Barack Obama’s Deficits, Part I

Lantern-jawed Michelle Obama imitates her husband and scowls at her betters during her European spending spree while Barack Obama bamboozles at a heightened level due to fears that Americans have caught on to his disastrous economic schemes and plots.


MichelleNoBelle

What drives Obama these days? This poll:

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on six out of 10 key issues, including the top issue of the economy.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 45% now trust the GOP more to handle economic issues, while 39% trust Democrats more.[snip]

Voters not affiliated with either party now trust the GOP more to handle economic issues by a two-to-one margin. [snip]

Republicans also now hold a six-point lead on the issue of government ethics and corruption, the second most important issue to all voters and the top issue among unaffiliated voters. That shows a large shift from May, when Democrats held an 11-point lead on the issue.

For the eighth straight month, Republicans lead on national security. The GOP now holds a 51% to 36% lead on the issue, up from a seven-point lead in May. They also lead on the war in Iraq 45% to 37%, after leading by just two points in May and trailing the Democrats in April. [snip]

Republicans lead the Democrats on immigration for the third straight month, pulling ahead to a 35% to 29% advantage on the issue.

On taxes, the GOP leads the Democrats for the fifth straight month, 44% to 39%. In May and April, Republicans held six-point leads on the issue.

Democrats continue to hold the lead on the issues of health care, Social Security and education. While Democrats have a 10-point advantage on health care, that’s down from the 18-point lead the party had a month ago.

So bad is Obama that the Republicans are trusted more on the economy! We poor Americans can be excused for holding our heads and weeping.

The Rolling Stones once starkly laid out the alternatives for voters: a parade of the gray suited grafters, a choice of cancer or polio.

Faced with voters awakening to the disasters he authors, Obama is now in bamboozle overdrive with his latest flim-flam – pretending he is fiscally responsible:

President Obama billed it as an adrenaline jolt — a $787-billion stimulus package that not only would put people back to work, but also underwrite construction and energy projects the country had long neglected.

But with the economy still sputtering and some experts doubting the program was meeting its goals, Obama vowed Monday to accelerate stimulus spending with the goal of creating or saving 600,000 jobs by summer’s end.

Opening a meeting with Cabinet members and Vice President Joe Biden, Obama sought to claim substantial progress while holding down expectations. [snip]

Results of the stimulus spending are difficult to measure, and so far the promised federal money has been slow in coming. As of May 29, just over 100 days since Obama signed the bill into law, only about 6% of the funds had been spent.

And on the jobs front, an early target was missed: Two of the president’s top economic advisors put out a report Jan. 9 predicting that with the stimulus spending, the U.S. unemployment rate this year would not exceed 8%. It now stands at 9.4%. That figure is higher than Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein had said it would be even if the stimulus package had not been adopted.

The economy is still issue #1 and Obama is mess #1. All the Obama bluster does not change economic reality.

“A lot of this is hokum. All along, [Obama’s] job numbers have kept changing according to the political environment,” said Peter Morici, a professor of international business at the University of Maryland.

Kevin Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank in Washington, put it even more bluntly: “The actual unemployment rate is worse than their baseline — suggesting that their stimulus plan was harmful. And yet, despite that, they’re asserting it has been successful. That shows an incredible amount of gall.”

The Obama lies on the economy are at least hokum. The Obama bamboozlement is at full throttle:

Obama has said the stimulus package has saved or created 150,000 jobs already and continues to pay off. Those numbers appear to be elastic, though: On a Sunday-morning news show, his senior advisor David Axelrod said the plan “has produced hundreds of thousands of jobs.”

Any figure involves guesswork, the administration has conceded.

Bernstein, who is Biden’s economic advisor, said in an interview that the president’s citation of 150,000 is “an estimate” based partly on what the economy would look like in the absence of the stimulus package. [snip]

Republicans are arguing that the stimulus package has failed.

“In order to achieve Keynesian economic nirvana,” Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) said Monday, “one has to spend the money essentially on bricks and mortar and get the money out the door quickly.” Hensarling said he was not a fan of economist John Maynard Keynes, who advocated government intervention, including deficit spending, to address severe downturns.

At this point, the largest share of stimulus spending has gone to states in the form of Medicaid grants, federal records show.

Though some signs suggest the recession is abating, the economy lost about 1.5 million jobs over three full months after the passage of the stimulus bill, from March through May. Unemployment in that period jumped to 9.4%, from 8.5%.

The White House has said conditions would be even worse without the stimulus package. But the public may be getting impatient.

A Gallup Poll released Monday showed that though Obama is personally very popular, people are not as happy with his stewardship of parts of the economy. Fifty-one percent disapproved of Obama’s performance controlling federal spending, compared with 45% who approved.

Gallup and Rasmussen cite Americans waking up to Obama’s lies on the economy and deficit spending and Obama ramps up the bamboozlement.

We opposed the Obama fake “stimulus” and argued the little money left should be spent wisely. A HOLC and a genuine universal health care plan which would help American businesses and workers, we argued, would be a wiser use of funds than the slush fund to help the Dimocrats in the 2010 elections called the “stimulus” and TARP. We have been proved correct.

Obama is right to be worried. Americans will be sufficiently awake in 2010 to deal Dimocrats major losses in 2010. Obama will still be worshipped by Big Media in 2010 but voters might decide that while they “like” Obama they don’t like Obama’s Dimocrats or policies and Obama’s ill-conceived, badly executed economic schemes and therefore vote the Obama Dimocrats out.

President Barack Obama assured the nation his recovery plan was on track Monday, scrambling to calm Americans unnerved by unemployment rates still persistently rising nearly four months after he signed the biggest economic stimulus in history. [snip]

He also repeated an earlier promise to create or save 600,000 jobs by the end of the summer.

Neither the acceleration nor the jobs goal are new. Both represent a White House repackaging of promises and projects to blunt criticism that the effects haven’t been worth the historic price tag. And the job estimate is so murky, it can never be verified.

Since the “stimulus” scam was enacted in February Americans have seen 1.6 million jobs disappear. Now Obama is admitting he was “optimistic”. [We knew the numbers were phony on February 27th.]

Public opinion of Obama’s handling of the economy has declined along with the jobs data.

For the first time, the administration admitted the economic forecasts it used to sell the stimulus were overly optimistic.

By now, according to earlier White House economic models, the nation’s unemployment rate should be on the decline. The forecasts used to drum up support for the plan projected today’s unemployment would be about 8 percent. Instead, it sits at 9.4 percent, the highest in more than 25 years.

Some analysts believe the White House is still not being realistic, that Obama will be lucky if any real job creation from his recovery effort is seen by the end of the year, let alone the employment explosion he predicts.

“I think these estimates are overly optimistic,” said Arpitha Bykere, a senior analyst with RGE Monitor.

It’s not optimism, it’s a lie. A lie to extract more money from the American taxpayer under flim-flamming false pretenses.

After extracting trillions of dollars for the Dimocrats 2010 election slush fund disguised as “stimulus” Obama now pretends to be responsible with the too late – pay as you go “paygo” mask:

Obama urged passage of so-called “pay-go” legislation that would require any new tax cut or automatic spending program to be paid for within the budget. [snip]

Entitlement increases and tax cuts need to be paid for. They are not free,” said Obama, who has been criticized by Republicans for proposing a hefty domestic agenda that includes overhauling the health care system, bolstering education and tackling global climate change.

The White House has forecast a budget deficit for this year of $1.84 trillion, or 12.9 percent of gross domestic product. [snip]

Surging deficits have also become an increasing concern for financial markets. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke last week issued a warning about risks to the economy of large deficits, which drive up long-term interest rates.

As Senator Kent Conrad, a Democrat warned about “paygo” “It can prevent the passage of new legislation that would worsen the deficit, but it does not address the deficits and debt projected under existing policy.”

Indeed, Obama who wasted trillions that would have been better spent on a HOLC type program or genuine universal health care already has declared his intention to pay for his ill conceived health care plans with more deficit spending.

President Barack Obama on Tuesday proposed budget rules that would allow Congress to borrow tens of billions of dollars and put the nation deeper in debt to jump-start the administration’s emerging health care overhaul.

The “pay-as-you-go” budget formula plan is significantly weaker than a proposal Obama issued with little fanfare last month.

It would carve out about $2.5 trillion worth of exemptions for Obama’s priorities over the next decade. His health care reform plan also would get a green light to run big deficits in its early years. But over a decade, Congress would have to come up with money to cover those early year deficits.

Obama will use his “paygo” proposals to further weaken Social Security while allowing exemptions for his pet projects which will somehow eventually have to be paid somehow, somewhere, sometime.

Last month Obama suggested a tougher plan that would prohibit Congress from swelling the deficit in one year by putting off until later years the tax increases or spending cuts to pay for it.

The requirement for legislation to be financed over the coming decade generally mirrors existing congressional rules and reflects the likelihood that Obama’s health care plan will add many billions of dollars to the deficit in the early years. Savings and revenues in later years would have to make up for the initial deficits.

Bill Clinton presided over a strong economy which observed “paygo” rules and each reinforced the other. Obama praises “paygo” without mentioning Bill Clinton even as Obama violates responsible economic principles. Senator Conrad is not fooled.

The plan faces far tougher sledding in the Senate, where Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., has expressed serious reservations.

Conrad said Obama’s proposal does nothing about the fiscal perils the country already faces, including deficits that the Congressional Budget Office predicts will average nearly $1 trillion a year over the next decade.

“I remain concerned about the potential effect of this proposal on American farmers, seniors and veterans,” said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.

Obama means to destroy Social Security and Conrad is signaling he is aware of that purpose.

Republicans have replied to Obama’s latest flim-flam:

Republicans said new budget rules ring hollow in the wake of the Obama-championed $787 billion stimulus package and other deficit spending. They said legal limits on appropriations should be put into place as they were in the 1990s, though such “caps” were easily evaded when surpluses appeared.

Republicans, responsible for so much waste after President Bill Clinton performed an economic miracle, are finally getting back to their responsibility rhetoric.

