important to me.”

  46. Another possibility is that Posey is pretending to not want to try to take down Obama, but that he is covertly trying to undermine Obama by raising the issue. I mean, the dude is a Republican, and it is a valid issue, and yes, voters and citizens have mentioned it.

    Just because the crime was in the past doesn’t mean that the laws governing that are null and void.

    So maybe Posey is just being sneaky.

  47. wbboei,

    May I use part of your comment in a post for NQ? I think this issue should be advertised exactly for what you say here:

    “We the people have a right to expect a certain level of decorum from someone who presumes to serve in the august role of First Lady of the United States. We do not expect them to be talking trash about senior cabinet officials in a public ceremony. Such behavior is bizarre, catty and disfunctional. It ill serves the nation and the presidency.”

  48. Btw, did Kim Gandy get a job in the Obama administration?

    h…../ no w’s
    tdg.typepad.com/heidi_lis_potpourri/2009/02/us-department-of-labor-womens-bureau-kim-gandy-no-mary-anderson.html

  49. Obama announces new food measures, Hamburg to FDA post

    President Obama used his weekly radio and video address to announce the nomination of former New York City Health Commissioner Margaret Hamburg as FDA commissioner.

    By Darlene Superville, Associated Press

    WASHINGTON — President Obama says the decades-old food safety system in the U.S. is a “hazard to public health” and in need of an overhaul, starting with the selection of a new head of the federal Food and Drug Administration.
    Obama used his weekly radio and video address to announce the nomination of former New York City Health Commissioner Margaret Hamburg as FDA commissioner, and his choice of Baltimore Health Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein as her deputy.

    The president also said he was creating a Food Safety Working Group to coordinate food safety laws throughout government and advise him on how to update them. Many of these laws, essential to safeguarding the public from disease, haven’t been touched since they were written in the time of President Theodore Roosevelt, he said.

    Obama said the food safety system is too spread out, making it difficult to share information and solve problems.
    He also blamed recent underfunding and understaffing at FDA that has left the agency unable to conduct annual inspections of more than a fraction of the 150,000 food processing plants and warehouses in the country. “That is a hazard to public health. It is unacceptable. And it will change under the leadership of Dr. Margaret Hamburg,” Obama pledged.

    Hamburg, 53, is a well-known bioterrorism expert. She was an assistant health secretary under President Bill Clinton and helped lay the groundwork for the government’s bioterrorism and flu pandemic preparations. As New York City’s top health official in the early 1990s, she created a program that cut high rates of drug-resistant tuberculosis.

    Sharfstein, 39, is a pediatrician who has challenged the FDA on the safety of over-the-counter cold medicines for children. He also served as a health policy aide to Democrat congressman Henry Waxman, who plays a leading role in overseeing the pharmaceutical industry. Both are doctors and outsiders to the troubled agency who will face the daunting challenge of trying to turn it around.

    Hamburg’s appointment requires Senate confirmation; Sharfstein’s does not.

    Obama said while he doesn’t believe government has the answer to every problem, there are certain things that only government can do such as “ensuring that the foods we eat and the medicines we take are safe and don’t cause us harm.” “Protecting the safety of our food and drugs is one of the most fundamental responsibilities government has,” he said. Obama cited a string of breakdowns in assuring food safety in recent years from contaminated spinach in 2006 to salmonella in peppers and possibly tomatoes last year. This year, a massive salmonella outbreak in peanut products has sickened more than 600 people, is suspected of causing nine deaths and led to one of the largest product recalls in U.S. history. These cases are a “painful reminder of how tragic the consequences can be when food producers act irresponsibly and government is unable to do its job,” Obama said, noting that contaminated food outbreaks have more than tripled to nearly 350 a year from 100 incidents annually in the early 1990s.

    The FDA’s work will be part of the larger effort undertaken by the Food Safety Working Group.

    usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-03-14-obama-address-hamburg_N.htm

  50. Obama’s agenda: Push for fast passage may hurt legislation’s chances

    Democrats open to president’s plans but disagree on some details

    By Janet Hook; March 14, 2009

    WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s ambitious first-year agenda flies in the face of wisdom attributed to the late Rep. Morris Udall: Congress can only do one thing at a time.