Obama’s disapproval rating on the economy has risen from 30 percent in February to 42 percent, according to a Gallup poll completed May 31. Sensing weakness on a signature issue of Obama’s presidency, congressional Republicans are renewing their criticisms that the stimulus plan has not shown results, only mounting debt.

“This is President Obama’s economy, and his administration must provide results and specifics rather than vague descriptions of success that seem to change by the week,” House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia said. “The administration looks dramatically out of touch as they highlight the creation of temporary summer employment in the face of job losses unseen in decades, record unemployment and massive deficits.”

The irresponsible Bill Clinton impeacher, hypocrite Newt Gingrich, has little credibility even though he is correct when he states that Obama’s economic schemes have “already failed”.


Jut Jaw

Michelle Obama will scowl and sneer at well dressed stylish women in the same way Barack Obama snubbed the experience of Hillary Clinton – both Obama’s despise what they lack and yearn for. But the well dressed will continue to snicker at Michelle’s lurid frocks and the politically aware see Obama’s experience deficit for the vulnerability it is:

Republicans on Capitol Hill think they’ve finally found Barack Obama’s Achilles’ heel: rising public concern about government spending and the federal deficit.

While Obama’s overall job-approval ratings are up over the past month, a Gallup Poll out this week has a 51 percent majority of Americans disapproving of the president’s efforts to control federal spending and a slim 48 percent to 46 percent disapproving of his handling of the federal deficit.[snip]

“This was not an inherited situation. This was a matter entirely of this administration’s and this Democratic leadership’s making,” Cornyn said. “In large part, I believe, 2010 will be a referendum on their performance.”

Some Democrats are being responsible and accountable:

“While I very much favor putting statutory pay-go back on the books, I don’t support waiving pay-go for trillions of dollars of items that I think have to be paid for,” Conrad said Tuesday.

Big Media attacked them and Dimocrats branded them as “the party of “no”‘ – but Republicans were very smart to unanimously vote against Obama’s “stimulus” scam. Americans have been against TARP bailouts for bankers and failed automobile companies as well as the “stimulus” waste.

The Republicans have a strong set of issues for 2010. The issues are Obama’s Deficits in accountability, responsibility, economics and defense of the nation.

Share

116 thoughts on “Barack Obama’s Deficits, Part I

  1. Gunshots at the Holocaust museum today. It appears to be a white supremacist.

    In a related story:

    http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-local_wright_0610jun10,0,7603283.story

    Asked if he had spoken to the president, Wright said: “Them Jews aren’t going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he’ll talk to me in five years when he’s a lame duck, or in eight years when he’s out of office. …

    “They will not let him to talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. … I said from the beginning: He’s a politician; I’m a pastor. He’s got to do what politicians do.”

  2. from previous thread:

    DailyKos: “Today in Congress” by David Waldman points out this meeting:

    Wed., 6/10, 10:30 a.m. House Education & Labor Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee: Examining the Single Payer Health Care Option
    &&&&&&&

    As we recall, the recent Obama gab-fest round table on health care deliberately excluded single-payer proponents, and one doctor (from NJ as I recall) was even jailed for protesting outside that meeting.

  3. DISCONNECT…OR STUPIDITY?

    From the top:
    “A Gallup Poll released Monday showed that though Obama is personally very popular, people are not as happy with his stewardship of parts of the economy. Fifty-one percent disapproved of Obama’s performance controlling federal spending, compared with 45% who approved.”
    &&&&&&&&&

    This reminds me of Bush. “I’m against what he’s doing in Iraq, I don’t like his financial policies, he’s screwing up everything he touches. But I’d love to have a beer with the guy.”

  4. Admin,
    This sums up the situation perfectly.

    “It’s not optimism, it’s a lie. A lie to extract more money from the American taxpayer under flim-flamming false pretenses.”

  5. BTW, did you see the story about Israelis’s insulted by BO showing the soles of his shoes while talking to Bibi?

    Also, Jeremiah has resurfaced and has been quoted as saying, “Them jews aren’t going to let him talk to me.”

    #$#@!

  6. Thanks Admin,

    Things must be really bad if the Republicans are starting to look good. I wonder whether bambie and friends will spin or ignore.

    At the same time, my thoughts and prayers go out to the security guard in critical condition and his family. I hope he pulls through.

  7. HUFFPO LEADS TO THIS INTERESTING DITTY:

    theplumline.whorunsgov.com/president-obama/state-department-hillary-worries-that-release-of-detainee-photos-will-endanger-diplomats/

    The Plum Line
    Greg Sargent’s blog

    State Department: Hillary Worries That Release Of
    Detainee Photos Will Endanger Diplomats
    ===================================

    I noted here yesterday that at a press conference, Senator Lindsey Graham disclosed that Hillary Clinton had privately confided to him that she worried that the release of detainee photos would endanger the security of diplomats abroad.

    It was a striking statement, because it either indicates that Hillary thinks the photos are so shocking that they’ll incite serious violence, or that the Obama administration is trafficking in some rather lurid imagery to justify its continued opposition to their release.

    So I asked State Department spokesperson Ian Kelly if Hillary had told Graham this. He emailed:

    “Normally we don’t comment on private conversations between the Secretary and members of Congress. However, the President himself said the safety of Americans serving overseas “is a clear and compelling reason to not release these particular photos.” Foreign Service personnel — and their families — serve America in virtually every country overseas, and of course Secretary Clinton always has their safety paramount in her mind.”

    That’s not quite confirmation, but it’s basically an endorsement of Graham’s version of what he was told. It’s also confirmation that Hillary claims to view the release of the photos as a potential danger to diplomats and their families. It’s interesting that Hillary is privately reassuring GOP members of Congress about the Obama administration’s opposition to the release. And it won’t sit well with civil libertarians and liberals who think the Obama administration is exaggerating the danger in a big way.

  8. I have not had time to catch up on previous thread so sorry if this is a repeat.

    In reference to the shooting at the HOLOCOST Museum in Washingtin DC, Shepard Smith on FOX said that we should stop asking for BO’s birth certificate and if he is a Muslim and he’s not said Smith.

    This crime is about hate of Jewish people…why in the world does everything no matter how related OR NOT ends up ALWAYS being about Barack Obama?

  9. Southern Born Says:

    June 10th, 2009 at 4:32 pm

    ———————–

    I agree. What has one to do with the other?

  10. Obama is taking the USA and the Democratic party backwards…

    Bill Clinton left the USA and the dems in such great shape…the future was bright…and then…

    nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

    from the NYT…

    The story of today’s deficits starts in January 2001, as President Bill Clinton was leaving office. The Congressional Budget Office estimated then that the government would run an average annual surplus of more than $800 billion a year from 2009 to 2012. Today, the government is expected to run a $1.2 trillion annual deficit in those years.

    You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, President George W. Bush’s policies, policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.

    The first category – the business cycle – accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It’s a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.

    About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.

    Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies – together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama – account for 20 percent of the swing.

    …it goes on…and on…and on…

  11. Scholars of the middle ages used to wonder how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

    That is of couse an imponderable.

    My vista is much smaller. The question that vexes me is whether that scowl is natural or cosmetically enhanced.

    One thing I know for sure is it is permanent. It shows up every time she forgets where she is.

  12. Wbboei, “every time she forgets where she is” and that she is being watched – just like hubby.

  13. -On Monday, Letterman “joked” that 14-year-old Willow Palin was “knocked up” by Alex Rodriguez during a baseball game.

    Last night, he associated Willow Palin with Eliot Spitzer and prostitution.

    When will the disgusting sexism stop? I have been totally disgusted with they way MSNBC David Schuster said Hillary was “pimping out” Chelsea, and now Palin’s 14 year old daughter essentially getting raped by 2 adult men?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5g8kE_g-YA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16ks_TcaOUs

    When do we draw the line and REALLY fight for women’s rights here?

    Call CBS and let them know your disgust. Call CBS: 212-975-4321

    Here are their sponsors.

    TV.com
    On The Border Restaurants
    Best Western
    Intel
    CBSports.com
    JohnFreida.com
    DiTech
    Lexus
    Earn My Degree
    True Credit by TransUnion
    Lifelock
    Bowflex
    Mars Candy
    Capitol One
    LasikPlus
    Embassy Suites
    EBay
    ancestry.com

    Here are statements from the Palin’s:

    “Any ‘jokes’ about raping my 14-year-old are despicable. Alaskans know it and I believe the rest of the world knows it, too.”

    – Todd Palin

    “Concerning Letterman’s comments about my young daughter (and I doubt he’d ever dare make such comments about anyone else’s daughter): ‘Laughter incited by sexually-perverted comments made by a 62-year-old male celebrity aimed at a 14-year-old girl is not only disgusting, but it reminds us some Hollywood/NY entertainers have a long way to go in understanding what the rest of America understands – that acceptance of inappropriate sexual comments about an underage girl, who could be anyone’s daughter, contribute to the atrociously high rate of sexual exploitation of minors by older men who use and abuse others.'”

    – Governor Sarah Palin

  14. -On Monday, Letterman “joked” that 14-year-old Willow Palin was “knocked up” by Alex Rodriguez during a baseball game.

    Last night, he associated Willow Palin with Eliot Spitzer and prostitution.

    When will the disgusting sexism stop? I have been totally disgusted with they way MSNBC David Schuster said Hillary was “pimping out” Chelsea, and now Palin’s 14 year old daughter essentially getting raped by 2 adult men?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5g8kE_g-YA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16ks_TcaOUs

    When do we draw the line and REALLY fight for women’s rights here?

    Call CBS and let them know your disgust. Call CBS: 212-975-4321

    Here are their sponsors.

    TV.com
    On The Border Restaurants
    Best Western
    Intel
    CBSports.com
    JohnFreida.com
    DiTech
    Lexus
    Earn My Degree
    True Credit by TransUnion
    Lifelock
    Bowflex
    Mars Candy
    Capitol One
    LasikPlus
    Embassy Suites
    EBay
    ancestry.com

    Here are statements from the Palin’s:

    “Any ‘jokes’ about raping my 14-year-old are despicable. Alaskans know it and I believe the rest of the world knows it, too.”

    – Todd Palin

    “Concerning Letterman’s comments about my young daughter (and I doubt he’d ever dare make such comments about anyone else’s daughter): ‘Laughter incited by sexually-perverted comments made by a 62-year-old male celebrity aimed at a 14-year-old girl is not only disgusting, but it reminds us some Hollywood/NY entertainers have a long way to go in understanding what the rest of America understands – that acceptance of inappropriate sexual comments about an underage girl, who could be anyone’s daughter, contribute to the atrociously high rate of sexual exploitation of minors by older men who use and abuse others.'”

    – Governor Sarah Palin

  15. Any experts with cut and paste?

    a single photo with HIS and HER Scowl picture should be sent everywhere…….

  16. Mp we’d love for someone to compile a photo essay of “the many scowls” of Michelle.

    We thought the his and her scowls were interesting so we got that done. We’ve also done the many snubs of B.O. (though that article probably needs to be updated with new snubs).

  17. http://gawker.com/5285064/yahoo-nukes-mans-photos-over-obama-comments

    Flickr user Shepherd Johnson was browsing the official White House photostream one night when he decided to post a politically-charged comment. Then another, then another. Soon, without warning, Yahoo’s photo-sharing service deleted his account, complete with 1,200 pictures.

    An unrepentant Yahoo won’t say what, exactly, Johnson did wrong. His comments were about Barack Obama’s support of a bill allowing the government to suppress torture photos. They were attached to seemingly relevant images from the president’s recent trip to Cairo to ring in a new era of U.S.-Middle Eastern relations.

    “I thought, this is an opportunity I can use to let the administration know how I feel about some of its policies,” Johnson told us in a phone interview.

    The Virginia man’s initial 10 or so comments, which went up Wednesday night, were deleted without explanation by Friday. That night, Johnson posted roughly ten more to different White House photos, this time linking in another Flickr user’s Abu Ghraib picture, as allowed by Flickr’s comment formatting (see Johnson’s reproduction of his comment, left, taken from his post to freedom-of-information hub Cryptome).

    In the midst of this second round of commenting, Johnson found his account was gone. There had been no warning of any sort from Yahoo, he said. Johnson would later work his way up Flickr’s customer service tree, eventually leaving a message for the vice president of customer service and other bigwigs. He even left a message for Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz — a noted fan of frank discourse — on Bartz’s home answering machine.

  18. Letterman has outlived his usefulness for Late Nite comic relief. Time for him to shove off and go to the ‘Tired Has Been’s Home’ for uncomedic retirees.

    wbb-

    watched “Rollover” last night. Amazing coincidence, the Saudi’s withdrawing 100s of Billions from Banks worldwide within a 24hr period leading to a hypothetical Banking crisis similar to what we have now, depicted in a movie made in the early 80s.

    Makes you want to go hmm!

  19. This is in response to Mrs. Smith’s comment on the last thread, but I think Hillary looked good in her interview with Steph. Here’s a pic:

    allthingshillaryclinton.blogspot.com/2009/06/exclusive-interview-with-secretary-of.html

  20. Carol Says:

    June 10th, 2009 at 6:16 pm

    ————————-

    How very tragic and sad. A worthy life ended because of cruelty and hatred.

  21. S, if we were supposed to have 800 billion budget surplus from 09′ to 12′ thanks to BC, then I am right and Bush was sent to begin the destruction of the government and Obama is sent to finish it off.

  22. A friend of mine who has excellent insight into the current situation concurs with my conclusion that it not a bad thing but a good thing that Bambi assigned to Hillary the task of making a QUALITATIVE assessment of Israels military superiority pursuant to pre-existing law. My friend made three salient observations on point:

    1. first, bambi blew it with that gadfly/gassbag speech. Israeli leaders do not trust him. And the suspicion is much broader now than just the Likkud Party. He cannot unring that bell.

    2. second, as a result, they must try to establish some degree of trust. Hillary was chosen to open a dialogue because she is trusted by Israels leaders, whereas Bambi and Gates are not.

    3. third, the statute requires a “qualitative” assessment only. In other words not a quantitative one. She can work with the Israelis now to develop an assessment which is acceptable to the Israelis, does not compromise their security and responsive to the requrements of the statute.

  23. Did not see or hear any news about “Rev” Wright latest comments on MSM this evening. I thought for sure he would be in “worst person of the world” category, but no. This man was like a father to Obama….It’ll be interesting to see if Obama, like Mel Gibson, reveals his true self in the future.

  24. So, as he does not make good on significant group promises, and as he continues to miss his estimaes, we are going toward a cliff again.

    If our Economy continues to faulter, and our debt continue to grow, the Decision for the Reps is easy, Romney. Then the SuperDuds, who did not understand the last time around what this country needed, will select O again and the Reps will be back in power and running the country again.

  25. I spoke to a friend this afternoon who has excellent insight into the current situation. Here is how she reads the situtation with respect to the Isaeli military capability assessment required by statute/

    1. first, bambi has blown his personal credibilty with senior Israeli officials by that speech and his actions leading up to it.

    2. second, the Administation must attempt to restore credibility. Hillary has that credibility therefore she was chosen because those Israeli officials trust her.

    3. third, all that is called for here is a qualitative assessment as opposed to a quantitative one. Thus it would not be harmful to Israeli security interests if Bambi schlepped it to his Saudi handlers.

    4. fourth, this assignment gives her the opportunity to forge personal bonds with Israeli leaders, she can confer with them and issue a report which is responsive to the statute, and to Israeli security concerns.

  26. If our Economy continues to faulter, and our debt continue to grow, the Decision for the Reps is easy, Romney. Then the SuperDuds, who did not understand the last time around what this country needed, will select O again and the Reps will be back in power and running the country again.
    ———————————
    If he fails to solve the economy, he needs to not run again. That is when Hillary should emerge.

  27. White House Picks New Leader for GM Who Has Interesting Things to Say About the Business

    Wednesday, June 10, 2009

    By Bret Baier

    When General Motors emerges from bankruptcy proceedings, a former chief executive officer at AT&T will take over. But Edward Whitaker tells Bloomberg News: “I don’t know anything about cars… I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.”

    The 67-year-old Whitaker says the administration contacted him weeks ago about coming out of retirement and running a company that has lost almost $88 billion since 2004. And while the Treasury Department says he is well-qualified, not everyone is buying it. Telecom industry analyst Victor Schnee calls his appointment, “bizarre… the guy accomplished a number of things in telecom and we all thought the book was closed. What happened was that wireless came along and created one of the most amazing growth markets in the world, and therefore bailed out sinking ships like Verizon and AT&T.”

    foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525753,00.html

  28. Likud MKs: Leave ‘two states’ out speech

    Jun. 11, 2009
    Gil Hoffman , THE JERUSALEM POST

    Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu faced a counterweight to the pressure on him from Washington to agree to the formation of a Palestinian state when he met with Likud MKs at the Prime Minister’s Office on Wednesday.

    Every MK who spoke at the meeting pleaded with him not to utter the catchphrase “two states for two peoples” when he delivered his policy address on Sunday at Bar-Ilan University. The MKs reminded him of statements he made at a Likud central committee meeting in 2002, in which he warned against the dangers of even a demilitarized Palestinian state, and urged him, “Don’t found a Palestinian state at Bar-Ilan.”

    Netanyahu declined to reveal the content of his speech to the MKs and spoke in only general terms. He denied statements from Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak that he had already decided to endorse the formation of a Palestinian state in the speech. But he did hint that he would use the threat of a nuclear Iran to justify additional steps to meet US President Barack Obama’s demands.

    “I will be considering a lot of challenges that come from different directions, [and] that will impact generations,” Netanyahu told the MKs in the closed-door meeting. “There are strategic threats facing Israel that require us to balance them out.”

    At the same time that they were meeting in Jerusalem, Minister-without-Portfolio Bennie Begin fiercely criticized the two-state solution in an address to veteran Likud activists at the party’s Tel Aviv headquarters. “There won’t be a Palestinian state,” Begin said emphatically. “The realities of the past 15 years gravely harmed the concept of two states for two peoples. The state they want is only intended to destroy Israel. The Palestinians are not interested in the two-state solution. They want the two-stage solution, after which there would be only one state: Palestine.”

    Recalling what Israel offered the Palestinians in Oslo, Camp David and most recently in former prime minister Ehud Olmert’s talks with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Begin said “it is crazy to try the same thing that hasn’t worked over and over again.” He quoted former PA prime minister Ahmed Qurei, who said in a recent interview that Abbas had rejected Olmert’s offer of a Palestinian state in 98 percent of the West Bank plus a land swap of more than 2% of pre-1967 Israel, because “the gaps were too wide.”

    Begin said this was proof the Palestinians would never accept any deal. He added that the Palestinians refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state because they intended to keep the Palestinian refugee issue alive after a Palestinian state was formed in order to destroy Israel from within. Despite repeated attempts from the crowd, Begin refused to answer questions about Netanyahu or the content of his speech, or to insult Obama. “America is our friend, and we have to persuade our friends when they are wrong,” Begin said.

    But fellow Likud MK Miri Regev did lash out at Obama at Netanyahu’s meeting with his party members. She said Netanyahu had to correct Obama’s mistakes in last Thursday’s speech in Cairo, such as hinting that Israel had been formed because of the Holocaust, and not mentioning the Jews’ ties to the Land of Israel going back to the time of Abraham. Regev brought polls showing that Obama’s support was falling in the US and that Americans wanted him to support Israel and not the Arabs. “The American people understand what makes sense,” Regev said. “Reach out to them and remind them of the result of our withdrawal from Gaza.”

    MK Danny Dannon, the most hawkish Likud MK, advised Netanyahu to mention a Palestinian entity instead of a state and to call for “development” and not “natural growth” in the West Bank, because he did not want America to start counting Jewish births in Judea and Samaria.

    Deputy Negev and Galilee Development Minister Ayoub Kara added that Netanyahu must know that if he surrendered to pressure from the Left and accepted a Palestinian state, they would only attack him further for giving in to them.