    Obama’s deluge of wide-ranging proposals is straining the legislative machinery on Capitol Hill and in the White House. The pace is driven by concerns about the deteriorating world economy and putting pressure on Congress to tackle health-care, economic and energy initiatives while Obama’s popularity is high and his momentum still strong.

    Administration officials such as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner are running ragged attending congressional hearings and speeches to explain Obama’s economic policies. Budget Director Peter Orszag has already appeared at 13 hearings and formal meetings with caucuses and leadership groups on Capitol Hill, as well as at myriad other meetings on the president’s spending plans.

    Democrats are all ears but not enamored with many details of Obama’s agenda. At a closed-door briefing of the House Democratic Caucus on Thursday, lawmakers asked Orszag to justify the Obama proposals to curb mortgage interest deductions for upper-income people and to reduce farm subsidies—two of the most sacred cows in Washington. Some Democrats worry that Obama unnecessarily risks losing ground by pushing for so much at once, because it is hard to assemble the coalitions needed to pass bills. “I told them to do one major thing at a time,” said Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), citing Udall’s line. “We’ll be making enemies all over the place, even within our own party.”

    Indeed, the steady stream of votes on big-spending plans that have dominated Congress for two months is causing difficulty in maintaining party discipline, especially among conservative Democrats. At a recent closed meeting of House Democrats, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) asked why the leadership was having a hard time corralling Democratic votes for a bankruptcy bill. According to one person at the meeting, a Democrat from a swing district replied: “Speaking for many, I was not elected to be a partisan Democrat. But all my constituents see is that I voted for the stimulus, the financial bailout bill. They say, ‘I thought you were elected as an independent.’ ”

    Obama has already made his first tactical retreat: He postponed his bid to end congressional funding for projects known as earmarks and signed a bill laden with them. In part, Democrats said, he did this to avoid alienating lawmakers he will need for future initiatives. Obama is asking for comprehensive action on a broad range of issues that divide the parties and have stalled in Congress in the past: health care, energy, economic recovery, tax increases. The administration is urging action on all fronts, arguing the issues are fundamentally related. But the risks of failure are high, because everything before Congress comes with a huge price tag.

    Other presidents have given Congress a long to-do list. Ronald Reagan pressed for changes in spending and taxation that altered economic policy for a generation. Jimmy Carter’s deluge of proposals put lawmakers in a state of gridlock.

    Obama’s potential problem isn’t so much the length of his wish list as the difficulty of it—especially for Democrats in vulnerable seats. “At some point they’re going to say, ‘Enough is enough,’ ” said William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former policy adviser to President Bill Clinton. “Asking them to vote on a lot of popular measures is one thing. If you’re asking them to vote for more money for the banks, or to reduce the value of deductions for charitable contributions … these are not in the category of easy votes. “If you have three helpings of spinach on your plate, you may be less inclined to dig in,” he said. “And the president has given Congress a plateful of spinach.”

    chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-agenda_14mar14,0,1951344.story

  51. Obama’s New Tack: Blaming Bush
    President Points to ‘Inherited’ Economy

    By Scott Wilson
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Saturday, March 14, 2009

    In his inaugural address, President Obama proclaimed “an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.” It hasn’t taken long for the recriminations to return — or for the Obama administration to begin talking about the unwelcome “inheritance” of its predecessor.

    Over the past month, Obama has reminded the public at every turn that he is facing problems “inherited” from the Bush administration, using increasingly bracing language to describe the challenges his administration is up against. The “deepening economic crisis” that the president described six days after taking office became “a big mess” in remarks this month to graduating police cadets in Columbus, Ohio. “By any measure,” he said during a March 4 event calling for government-contracting reform, “my administration has inherited a fiscal disaster.”

    Obama’s more frequent and acid reminders that former president George W. Bush left behind a trillion-dollar budget deficit, a 14-month recession and a broken financial system have come at the same time Republicans have ramped up criticism that the current president’s policies are compounding the nation’s economic problems. Obama had initially been content to leave partisan defense strategy to his proxies, but as the fiscal picture has continued to darken, he has appeared more willing to risk his image as a politician who is above petty partisanship to personally remind the public of Bush’s legacy.

    His approval ratings remain strong — above 60 percent, according to the most recent Gallup poll — but have dropped from their highs almost entirely because of falling support among Republicans since he took office.

    Upon entering the White House in 2001, Bush pinned the lackluster economy on his predecessor, using the “Clinton recession” to successfully argue in favor of tax cuts that won some Democratic support. But for Obama, who built his candidacy on a promise to rise above Washington’s divisive partisan traditions — winning over many independent voters and moderate Republicans in the process — blaming his predecessor holds special risks. He will need support beyond his Democratic base as he begins lobbying for his $3.6 trillion budget, which proposes sweeping changes in health care, the energy sector and the public education system. The president did not receive a single House Republican vote for his stimulus plan, prompting some in his administration to view his bipartisan outreach efforts as having little hope of success. And Republicans have seemed only more emboldened in their rhetoric. Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), for example, recently called the borrowing needed to fund the president’s economic recovery plans “generational theft.” “What the administration is involved in now is the politics of attribution,” said Lawrence R. Jacobs, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota. “Each week that goes by with falling job numbers and Republican criticism of the administration’s flaws means falling approval ratings. What’s the antidote? That the guilty party is George Bush.”
    “The trick,” Jacobs said, “is how do you shift blame to George Bush and retain any credibility on the idea that you are looking past partisan warfare? This looks like a doubling down on a very partisan approach.”

    Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, denied that the president has changed his tone toward the previous administration. He said Obama is “not trying to place blame, but he is trying to say clearly: Here’s what we’ve got and here’s our way out of it. He’s offered a positive alternative to their criticism.”
    “The truth is that 98 percent of his speeches are about the future, and 2 percent are about inheritance,” Emanuel said. “Whereas I think for Republicans it’s 2 percent about the future, and 98 percent hope that the people have amnesia.”

    Until recently, the job of reminding the country of the Bush-era legacy had been left mostly to senior administration officials, and it sometimes ranged beyond economic matters. Referring to the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Vice President Biden said soon after the inauguration that “we’re trying to figure out exactly what we’ve inherited here.” In early February, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that “after I accepted the position, I began looking at the broad array of problems that we were going to inherit,” citing the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan in particular. But most of the Bush-era blame has focused on the economy and the dismal state of the government’s finances. Bush’s spokesman, Rob Saliterman, declined to comment for this article.

    Obama has strengthened his rhetoric gradually. Thomas E. Mann, a senior fellow at the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution, said the administration’s “sharpened language is a response to the Republican argument against Obama based on huge deficits and big spending.” Six days after taking office, Obama kicked off an event on jobs, energy reform and climate change with “a few words about the deepening economic crisis that we’ve inherited.” He lamented announced job cuts at such economic mainstays as Microsoft, Intel, Home Depot and Caterpillar, among others. Just over a week later, Obama, arguing for his stimulus plan, said that “we’ve inherited a terrible mess,” and a few days after that, in the economically depressed city of Elkhart, Ind., he told the audience, “We’ve inherited an economic crisis as deep and dire as any since the Great Depression.”
    During a prime-time news conference later that day, he used “inherited” twice in the same sentence to describe the deficit and “the most profound economic emergency since the Great Depression.”

    This month, Obama has described inheriting “a fiscal disaster” and “a real mess,” as administration officials emphasized that the effects of the stimulus package have yet to be seen in paychecks and job-creating public-works projects. “There’s a fascinating behind-the-scenes trend taking place for someone who remains a very popular president,” said Ari Fleischer, a former Bush press secretary, describing the decline in Obama’s approval ratings and an increase in disapproval numbers. “His response to that trend is to turn up the blame on George Bush and everything that came before him. And he was the one who talked about getting past partisanship.” The economy continues to shed jobs — 651,000 in February alone — and the Dow Jones index is roughly 12 percent lower than when the market opened on the day of Obama’s inauguration. Perhaps most damaging has been the uncertainty surrounding Obama’s strategy to rescue the banking sector, a plan that has been criticized for lacking detail.