    The closest thing to an endorsement of a Palestinian state in the meeting came when dovish MK Carmel Shama told Netanyahu, “You are the leader, and you can say whatever you want in your speech.”

    Prior to Netanyahu’s meeting with the MKs, Likud activists from Judea and Samaria came to the Knesset to lobby the party’s legislators to oppose a Palestinian state.

    Earlier at the Knesset, Defense Minister Ehud Barak called on Netanyahu to publicly embrace the road map and accept Obama’s Middle East peace initiative. Speaking to junior high school students at the parliament, Barak said that Labor had joined the coalition based on the understanding that Netanyahu was committed to previous agreements and would see it as his duty to promote the peace process. He told the students that he hoped Netanyahu would say “things that will allow us to continue on the path laid down by Obama,” during his speech. “You know the government is made up of several parties. Our party, the Labor party, joined the government, among other reasons, because we agreed that this government would abide by all agreements made by previous governments,” he said. “That’s why we think we should clearly state that we commend President Obama’s initiative, that we are committed to the road map and that we want two states for two peoples – all this without compromising on our security concerns.” Barak also referred to Obama’s recent speech to the Arab world from Cairo. “We may not like every word, and maybe if one of you or me had written it, we would have written it in a way which emphasizes our place here in Israel and in history,” he said. “But it was still a speech made in Cairo and intended for the Arab world, and it was important because he still told them important things about our place here and about the need to abandon the path of violence and make peace.”

    Moving on to the Iranian nuclear issue, Barak said it was “a very serious threat, and all indicators show they are building a nuclear weapon. They are trying to hide it by saying they only want to build power plants. It is their right to claim this, but it is a bit of a funny claim when they have a lot of oil and produce some three million oil barrels a day. They hide their [nuclear] program behind a civilian program and that’s why it’s very hard to prove [they are building nuclear weapons]. “Now the Obama administration has said it wants to talk to the Iranians, try a ‘good’ approach, as they say. We can’t tell them, ‘Don’t do it,’ but we say we believe this dialogue should be short and to the point and that they shouldn’t let the Iranians fool them and string them along,” he continued. “When we [in Israel] said we were not taking any options off the table, it’s like a hint that we are also considering other things, without talking about them, and we mean it. But because there are cameras and recording equipment here, I cannot say any more than that.”

    jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244371065693&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

  29. wbboei

    Unfortunately, O has such a big ego, no ability to see his faults, and confidence that he can manufacture the vote, he is probably incapable of not running again.

    He will only backdown if the party makes the decision to desert him. Unfortunatley, they too think he can manufacture the vote (he has Acorn).

    It will be interesting to watch.

  30. If I had to bet, Bibi is going to cave……Obama is using tactics Israel never thought American Jews/politicians would stand by and permit. Like Hillary, they failed to recognize how Obama and his pals get things dome their way/

  31. A scene from The Godfather Netanyahu should remember:

    Clemenza: Pretty goddam bad. Probably all the other Families will line up against us. That’s all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with that, they was just asking for trouble.

  32. C’mon, guys. I really think this site has jumped the shark, and it’s time for us all to move on. Barack is the president, and Hillary will be president in 2016 and possibly VP even before then if Joe doesn’t want to go through a re-election campaign.

    I was as angry as you guy all through the campaign and didn’t know how to vote until I walked in the booth. I ended up writing in Hillary’s name because I was so angry about the misrepresentation and blatant favoritism shown by the media.

    So now. What do we do? What is the point of tearing him down? Would you prefer he fail? Would you prefer the republicans rule? Really? It is what it is. I love Hillary, but she didn’t win, fair or not. We have a president.

  33. rickroberts Says:

    June 10th, 2009 at 10:52 pm

    —————————-

    You have every right to your beliefs as do the rest of us. However, by not providing constructive critiques of any politician’s actions, president or not, how does that make us any better than the unethical media who are also giving him a free ride?

  34. However, by not providing constructive critiques of any politician’s actions, president or not, how does that make us any better than the unethical media who are also giving him a free ride?
    *************
    Exactly…I bitched about Bush for eight years and supported candidates who apposed his destructive agenda. Obama is worse than Bush. If you don’t realize that then you aren’t doing any research into his agenda. The best way for you to get educated is to donate to the ACLU and get on their mailing list. You are right on one point, with Obama as President, there is no obvious path to correct the nightmare of what will be 12 years of terrible Presidential leadership.

  35. Paula Says:
    June 10th, 2009 at 8:09 pm

    Yes, Paula- She looks great in the picture you posted. I probably saw a typically unflattering pic of her at the Strep interview posted by the media.

    (uh-huh, thats a deliberate spelling error- when i saw it, i liked it)

  36. rickroberts

    Sorry, you don’t get over your vote not counting in the primary or the general election. That is what a Democracy is based on. HE DID NOT WIN, AND YOUR ACTIONS AND WORDS ARE LETTING HIM GET AWAY WITH IT. Rick, you have the right to fold in if you want to, and we have the right to continue to pursue a democracy.

  37. NewMexicoFan Says:

    June 10th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
    wbboei

    Unfortunately, O has such a big ego, no ability to see his faults, and confidence that he can manufacture the vote, he is probably incapable of not running again.

    He will only backdown if the party makes the decision to desert him. Unfortunatley, they too think he can manufacture the vote (he has Acorn).

    It will be interesting to watch.

    **********************************

    it is way beyond his ego at this point…remember how they did away with the ‘clinton machine’…the Obama crew has no intention of letting anyone dislodge them in any way…no matter what…this is what is so frightening about these people…they intend to OVERPOWER anyone that gets in their way…and if that means other dems…they don’t care…manipulation is their game…

  38. I think we’ve been Rick Roll’d .. oh, wait-

    Admin: whenever you have a minute:

    youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

  39. rickroberts:

    yes … I would prefer a republican president over BO ANY DAY……anybody but “THAT ZERO”

  40. it is way beyond his ego at this point…remember how they did away with the ‘clinton machine’…the Obama crew has no intention of letting anyone dislodge them in any way…no matter what…this is what is so frightening about these people…they intend to OVERPOWER anyone that gets in their way…and if that means other dems…they don’t care…manipulation is their game…
    ———————————————–
    Please. You must not take such a morbid view of the prospects. The political winds are always changing. What looks like a sure think at one time becomes a dead duck a year later. Suppose a year from now we have high unemployment and inflation. Do you really think Bambi can hold on to power under those circumstances. What if a centrist party formed. What if non-African people came to the voting polls with the means to not be intimidated by nightstick wielding thugs Holder wont do anything about, what if there was a massive march of unemployed in Washington, etc. You have to consider all the implications of an economic meltdown and a permanently unemployed workforce. We are heading into a storm and nothing is forseeable except that Bambis numbers are falling and will continue to do so. Keep the faith.

  41. So now. What do we do? What is the point of tearing him down? Would you prefer he fail?
    ————————————–
    Yes. If you believe as I do that his policies are those of a dictator, then by all means I hope he fails. I think the future of the country depends on him failing. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you bot.

  42. When it comes to the damage Mr Obama is doing to our economy and our life savings and the value of the dollar the indictment can be separated into several parts, and broke down further from there.

    1. Bush policies he adopted

    2. Tarp monies he forced banks to accept

    3. The Government Motors bail out

    4. The Stimulus Slush Fund

    5. Michelle’s mad money (cosmetics and 40 k dates in NY)

    6. Massachusetts health care program

    7. Doubling money supply

  43. To use a word Obama loves to use–the damage he is doing to our economy is “irreversible”. The interest on the stimulus slush fund alone is $300 billion.

  44. rickroberts…rickroberts. That name sound familiar. Are you the same rickroberts who posted here a bit last year…spent some growing up years along the delta of northeast Arkansas?

  45. More Islamic Fundamentalist fanatacism
    from assyrian Internatiopnal news Agency, June 7, 2009.
    Again I ask, does anyone EVER hear of similar stories involving Christians of jews forcing their religion on others?

    Cairo (AINA) — In another incident of abduction and forced Islamization of Coptic minor girls, 16-year old Nermeen Mitry was abducted by a Muslim man to coerce her into converting to Islam. She was successfully recovered on the same day by her family, who did their own investigation and search to locate her.

    Nermeen was abducted from El-Mahalla by Muslim Hossam Hamouda in conspiracy with his aunt Leila Attia; she was hidden away by a third person called Nasser Abu Deif from Assuit in Upper Egypt, at the home of one of his female relatives called Rasha Soliman in Zagazig.

    The success of recovering the Coptic girl led to anger, revenge and assaults from the disappointed village Muslims against her family. Nearly 150 Muslims, armed with swords and clubs, physically assaulted five family members of the abducted Coptic teenager, as they drove back to their village after being forced into reconciliation with the abductor’s family by State Security, compromising their right to pursue the case any further. “With every blow on us, they chanted ‘There is only one Allah’ while the Police stood there watching the assault, until we could take no more and three of us were hospitalized,” said Nermeen’s uncle Sameh Mitry in an aired interview with Coptic News on 6/7/2009. “They dragged us out of the car saying “Get out you followers of the Dog’s religion!’ They were consumed with anger ever since we got our girl back.”

  46. “The interest on the stimulus slush fund alone is $300 billion.”

    ——————————-

    I was just thinking about all those times during the primary when a frustrated Hillary asked the same question over and over again: How was he going to pay for all of his empty promises? Where was the money going to come from?

    No wonder he was so reluctant to explain. And no wonder Hillary knew exactly what he was planning.

  47. Juanes asks Clinton support for anti-landmine campaign

    Thursday, 11 June 2009

    Colombian singer Juanes Monday met with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to ask support for his campaign against anti-personnel mines in Colombia.

    Juanes — chairman of the Mi Sangre foundation that seeks to help victims of landmines and combat the illegal use of the explosives — reportedly also talked to Clinton about his plans for a second Peace without Borders concert that he organizes with Spanish singer Miguel Bose.

    Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere, Thomas Shannon and a number of Congressmen were was also present at the meeting to hear the Colombian about his humanitarian work.