    Host Chris Wallace asked on “Fox News Sunday” this month, “Can this now fairly be called the Obama bear market?”
    House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) said, “I want to take the president at his word that he wants to work on these problems plaguing American families,” adding that “people are looking for leadership.” “It is the Obama economy and the Obama stock market,” Cantor said. “This is about today, and he’s assumed his post.”

    washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/13/AR2009031303486.html

  52. JanH Says:
    March 13th, 2009 at 6:19 pm

    obama is making a habit of screwing around with tradition and ethical behavior.
    &&&&&&&&&&&

    Oh, like that “tradition” where POTUS is actually a US citizen??

  53. Have some of our posters been moonlighting at Popicola?


    poplicola
    And you can put us down as much you’d like, but it won’t change the fact that your sainted leader is a wagyu-eating, thermostat-raising, teleprompter-reading, dvd-giving, non-stop-campaigning, terrorist-befriending, dictator-kissing, stuttering, leadership-impaired, history illiterate president on training wheels.

  54. JanH Says:

    March 14th, 2009 at 10:21 am
    Obama’s New Tack: Blaming Bush
    President Points to ‘Inherited’ Economy

    Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, denied that the president has changed his tone toward the previous administration. He said Obama is “not trying to place blame, but he is trying to say clearly: Here’s what we’ve got and here’s our way out of it. He’s offered a positive alternative to their criticism.”
    “The truth is that 98 percent of his speeches are about the future, and 2 percent are about inheritance,” Emanuel said. “Whereas I think for Republicans it’s 2 percent about the future, and 98 percent hope that the people have amnesia.”
    &&&&&&&

    He’s not trying to place blame?? Rahm, you are a turd. A product of Chicago mobster-politics.

  55. The truth trickles out.
    Finally67, commentary on BHO’s past provided by an ex-Harvard Review editor.
    (from Heather at NQ)

    Carol Platt Liebau was first female managing editor of the Harvard Law Review;

    It reminds me a little bit of my experience with him when he was president of the Harvard Law Review. You know, I hesitated to say a lot about this during the campaign because I really thought maybe it wasn’t fair. That maybe, finally, when he got to be President, this would be a job big enough to engage and hold Barack Obama’s sustained interest, because really, is there a bigger job out here?

    […]

    [W]hen he was at the HLR you did get a very distinct sense that he was the kind of guy who much more interested in being the president of the Review, than he was in doing anything as president of the Review.

    A lot of the time he quote/unquote “worked from home”, which was sort of a shorthand – and people would say it sort of wryly – shorthand for not really doing much. He just wasn’t around. Most of the day to day work was carried out by the managing editor of the Review, my predecessor, a great guy called Tom Pirelli whose actually going to be one of the assistant attorney generals now.

    He’s the one who did most of the day to day work. Barack Obama was nowhere to be seen. Occasionally he would drop in he would talk to people, and then he’d leave again as though his very arrival had been a benediction in and of itself, but not very much got done.

    So, you know, you see that and you think, gosh, maybe that’s the way the guy operates, hut then you figure ok, obviously he always had his eye on bigger and better things.

    But now he’s President…there really isn’t a bigger or better thing.

    smalldeadanimals.com/archives/010944

  56. Still waiting for Dailykaos to get upset about that knife in their back…

    Not upset that a president lies about earmarks?
    Not upset that a president lies about signing statements?
    Not upset that a president uses signing statements to rip away protection for whistleblowers?

    I guess not if that president is not a white Republican…

    Here are things that these wimps find important today, instead of finding any discomfort with the knife in the back. Obama throws up these distractions, and they jump up for it like they are dogs and he’s throwing them meat scraps:

    * blah blah food safety (sure, it’s important)
    * global warming (yes it’s a valid issue)
    * Week (stock prices) ends on optimistic note (by Jed Lewison): I’m glad you are so happy, Jed, about that booming economy that Obama is responsible, except for the part where it’s the worst in decades, which is Bush’s fault
    * affordable birth control (NYTimes)
    * Steele. “But it is money that may be the tipping point that sends Steele packing” (Rick Moran, or is that “Moron”??
    * Rush Limbaugh being viewed unfavorably (Tom Bevan)
    * Colbert King: “I won’t say Michael Steele is a hypocrite…”
    * Obama to “restore science to its rightful place” (yeah, we know Bush was a dick, so what’s your point? Any new president, McCain or Hillary, would be doing what Obama’s doing, and better)
    * Defending Obama’s popularity (do we still care about his popularity???):
    1. Obama’s approval ratings remain strong; it’s his disapprovals that are rising.
    2. Obama is more popular than programs like the stimulus package and TARP.
    3. Obama’s approval won’t remain this high forever.
    4. Obama’s disapprovals are rising mostly among Republicans.
    5. Obama’s programs have attempted more than is usual this early on.
    6. Republicans are a smaller part of the electorate than in the recent past.
    Shut up already about Mr. Popularity!!