    “All expressed their support for Juanes and his intentions to use music as a way to spread the message of peace,” Juanes’ manager told newspaper El Tiempo.

    colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/4492-juanes-asks-clinton-support-for-anti-landmine-campaign.html

  48. Clinton adopts low-key style at State Dept.

    By Ken Dilanian, USA TODAY

    SAN PEDRO SULA, Honduras — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton won a small diplomatic victory here recently. Few Americans are likely to have heard about it.

    The issue was Cuba, and the details were arcane. Clinton and her team, in negotiations on the sidelines of the Organization of American States assembly, persuaded 33 other governments not to allow Cuba back into the OAS without a process that respects the group’s charter language on democracy.

    It wasn’t easy. Most of the assembly, frustrated with the USA’s desire to isolate Cuba, wanted to lift the 1962 suspension without conditions. Ted Piccone, a Latin America expert at the Brookings Institution, called it “a great win for the State Department.”

    Clinton wasn’t around to mark the occasion, however. She left before the deal was reached for Cairo, where she sat in the audience applauding President Obama’s address to the Muslim world. Media coverage of that speech eclipsed the few news accounts about Clinton’s efforts in Latin America.

    If that sort of dynamic bothers Clinton, she hasn’t let it show. A year after conceding the Democratic nomination to Obama, and four months after becoming his secretary of State, the former first lady and New York senator has settled into her next act: a supporting role as the top diplomat for a president who is his own global ambassador. “I feel very much in the center of helping to devise the policies, carry out the policies, pick the people who will implement the policies,” Clinton tells USA TODAY during an interview in El Salvador. “I see the president every week. We spend a lot of time talking.”

    Clinton says she had no inkling Obama would ask her to be secretary of State. She resisted, “but the president is very persuasive.” The decision was “a difficult transition in some respects, because I never even dreamed of it.” She took the job in challenging times, to say the least: Among her tasks is to stop Iran’s nuclear program, curb Pakistan’s Islamic insurgency, preserve post-war Iraq as U.S. troops leave there, and help new U.S. forces in Afghanistan with civilian projects. Clinton also has to deal with an unpredictable, nuclear-armed regime in North Korea, which sentenced two U.S. journalists to 12 years hard labor this week and continued saber-rattling in the face of new U.N. sanctions.

    How Clinton and the Obama administration will fare in dealing with those thorny problems is unclear. But so far, even Republicans give Clinton high marks for tackling management challenges at the State Department, using her political skills to boost the USA’s image abroad and avoiding signs of tension between her circle and the White House. The “team of rivals” story line, much discussed when Clinton was first appointed, hasn’t played out.

    In Washington, Clinton has been “one of the less visible secretaries of State in recent history,” says Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi of the Israel Project, a pro-Israel advocacy group. Obama has been his own foreign policy spokesman, sometimes with Clinton standing quietly behind him. Some days, one of the many special envoys gets more attention than she does. Clinton made her first Sunday morning news show appearance as secretary of State just a week ago.

    Don’t be fooled by appearances, Vice President Biden says: Clinton is making a difference behind the scenes. “I think (the president) listens to her as much or more than anybody,” Biden tells USA TODAY. “She’s the main player … the one he looks to give the last wind-up pitch about what should be done.” Biden says Clinton’s view prevailed over his own during a policy debate about sending additional troops to Afghanistan. Biden declined to go into details, but Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., a Naval Reserve officer with contacts at the State Department and Pentagon, says Biden opposed sending 21,000 additional troops and Clinton favored it.

    “It turned into Biden vs. Hillary, and she crushed him,” Kirk says. Biden calls that an exaggeration and says their differences were small. “It is true that Hillary was very forceful, I had some disagreement in degree with her … and the president ended up landing on a spot that was where she was.”

    Kirk, who is on the subcommittee that oversees the State Department, calls Clinton “the superstar of the Cabinet. Everything she touches is well run.”

    Grunt work and budgets

    Much as she did in 2001, when she first entered the U.S. Senate and was establishing herself in that position, Clinton is spending part of her time on what amounts to grunt work. Though traveling frequently, she’s also focused on securing a big budget increase to hire more diplomats and pushing to overhaul the way the USA distributes foreign aid, a subject full of pitfalls.

    “The fact she is not in the headlines every day not only doesn’t seem to be bothering her. She looks maybe the happiest she’s seemed in her entire career,” says Kristen Lord, a fellow at the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank with ties to the Obama administration.

    During her Senate confirmation hearings, Clinton promised to harness what foreign policy wonks call “smart power” — U.S. economic and cultural influence — to make diplomacy “the vanguard of our foreign policy.” She assembled a senior team at State that is a mix of political aides and career diplomats. Her chief of staff is Cheryl Mills, a longtime confidante who defended President Clinton during his impeachment trial. She kept Russia specialist Bill Burns as undersecretary for political affairs.

    With the help of Jack Lew, a one-time budget director under President Bill Clinton whom she brought on as deputy secretary for management, Clinton got the administration to seek a 10% increase in the foreign affairs budget, enough to boost aid and hire thousands more diplomats. That could end up being her biggest legacy, Lord and others say.

    It’s also made Clinton very popular among State’s 57,000 employees, says John Naland, head of the union for diplomats.

    Despite their differences in the primary, Clinton hasn’t hesitated to adopt the positions of her boss. When a Republican congressman reminded her during an April hearing that she had criticized Obama for pledging to meet with rogue leaders — the context was Obama shaking hands with Venezuela president Hugo Chavez— she replied, “President Obama won the election. He beat me in a primary in which he put forth a different approach.”

    The big picture

    Clinton says it was her idea to appoint special envoys for Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Middle East peace process, Iran and North Korea. They didn’t have to be confirmed by the Senate, so they could get to work immediately. The envoys free Clinton to focus on the big picture — and also on different parts of the world. “She doesn’t feel in any way squeezed or threatened by them,” says Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution and a Clinton friend. “She understands that these are monster problems, and while she has not shied away from being involved in them, it’s just plain smart for her not to role up her sleeves and do the week-in, week-out work that’s required there.”

    Says Biden: “It’s clear to everybody that the envoys work for her.” With the envoys in the hottest spots, Clinton has focused some of her travel in overlooked areas such as Latin American and East Asia. On those trips, she has set a new tone. She often acknowledges what she sees as past mistakes by the United States — to the delight of her audience. And she’s booked a series of campaign-style public appearances that she calls “people-to-people” diplomacy, an effort to shore up the flagging U.S. image.

    On her first trip to Asia, for example, she held town hall meetings with students in Tokyo and Seoul and appeared on a popular Indonesian teen television show called “Awesome.” “There is a hunger for the United States to be present again,” Clinton told reporters during the trip. “Showing up is not all of life — but it counts for a lot.”

    Fixing foreign aid

    After spending eight years as a senator, Clinton has been unusually blunt for a diplomat. She made headlines in April when she said Pakistan had “abdicated” to the Taliban (she now praises the government’s military assault on the radical group), drawing criticism from the Pakistani author Ahmed Rashid, who wrote that her remark “provoked increasing anti-Americanism in the Pakistani army and public.” Clinton says her comment, designed to send a message, spurred Pakistan to action.

    Clinton has also spoken frankly about what Talbott and others say could become a major focus of her tenure: Her desire to overhaul the uncoordinated and often ineffective American foreign assistance programs, many of which are delivered through private contractors.

    During the campaign, Obama promised to double foreign aid to $50 billion a year by 2012. But Clinton acknowledges that the main aid agency, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) — which she oversees — is straining to manage the huge contracts it administers. On her plane to Europe in March, she told reporters that aid programs in Afghanistan spent billions with little to show for it. Among her entourage on the aircraft were two top USAID officials who had worked as Afghanistan country directors during the Bush administration.

    “We have to hold ourselves accountable. We owe it to the American taxpayer,” Clinton tells USA TODAY. “We can’t go to people who have lost their job at GM and say, ‘Oh, by the way, we are going to pay money to build a road here or inoculate children there,’ unless we can demonstrate that it is in America’s interest. I happen to think it is. … But we’ve got to make sure that it is delivered effectively and that we can justify it.”

    She adds: “I want to rebuild USAID. I want to see it become again the premier aid agency in the world.”

    If the good reviews continue, there will be inevitable speculation about another run for the White House. Clinton would be 69 in 2016 — three years younger than John McCain was last year. “I would be real surprised if she ever ran again,” political analyst Charlie Cook says. “I think that when she took this job, she chose to go a different course. This scratches a different itch.”

    usatoday.com/news/world/2009-06-10-hillary-clinton_N.htm

  49. rickroberts Says:

    June 10th, 2009 at 10:52 pm

    We don’t have a president…we have a usurper and a fraud. If he fails badly enough and quickly enough, perhaps there is a chance for Hillary in 4 years. Otherwise, I fear we will end up with a right wing repug.

  50. I guess when you are as corrupt as the New York Times, you cannot help yourself. In a transparent attempt to exhonerate Bambi they argue that only 20% of the total shortfall incurred since Bill Clinton left office up to this moment can be attributed to Bambi compared to 37% for Bush.

    1. First of all, this is materially misleading. Why? Because it is merely a snapshot of where we are right now. It does not reflect the future cost of the programs which Bambi has adopted, and it fails to reflect the prolifigate cost of the new ones like health care which he fully intends to incur.

    2. Second, it fails to note that it has taken Bambi only four months to incur over half of the costs which Bush incurred over eight years. If you assume the same rate of deficit growth over the same time frame as Bush, the cost increase under this clown will be 184% of what it is now– which is hypothetical as well, but illustative of the problem.

    3. Third, it says nothing about the context. It is one thing to incur debt when the economy is expanding, quite another to do so when it is contracting. That is what Babi is doing. He is acting like a drunken Santa Clause buying everything in sight with somebody elses credit card while the corrupt New York Times tries to bamboozle us, with false palliatives like this one.

  51. State Department Won’t Say Yes or No on Crucial Assurances to Israel

    Thursday, June 11, 2009
    By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

    CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration so far has refused to say whether it is bound by key written assurances President Bush made to Israel five years ago, relating to Jewish settlements in areas demanded by the Palestinians for a future state. Three different State Department spokesmen sidestepped the issue at three separate daily briefings last week, refusing multiple times to provide a simple yes or no answer to the question: Is Bush’s letter to then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, dated Apr. 14, 2004, binding on the Obama administration?

    Jewish advocacy groups are calling for an unambiguous response.

    For Israel the matter is crucial: It was largely on the basis of assurances contained in that letter that Sharon moved ahead with the plan to withdraw from the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2005, uprooting 9,000 Israelis living there in the process.

    Among other issues, the letter touched on the future boundaries of Israel once an envisaged Palestinian state is established in line with the so-called “two-state solution.” “In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949,” Bush wrote, adding that “all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion.” “It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities,” he continued.

    (The 1949 armistice lines, also known as the pre-June 1967 lines, are essentially the borders of Israel today excluding the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The lines held until the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel captured those three areas from Egypt, Jordan and Syria respectively.)

    The Bush letter makes it clear that the U.S. does not expect Israel to dismantle all Jewish communities in the West Bank – the area known by Israelis as Judea-Samaria, the country’s biblical “heartland.”

    The implication of Bush’s words is that the boundaries of a Palestinian state in a “realistic” final Israeli-Palestinian peace deal will therefore fall short of the entire West Bank. That stance has held by every Israeli government since the Oslo Accords were signed.

    But if the U.S. government recognizes the continued existence of Jewish settlements into the future, then the question of “natural growth” springs to the fore: Israel has long argued that no town’s inhabitants can reasonably be prohibited from building new homes to accommodate a naturally growing population.

    The communities in question would include towns like Maaleh Adumim and Modiin Illit, each with populations exceeding 30,000. Beitar Illit’s population is just a little smaller while more than 16,000 people have built a thriving town in Ariel. More than 280,000 Israelis live in towns and villages built in Judea-Samaria over the past 40 years.

    A former chief of staff to Sharon said recently that the prime minister and Bush had reached understandings permitting Israel to continue natural growth construction within the boundaries of existing communities. (Sharon himself has been in a coma since 2006.)

    As the State Department declines to answer direct questions about whether the Bush letter is binding, they and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are insisting that the focus be on the 2003 Mideast “roadmap.” The roadmap incorporates a recommendation, first made by a panel chaired by Sen. George Mitchell in 2001, that Israel should “freeze all settlement activity, including the ‘natural growth’ of existing settlements.” Israel refused to agree to a total freeze on settlement construction in the roadmap, however.
    Clinton has said on several occasions in recent months that there will be no exceptions for natural growth in settlements. She told ABC News at the weekend that a Bush-Sharon understanding permitting natural growth “was never made a part of the official record of the negotiations as it was passed on to our administration.”

    Congressional backing

    The Bush letter was endorsed by both Houses of Congress in June 2004. The House of Representatives by a 407-9 vote passed a resolution saying it “strongly endorses the principles articulated by President Bush in his letter dated April 14, 2004, to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon which will strengthen the security and well-being of the State of Israel.” The Senate then passed a resolution, 95-3, which like the House measure incorporated the key sentences from the Bush letter regarding “existing major Israeli population centers” and a “realistic” final settlement.

    Clinton, then senator for New York, voted in favor.

    The Republican Jewish Coalition on Tuesday decried what executive director Matthew Brooks called “a steady, step-by-step withdrawal by the Obama administration from key elements of the U.S.-Israeli alliance.” It urged the administration to provide “a clear and unambiguous answer to the question of whether they will honor the understanding” reached by Bush and Sharon on settlements, noting State Department officials’ repeated recent refusals to address the issue.

    “The president who promised ‘transparency’ in his administration should be forthcoming about his intentions, his position, and his policies regarding these very sensitive issues,” said Brooks. “It is time for a clear and unambiguous answer to the question of whether the U.S. will stand by its past agreements and stand with our ally Israel.”

    The Zionist Organization of America argued that Obama was morally obliged to honor the assurances given by Bush.
    “It is simply inhumane and wholly impractical to prohibit a Jewish son or daughter who marries or moves out of their parents’ home from building a house in the same town as their parents, thus forcing them to live in a town other than the one in which they grew up,” it said last week. “That this sort of measure is to be applied solely to Jews because they are Jews is simply racist and against American values … why can 1.2 million Arabs live among six million Jews within the Green Line, but 300,000 Jews cannot live among two million Arabs in Judea and Samaria?”

    Other important elements of the Bush letter include a U.S. commitment to ensure that Palestinian institutions will “dismantle terrorist organizations.” Bush pledged that the U.S. would “lead efforts” to that end.

    The Palestinian Authority has not dismantled Hamas, Islamic Jihad or the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a terror group affiliated to P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah faction. The Gaza withdrawal was followed in time by a violent Hamas takeover of Gaza, and an increase in rocket attacks against Israeli towns from the strip eventually led to Israel’s controversial military operation last winter.

    cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49447

  52. It is a lifetime exercise in futility try to figure on a case by case basis how the New York Times is distorting the facts, censoring material information, and substituting opinion for objective jouranalilsm. The only practical answer is to ignore them or assume a contrarian position. Their prototypical assumption is not an intelligent reader, but a rather dull unimaginative one eager to take what they say as gospel. In other words, a non-sentient being.

  53. He is acting like a drunken Santa Clause buying everything in sight with somebody elses credit card while the corrupt New York Times tries to bamboozle us, with false palliatives like this one.

    ——————————–

    And yet the teflon armor is still largely intact. The finger pointing is directed at everyone but him.

    It boggles the mind.

  54. It seems to me that the argument advanced by Israel on the question of the right to maintain those settlements, and by implication organic growth thereto is compelling. In that case Obamas position as articulated by members of his administration is untenable.

    1. first, the support for those settlements is not an unofficial statement, as Bambi would have you believe. It was reduced to writing, and is a lawful presidential declaration and commitment.

    2. second, Bush did not stop there however. He put the policy embodied in that letter before Congress and it passed overwhelmingly with bi-partisan support. It is legally binding for that reason.

    3. third, Israel changed its own position in reliance on that commitment. Therefore, if you consider this to be an agreement between the US and Israel, then the elements of a contact are satisfied. If not then we are equally bound under the equitable doctrine of promissory estoppel.

    That being the case, the question is whether Bambi can repudiate the agreements reached by prior administrations with key allies in this manner. To repeat, we are dealing with more here than a mere policy position which can always be changed by the succeeding one. We are dealing with a de facto agreement. And when you have an agreement you cannot simply walk away from it. You must negotiate your way out from under it. And that is where we are really at here.

  55. And yet the teflon armor is still largely intact. The finger pointing is directed at everyone but him.

    It boggles the mind
    ———————————-
    That is because the bill has not been presented for payment. When the American People not only see it, but feel its effects in their daily life that will change. The Rassmusson poll show the ice is breaking.

    A year from now, the economy will be in worse shape. As a result, public confidence in his policies will further erode. If they still support him personally, but not his policies will they still want him as president? Or will it be like the contractor who fell on hard times told his mistress: I love you but I cannot afford you.

  56. I have been waiting for someone from the media to examine Bush’s exact actions and promises to Israel. I think Patrick Goodenough laid the t facts out very well. This was not just a “verbal” promise that wasn’t binding. It can’t just be swept under the rug.

  57. What is happening in Iran now could change some of the dynamics in the middle east–although less than we might hope. The hatred of the US has increased since Obama took office, but that does not mean everyone supports the current president. Under the best case scenario, the opposition candidate would win. This would have the added benefit of reinforcing the pro democracy forces in that country. However, the ayatollas would still remain at the pinnacle of leadership and that is the real problem. From Israels standpoint, you must evaluate an adversary not in terms of its professed intention, but in terms of its capabilities. And here particularly even if the government changes the ruling thugocracy will not. If the current president wins, the only benefit I can see is we may be treated to the spectacle of him debating with Obama. Heckle and Dr. Jeckyl.

  58. Decision time for Iran

    ——————————————————————————–

    Top Story: After a week of massive rallies, Iran is quiet again as campaigning officially ended for the presidential election, which will be held on Friday. In a final TV apearance (which his opponents boycotted, saying they had not been allowed equal airtime) President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused the opposition candidates of conspiring with Israelis to discredit him.

    If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote tomorrow, there will be a run-off between the two front-runners next week. The big story in the run-up to the election has been the unexpected rise in popular support for former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi. Perhaps rattled by the huge rallies in support of Mousavi in Tehran, the political head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard warned yesterday that any “attempt for velvet revolution will be nipped in the bud.”

    One of Mousavi’s most powerful backers, former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rasfanjani, sent an unusually blunt open letter this week to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, asking him to put a stop to Ahmadinejad’s “insults, lies and false allegations.”

    The final days of the campaign have also been marked by the opposition candidates’ all-out push for female voters, who have been marginalized under Ahmadinejad’s presidency.

  59. wbboei Says:

    June 11th, 2009 at 11:12 am

    ——————————–

    I have been watching these elections very carefully. I wouldn’t put it past Ahmadinejad to “fix” the election in his favor no matter the results. I hope I am wrong.

  60. RGB” As we recall, the recent Obama gab-fest round table on health care deliberately excluded single-payer proponents, and one doctor (from NJ as I recall) was even jailed for protesting outside that meeting.
    ——————————————–
    They do not know WHAT they are doing. If Obama people line you up against a wall to shoot you for an offense you did not commit, and ask if you have any last request, be sure to ask for a cigarette because in the time it takes you to smoke it, they will probably change their minds–not because of new evidence, due process or anything like that, but because their decision making process is so convoluted that the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing, and the head of it all, of course, is a sociopath.

  61. Clinton adopts low-key style at State Dept.

    By Ken Dilanian, USA TODAY

    SAN PEDRO SULA, Honduras — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton won a small diplomatic victory here recently. Few Americans are likely to have heard about it.
    ————————–
    Jan–this is a hit job. No need to characterize this as a small victory. No need to say Hillary will not run again. Not true.