    * Dissing Gov. Palin about wildlife

    * “mcjoan” takes the bait about Obama *seeming* to do something positive, about enemy combatants.. But they’ll have to wait a good long while for his WORDS to be tranlated into ACTION.

    however, the do go on to cite an ACLU person’s qualms with the vagueness / broadness of the interpretation of terminology, and sound like they want to keep an eye on Obama about Guantanamo and the treatment of people being detained indefinitely.

    * Something about Vitter
    * Jon Steward vs. Cramer: yay tv infotainment!
    * Harping on Glenn Beck (jeez, Rush, now Beck…yeah, I get it, they’re ultra-conservatives.)
    * Yet another rant on Michael Steele??? Jeez. “Job Pressure Caused Steele’s Confusion On Abortion?”

    &&&&&&&&&

    So there you have it. The knife in the back feels comfortable. A small price to pay to have a Democrat, any Democrat, even a completely unqualified, probably foreign-born, Democrat sitting in the Oval office.

    Gee, when Bush was in there, they had all these valid concerns about what he was doing.

  57. basil9 Says:

    March 14th, 2009 at 12:18 pm

    Carol Platt Liebau was first female managing editor of the Harvard Law Review;

    It reminds me a little bit of my experience with him when he was president of the Harvard Law Review. You know, I hesitated to say a lot about this during the campaign because I really thought maybe it wasn’t fair. That maybe, finally, when he got to be President, this would be a job big enough to engage and hold Barack Obama’s sustained interest, because really, is there a bigger job out here?

    [W]hen he was at the HLR you did get a very distinct sense that he was the kind of guy who much more interested in being the president of the Review, than he was in doing anything as president of the Review.

    A lot of the time he quote/unquote “worked from home”, which was sort of a shorthand – and people would say it sort of wryly – shorthand for not really doing much. He just wasn’t around. Most of the day to day work was carried out by the managing editor of the Review, my predecessor, a great guy called Tom Pirelli whose actually going to be one of the assistant attorney generals now.

    He’s the one who did most of the day to day work. Barack Obama was nowhere to be seen. Occasionally he would drop in he would talk to people, and then he’d leave again as though his very arrival had been a benediction in and of itself, but not very much got done.

    So, you know, you see that and you think, gosh, maybe that’s the way the guy operates, hut then you figure ok, obviously he always had his eye on bigger and better things.

    But now he’s President…there really isn’t a bigger or better thing.
    &&&&&&&&

    Ah, I believe Bush framed his laziness / intellectual incuriosity as his “management style”.

    We seem yet another way Bush emulates his predecessor.

    He is a lazy POS. Time for a vacation! European road trip! Off to the gym.

    Obama: “The work is piling up on my desk, but thankfully, the janitor comes around at night a properly disposes of it.”

  58. pm317 Says:
    March 14th, 2009 at 9:16 am

    wbboei,

    May I use part of your comment in a post for NQ? I think this issue should be advertised exactly for what you say here:…
    —————
    obviously with all attribution to you, if I did not make that clear. I have a post ready to go and waiting to hear from you. Thanks.

  59. Re: Michael Steele

    Supported him before and support him now for RNC, not that I’m a card-carrying member by any stretch, but a HRC PUMA Indy. Yes, if the dumba– Dims and Repubs would stop and take a breath, and take another look at Steele – what they would se is a SENSIBLE patriot. He is trying to grow the Republican Party, appeal to Independents and nab some disenfranchised (HRC PUMAS?) Democrats to build a NORMAL constituency. Notice he’s NOT crying “race card” because Steele “gets it.” He knows that true IDEAS are colorless. So, if the Republicans are smart (Rush et al) they will BACK OFF STEELE and let him GROW their party, ENCOURAGING diehards to “get with the program” or seal certain defeat, allowing BHO to remain in power indefinitely. Democrats might actually make some headway in moving the REAL Democratic Party away from the far-left Dims back toward the Blue-Dog Center.