  62. Why is such a big deal being made of the slain Holocaust Museum guard while there has been no mention of the slain Arkansas soldier?

    Not that I condone EITHER killing, of course, but I DO question why ONE is highlighted while the other is swept under the rug.

  63. Not to be inflammatory, but could it be because of race?

    A white supremaicist kills a black guard?

    The opposite happened in Arkansas. A Black Muslim killed a white soldier.

    Sorry for going there but WTF!!!!!!!

    This is also being called a HATE crime against the guard. What about the Arkansas soldier???????

  64. Yea, he has got the mark. He was with the Philadelphia Inquirer before, which is a Gannet Newspaper just like USA Today, as I seem to recall. My speculation would be that he was laid off and went to work there. His work is unremarkable in my opionion, and dull as paint. He has he has a pro Bambi bias which is par for the course. I am comfortable with the notion that he is spewing party line and hasnt a clue what he is talking about. In other words a prototypical member of big media.

  65. wwoebi,

    a hit job with a few crumbs thrown in, but worth reading to see what the media is still spinning about her.

  66. Sorry for multiple posts but I’m listening to the press conference and I’m disgusted.

    WTF is the FBI Terrorism task force being called up for this incident and not for the Arkansas incident????????

  67. The FBI says Van Brauns picture is being displayed on the cover of every paper in the US and anyone with info about him should contact the FBI.

    Why wasn’t the same thing done with the Arkansas Muslim killer?

  68. Why wasn’t the same thing done with the Arkansas Muslim killer?
    —————————————————–
    With Eric Holder as Attorney General racism and politics will be the prevailing theme. The statements he has made in the past are indicative of his perverse state of mind on these issues. It is not a crime if it is perpetrated by a minority against a non minority. The failure to prosecute the night stick wielding black pather who threatened voters in Philadelphia, and now the apparent failure to categorize the killing of the white soldier as a hate crime suggests to me that where Holder is concerned there is no such thing as equal justice under the law–yet another example of critical legal thinking.

  69. The FBI says Van Brauns picture is being displayed on the cover of every paper in the US and anyone with info about him should contact the FBI.

    Why wasn’t the same thing done with the Arkansas Muslim killer?
    ——————————————————–
    It is pure politics UNLESS they have evidence that he had accomplices. In the case of the muslim the evidence suggests he was acting alone.

  70. The opposite happened in Arkansas. A Black Muslim killed a white soldier.
    ***********
    The Islamic terrorist was an equal opportunity shooter, Pvt. Long is white, the wounded soldier is Black.

    “WTF is the FBI Terrorism task force being called up for this incident and not for the Arkansas incident????????
    ************
    Exactly, The first successful Islamic terrorist attack on US soil sicne 9/11 and there was a complete MSM blackout when it happened; couldn’t spoil Bambi’s best vacation, ever!!! you know.

  71. Wbboei,

    The Arkansas killer DOES have a trail of working with other terrorist groups. Proof of that was found on his computer. The FBI was ORDERED not to investigate further. On the other hand, in the press conference a couple of minutes ago, the FBI was touting its NATIONAL investigation into Van Braun. (I don’t have the link handy about the Msulim shooter)

    I agree it is more media lying. They are carrying out a very dangerous agenda, IMHO, by stirring up racism and terrorism that fits their definition of it. In Obamaworld, only whites are capable of racism and terrorism. It is sick, skewed, deliberate and dangerous.

  72. My comments to rickroberts’ 10:52 posting are prefaced with $$$

    rickroberts Says:

    June 10th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
    C’mon, guys. I really think this site has jumped the shark, and it’s time for us all to move on. Barack is the president, and Hillary will be president in 2016 and possibly VP even before then if Joe doesn’t want to go through a re-election campaign.

    $$$ Shark-jumping??? Now really. Where have we gone over the top? We have valid criticisms of this guy inhabiting the White House. All the more valid every since he tried, twice, to be sworn in. As for his legitimate claim to be POTUS, we don’t buy it. He NEVER provided a hard copy of his birth certificate. To you, this must be a minor inconvenient detail. Hey, you can’t even work at McDonald’s without **proving** who you are. So for all the forces that let him get away with the lies and lack of transparency and complete lack of a paper trail, you have to wonder who is propping him up, and what they want. At least I wonder. Maybe you don’t.

    I was as angry as you guy all through the campaign and didn’t know how to vote until I walked in the booth. I ended up writing in Hillary’s name because I was so angry about the misrepresentation and blatant favoritism shown by the media.

    $$$ Good for you. I voted for McCain. He would have been much less dishonest, much less of a continuation of Bush’s two terms. But the write-in conscience vote has its own merits.

    So now. What do we do? What is the point of tearing him down? Would you prefer he fail? Would you prefer the republicans rule? Really? It is what it is. I love Hillary, but she didn’t win, fair or not. We have a president.

    $$$ The point of “tearing him down” is to fight the power grab. He completely lied to his supporters and the American voters. The only promise he hasn’t broken is that he was going to get a dog. Do we really “have a president”? Did he “win”? The DNC at the Rules and By-laws committee saw to it that the Bot-wing of the Dem party got the fast track, and the centrists got the shaft. That’s not a party I can support. And for all the people who did back Obama, and waited for the favors to be returned, they are finding out that the man doesn’t return their calls any more. Too bad, Mr. Kerry. Too bad, Mr. Richardson.

    $$$ So please don’t tell us we are jumping the shark. We exchange lots of good information and viewpoints here. If you don’t like a cold hard look at the current inhabitant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., you can find much more upbeat analysis at HuffPost, DailyKaos, or any one of the many MSM. They will be glad to put on a happy face on this presidency, for your benefit.

  73. OT…Media so far ignoring this story:

    “(CNN) — The World Health Organization raised the swine flu alert Thursday to its highest level, saying H1N1 has spread to enough countries to be considered a global pandemic.”
    (snip)
    “Thursday’s declaration of a pandemic by the WHO made this the first flu pandemic in 41 years.”

    One of the initial concerns, when this flu showed up very late in the flu season, was that it would continue to spread and evolve in the Southern Hemisphere and then return to the US in the fall and winter, much more virulent.

  74. Basil 9, do know for certain that the FBI was told not to investigate further, if so, why, and who told them to stop?

  75. It looks like I will have a duplicate posting. Sometimes, submitting things gets caught up in some bizarre filter, or maybe it’s obama bot-web police…?

  76. Okay Basil then I am wrong. Your question is a good one.

    SHV has put his finger on the fundamental point: The first successful Islamic terrorist attack on US soil sicne 9/11 and there was a complete MSM blackout when it happened.

    The ramifications are clear: big media hides critical truth from the American people and leaves them unprotected against deadly threats. Why in Gods green earth should anyone with any common sense put any faith in what big media tells us? What is the use of listening to the diatribes of a serial liar? They will lead you far far away from the truth you need to know to survive in this chaotic and uncertain world.

  77. SHV,
    I agree the US is burying the flu story. Again, I ask WHY???????

    Why isn’t the FCC investigating Letterman’s comments about raping Palin’s daughter? Why isn’t anyone questioning Jeremiah’s comments yesterday that “Them Jews won’t let him (BO) talk to me?”

    What about anti-semitism and misogyny in the BO administration and among his supporters?
    Sickening as it is to say this, in a way the Holocaust Museum Shooting is VERY useful to BO. He gets to link racism, anti-semitism and white supremacism and spin those trends in a way advantageous to him. more divide and conquer. into one

  78. confloyd, wbboei,

    I don’t have the link handy but I will track it down later and post it for you.

    That info was available in several (non-MSM) stories.

  79. wbboei,

    MSM also buried these recent stories 2 of which which took place in NYS and the other in NJ.

    1 – 4 Newburgh ex-prisoners and muslim convertees conspired to blow up a couple of NYC synagogues and Stewart airforce base. It was all over NYS news but not a word in other publications.
    2- Starbucks NYC bombed. Source suspicious.
    3 – A cache of pipe bombs was found last week in Wayne, NJ. Wayne is next to a city with one of the highest muslim populated areas in the US, the place where half of the WTC hi-jackers called home.in one of the

  80. If the FBI has been told not to investigate that arkansas ISLAMIC TERRORIST murder then I hope that Arkansas police and local divisions do their job.

    The two senators from Arkansas and all its house members need to be thrown out if they silent on this issue.

  81. I can’t find the definitive articles about the killer’s pc right now (scrubbed?) but here’s an article that speaks to that.

    Did Whitehouse Order FBI to back off investigations of radicalized Muslim converts?

    clipmarks dot com/clipmark/65540CB6-D01E-4F6E-AD1F-B3EE8B3ED8E3/

    confloyd – Yup! Two of the passengers in the Airfrance crash may have been Islamic radicals on the French FBI (?) list. At least THAT’S being investigated!

  82. NY TIMES: OBAMA HALF-MEASURES AND HANDS-OFF REORM “NOT ENOUGH”

    TARP, credit card reform, you name it, Obama’s stances reveal that he’s more interested in caving into the industries that he’s reputedly trying to reform.

    Sorry, rickroberts, for not being more upbeat, and “wanting him to fail”. Yes, I want obama to fail when he lies to the public, pretending to be “for reform”, but then letting the foxes guard the hen houses by letting the corporations write the laws.

    nytimes.com/2009/06/11/opinion/11thu1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

    Payback Time
    =========

    Published: June 10, 2009
    President Obama struck a cautionary note on Tuesday as he announced the administration’s decision to permit 10 banks to repay a combined $68.3 billion in bailout money. “Now, this is not a sign that our troubles are over,” he said. “Far from it.”

    If anything, he was not cautionary enough. The payback could be premature, requiring more bailouts later on. Worse, by allowing it now, before reforms are in place to prevent a repeat of the current crisis, the administration is weakening its hand in reining in the banks.

    Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and other banks have been pressing for months to repay the money, to escape the bailout’s pay caps and other constraints. To prove their soundness, they raised fresh capital and issued debt without government guarantees. Eight of the 10 banks were also deemed adequately capitalized under the government’s recent stress tests. Of the other two, Morgan Stanley moved quickly to raise needed additional capital and Northern Trust was not tested because of its relatively small size.