    Re: Lack of BHO Hawaiian COLB since THERE ISN’T ONE –

    If my Republican home state of Texas (large in population with LOTS of electoral votes) would pass a state law RIGHT NOW requiring ANY person running for office and appearing on a TEXAS BALLOT – whether local, state OR FEDERAL to be required to furnish an AUTHENTIC COLB – then this would FORCE the issue of BHO’s LACK of required citizenship to serve as POTUS. Plain and simple. Hey – Texans….Remember the Alamo? Well, we fought then and lost at San Antonio (as in Nov. 2008) but won months later at San Jacinto (future loss of BHO due to no COLB). So Texas…….Remember Nov. 2008 and the move toward Socialism, then lead the way……don’t mess with Texas….and don’t mess with determined HRC supporters.

    C’mon Red State of Texas…..do whatever it takes to pass a law requiring proof of citizenship to appear on ANY Texas ballot. Pave the way for the entire country in pure Gen. Sam Houston fashion.

  60. “poplicola
    And you can put us down as much you’d like, but it won’t change the fact that your sainted leader is a wagyu-eating, thermostat-raising, teleprompter-reading, dvd-giving, non-stop-campaigning, terrorist-befriending, dictator-kissing, stuttering, leadership-impaired, history illiterate president on training wheels.”

    ————————-

    Poetry in motion!

  61. Barack Obama’s aides admit errors are making him less popular

    Senior aides of US President Barack Obama privately admit that a series of presentational errors have contributed to falling popularity with voters and pundits alike.

    By Tim Shipman
    14 Mar 2009

    His staff are being warned to get a firmer grip now he has passed the 50-day mark in the White House, and prevent a repeat of the mistakes that marred the last seven weeks.

    A White House official last week passed details to The Sunday Telegraph of Mr Obama’s desire to avoid a repeat of such errors as the inept handling of Gordon Brown’s recent visit to Washington. A new poll revealed that the president’s personal approval ratings have slumped to levels below those of George W. Bush at the same stage of his first term, undermining the common assumption that Mr Obama is enjoying unusual levels of public popularity. The Rasmussen survey found that Mr Obama enjoys the confidence of just 56 per cent of voters, with 43 per cent who do not have confidence and a third strongly disapproving of his early performance.

    Mr Obama has now told his staff to learn from the errors made during Mr Brown’s visit and to ensure that the protocol is observed when he meets the Queen later this month. Administration officials have been warned to be better prepared for the high profile series of international meetings over the next few weeks, during which Mr Obama will travel to Europe for the G20 meeting in London, roll out a new strategy for Afghanistan at a Nato summit and make his first appearance in a Muslim nation – Turkey.

    A source close to Mr Obama’s top team telephoned this newspaper last week to say that White House officials now regard it as “a mistake” to have returned the bust of Winston Churchill that the British government loaned George W. Bush – a story first reported by The Sunday Telegraph – and then to have sent the prime minister home with a gift of 25 DVDs after his visit to Washington. “Clearly it was a mistake, and they want people to know that they know that,” the source said. “There is a collective desire to learn from the experience. They pride themselves on attention to detail. They didn’t have their eye on the ball… they all know they’ve got to do better.”

    Mr Obama is due to call at Buckingham Palace shortly before the G20 meeting.
    The source said: “The point was made that the protocol people need to be absolutely sure they are on top of everything to do with meeting the Queen and make sure that everyone knows what is expected. The Queen won’t be getting any DVDs.”

    The admission came as Mr Obama faced and upsurge of criticism from influential and previously devout supporters among American commentators, halfway through what Mr Obama hopes will prove the most consequential first 100 days since Franklin D. Roosevelt. So far he has had a radical economic stimulus approved by Congress, but faces accusations that he and his team, who regard themselves as great communicators, have made presentational errors.

    The veteran Newsweek political columnist Howard Fineman, previously an enthusiastic cheerleader, delivered a withering verdict under the headline “The Turning Tide”, which concluded: “Obama still has the approval of the people, but the establishment is beginning to mumble that the president may not have what it takes.” Camille Paglia, the feminist writer who was early and vocal Obama fan, said: “Heads should be rolling at the White House for the embarrassing series of flubs that have overshadowed President Obama’s first seven weeks in office.” She denounced “the fiasco of the ham-handed White House reception for British Prime Minister Gordon Brown” and said that Mr Obama’s aides were a “posse of smirky smart alecks and provincial rubes” who seemed like “dazed lost lambs in the brave new world of federal legislation and global statesmanship”. Ms Paglia added on Salon.com that Mr Obama “has been ill-served by his advisers and staff.” Nile Gardiner, the foremost conservative expert on the special relationship in Washington, is gunning for the official at the state department who told The Sunday Telegraph last weekend that Britain deserved no special favours and was “just the same as the other 190 countries in the world”. Dr Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, said: “The official’s highly insulting remarks were the most offensive comments directed against Britain by any U.S. representative in recent memory. There should be a full inquiry… and the Secretary of State should be prepared to offer an unreserved apology on behalf of the Obama Administration to the British people.”

    But the criticism is not confined to conservatives. The billionaire investor Warren Buffett, a friend of Mr Obama, last week criticised the president’s determination to press ahead with expensive liberal pet projects like healthcare reforms when he should be devoting all everything to the economy.
    “Job one is to win the war, the economic war. Job two is to win the economic war – and job three,” he said. “You can’t expect people to unite behind you if you’re trying to jam a whole bunch of things down their throat.”

    telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4991247/Barack-Obamas-aides-admit-errors-are-making-him-less-popular.html

    ………………………………….

    “The Queen won’t be getting any DVDs.”

    Shaking my head here.

  62. Mr Obama has now told his staff to learn from the errors made during Mr Brown’s visit and to ensure that the protocol is observed when he meets the Queen later this month. Administration officials have been warned to be better prepared for the high profile series of international meetings over the next few weeks, during which Mr Obama will travel to Europe for the G20 meeting in London, roll out a new strategy for Afghanistan at a Nato summit and make his first appearance in a Muslim nation – Turkey.
    &&&&&&&&&

    How much you wanna bet that with Hillary as POTUS, that exact same staff would not have made those boneheaded gaffes. You may have 10 great players, but if the quarterback sucks, you won’t be winning any games. On the other hand, a great quarterback can compensate for known weaknesses, and work around it.

    Hillary does her homework. It shows as Senator, as candidate for POTUS, and as SoS.

    Obama is lazy, and intellectually incurious. He is a bad manager. He has to rely on his reputation as a “delegator” and “manager” because he is not a “doer”.

    To the Bots: You barack it, you bought it. (like the signs in the antique stores).

  63. Bah humbug “Council on Women” summary Sat noon

    Must go soon, but I just wanted to give this fact about the actual make-up of the ‘Council.’ So if the ‘Council’ ever has a meeting and anything that matters comes up for a vote, look who will have the most votes. “While the new council does not have Cabinet rank, the whole Cabinet, from the Secretary of Defense to the US Ambassador to the United Nations, is required to serve on it.” “The members are all Cabinet Secretaries and the heads of numerous federal agencies.” h…./ no w’s
    http://www.fem2pt0.com/?p=855

    So is it now about 75% men in Obama’s cabinet? They will be automatically on the Council and able to outvote anything the women might come up wtth. (Is the gender parity any better among the “heads of numerous federal agencies”? — Of course as he needs in future, Obama could make a new executive order defining just which of those heads are on the Council from one meeting to the next. Headed by two cronies, peopled by a large percentage of male appointees…. Very safe design….

    Reasons for scepticism, in no particular order:

    Created all of a piece with Jarrett and Tchen (both Chicago cronies of Obama) already installed, no chance for public input.
    Jarrett has no known prior feminist credits; Tchen’s none mentioned since college.
    ‘Council’ has no staff, no meetings; both Jarrett and Tchen already have full time jobs with the Administration, and Jarrett already has other impressive titles.
    ‘Councll makeup: “While the new council does not have Cabinet rank, the whole Cabinet, from the Secretary of Defense to the US Ambassador to the United Nations, is required to serve on it.” “The members are all Cabinet Secretaries and the heads of numerous federal agencies.” h…./ no w’s http://www.fem2pt0.com/?p=855

Comments are closed.