    Unfortunately, the picture of renewed health is not without cracks. On the day of the payback announcement, Elizabeth Warren, who leads the Congressional panel that oversees the bailouts, said the government should consider a new round of stress tests that would better account for rising unemployment and projected losses in commercial real estate, both of which could drastically alter the banks’ fortunes.

    The health of the banks is overstated in other ways, too. Last year’s direct infusions of capital are only one of many government props currently supporting the banks, like favorable loans from the Federal Reserve, debt guarantees and incentive payments to modify bad mortgages. Indeed, one of the reasons the banks are so hot to repay the initial bailout funds is that other supports — which don’t come with pay restrictions — are available.

    Clearly, the way the banks see it, last year’s bailouts meant unwanted public scrutiny and salary restraints, so paying the money back frees them from those burdens. That bodes ill for regulatory reform. The compensation they seek to protect was based in large part on the risky practices that brought the system to the point of collapse. It stands to reason then that if colossal pay and bonuses continue, so will recklessness.

    The Obama administration said on Wednesday that it will develop compensation standards to discourage excessive risk-taking. But the 10 large banks that are repaying their bailout funds face no mandatory changes to their pay practices. The administration has also promised — as early as next week — a broad regulatory reform proposal. It would have been better to release it before springing the banks. As it is, the payback only adds to the steroidal lobbying muscle that the banks have shown in financial matters before the White House and Congress.

    Even the recent credit card reform, which the Obama administration pushed on resistant banks, was an apparent trade-off for the administration’s hands-off approach to a larger proposed reform that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to help troubled homeowners.

    After Mr. Obama announced the payback, The Times’s Eric Dash reported, Goldman Sachs employees toasted their freedom at a cafe near Wall Street. The risk is great that the repayment is yet another step back to a status quo that served the bankers so well and everyone else so poorly. That’s nothing to cheer.

  83. Again, please excuse me if later this turns out to be a duplicate…

    NY TIMES: OBAMA HANDS-OFF REFORM IS “NOT ENOUGH”

    Obama’s trick is to say he is trying to reform X (banks, auto industry, credit card companies), but the let the foxes guard the henhouses (the lobbyists are the ones writing the legistlation).

    Sorry, rickroberts, if that is not upbeat enough. Yes, I want him to fail, when he is working against the interests of working families. When he stops working for the monied interests who elected him, maybe I’ll cut him some slack. Given his track record, over the many years, I am not terribly worried that my opinion will be changing any time soon.

    Payback Time
    =========

    Published: June 10, 2009
    President Obama struck a cautionary note on Tuesday as he announced the administration’s decision to permit 10 banks to repay a combined $68.3 billion in bailout money. “Now, this is not a sign that our troubles are over,” he said. “Far from it.”

    If anything, he was not cautionary enough. The payback could be premature, requiring more bailouts later on. Worse, by allowing it now, before reforms are in place to prevent a repeat of the current crisis, the administration is weakening its hand in reining in the banks.

    Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and other banks have been pressing for months to repay the money, to escape the bailout’s pay caps and other constraints. To prove their soundness, they raised fresh capital and issued debt without government guarantees. Eight of the 10 banks were also deemed adequately capitalized under the government’s recent stress tests. Of the other two, Morgan Stanley moved quickly to raise needed additional capital and Northern Trust was not tested because of its relatively small size.

    Unfortunately, the picture of renewed health is not without cracks. On the day of the payback announcement, Elizabeth Warren, who leads the Congressional panel that oversees the bailouts, said the government should consider a new round of stress tests that would better account for rising unemployment and projected losses in commercial real estate, both of which could drastically alter the banks’ fortunes.

    The health of the banks is overstated in other ways, too. Last year’s direct infusions of capital are only one of many government props currently supporting the banks, like favorable loans from the Federal Reserve, debt guarantees and incentive payments to modify bad mortgages. Indeed, one of the reasons the banks are so hot to repay the initial bailout funds is that other supports — which don’t come with pay restrictions — are available.

    Clearly, the way the banks see it, last year’s bailouts meant unwanted public scrutiny and salary restraints, so paying the money back frees them from those burdens. That bodes ill for regulatory reform. The compensation they seek to protect was based in large part on the risky practices that brought the system to the point of collapse. It stands to reason then that if colossal pay and bonuses continue, so will recklessness.

    The Obama administration said on Wednesday that it will develop compensation standards to discourage excessive risk-taking. But the 10 large banks that are repaying their bailout funds face no mandatory changes to their pay practices. The administration has also promised — as early as next week — a broad regulatory reform proposal. It would have been better to release it before springing the banks. As it is, the payback only adds to the steroidal lobbying muscle that the banks have shown in financial matters before the White House and Congress.

    Even the recent credit card reform, which the Obama administration pushed on resistant banks, was an apparent trade-off for the administration’s hands-off approach to a larger proposed reform that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to help troubled homeowners.

    After Mr. Obama announced the payback, The Times’s Eric Dash reported, Goldman Sachs employees toasted their freedom at a cafe near Wall Street. The risk is great that the repayment is yet another step back to a status quo that served the bankers so well and everyone else so poorly. That’s nothing to cheer.

  84. Here is a link to where the local stories for the LR shooting can be found. There are about sixteen stories on the fox16.com web site.

    ww.fox16.com/search/sitesearch.aspx?q=muhammad&start=0

  85. pc = computer FBI is said to have confiscated it and it had info about other people the killer was working with.

    OK. What’s LR?

  86. wbboei says:

    Please. You must not take such a morbid view of the prospects. The political winds are always changing. What looks like a sure think at one time becomes a dead duck a year later. Suppose a year from now we have high unemployment and inflation. Do you really think Bambi can hold on to power under those circumstances. What if a centrist party formed. What if non-African people came to the voting polls with the means to not be intimidated by nightstick wielding thugs Holder wont do anything about, what if there was a massive march of unemployed in Washington, etc. You have to consider all the implications of an economic meltdown and a permanently unemployed workforce. We are heading into a storm and nothing is forseeable except that Bambis numbers are falling and will continue to do so. Keep the faith.
    ********************************************88

    yes, things can change on a dime…bottom line…my point was the type of energy and tactics we are dealing with…chicago hardball that will aggressively use every last trick in their book…and currently with full support of our national media backing up any lie or propoganda they want to plant or slant…

    like today…oh happy day, job losses less than expected…only 600,000…things are getting soooo much better…not!

  87. It is upsetting having to read how the “Clinton Legacy” has been further diminished by the McAuliffe race. Several articles posted on MSM sites. Yet, not one article on Rev. Wright and or why Obama is not condeming his blatant ant-semetic remark.

  88. Easy easy thing to do to respond to Letterman is to take your remote control and use parental controls and block letterman(and all of CBS for that matter) cable companies negotiate based on viewers an if a hundred thousand people start blocking it will be noticed

  89. And now they are comparing some Iranian “reform”(an oxymoron) candidates wife to MO!!!!!!! This is insanity.

  90. jbstone,

    I agree. What’s going on is sheer madness. And if you want to see something really bizarre check this pic of MO in London. Is there even a name for the type of outfit she’s wearing?
    texasdarlin dot wordpress dot com/2009/06/10/wednesday-open-thread-flowers-anyone/

    But I personally don’t take any HRC-legacy-tarnishing articles seriously. Although I’m sorry terry didn’t win I read that BO’s candidate didn’t win, either. .

  91. basil9
    you are much me informed and far more eloquent than I so I beseech-implore- beg you to scream to to others to vote again this time using the remote. Lettermans words when it came to her children are unforgivable. As i UDERSTAND CABLE COMPANIES ARE NOT FOND OF PARENTAL BLOCKING.

  92. henry,

    you really SHOULD go to hillbuzz. They have several threads dedicated to canning Letterman.

    it’s ht tp hillbuzz.org. I think you’ll love it there.

    On another note, McCain is Finally speaking out. WTF took him so long? Today he spoke against Letterman and the releasing of torture photos. I wonder how he feels now about refusing to use BO’s middle name, about cutting him so much slack. Sometimes I wonder how he can live with himself. He threw the election to BO, IMHO.

  93. OBAMA: “The status quo is unsustainable,”

    Sigh, another town hall, another chance to pose as an agent of change…

    yahoo.com/s/nm/20090611/pl_nm/us_usa_healthcare_obama

    Obama presses healthcare overhaul in heartland
    ==================================

    By Doug Palmer Doug Palmer – 2 hrs 13 mins ago
    GREEN BAY, Wisconsin (Reuters) – President Barack Obama took his push for healthcare overhaul to the U.S. heartland on Thursday, calling the current system unsustainable and vowing not to tolerate “endless delay” before acting to fix it.

    Hosting a townhall-style meeting, Obama stuck to his view that a government-sponsored insurance plan must be part of a healthcare revamp, despite opposition to the idea from Republicans, private insurers and even the influential American Medical Association doctors’ group.

    “We have reached a point where doing nothing about the cost of health care is no longer an option. The status quo is unsustainable,” the Democratic president said. He insisted, however, he was not seeking a “government takeover” of the troubled system.

    Obama’s drive on healthcare comes as lawmakers seek to craft a bill and pass it through the Senate before their summer break. Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives also hope to pass legislation by August.

    “As Congress moves forward on healthcare legislation in the coming weeks, I understand there will be different ideas and disagreements … I welcome those ideas,” he said. “But what I will not welcome is endless delay.”

    Underscoring a sense of urgency, he said, “If we don’t get it done this year, we’re probably not going to get it done.”

    COSTS

    Obama acknowledged public concerns about the cost of extending coverage to tens of millions of people who do not have health insurance at time when the government is spending heavily on economic recovery programs and financial bailouts.

    “That’s why I have already promised that reform will not add to our deficit over the next 10 years,” he said.

    “To make that happen, we have already identified hundreds of billions worth of savings in our budget — savings that will come from steps like reducing Medicare overpayments to insurance companies and rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in both Medicare and Medicaid,” he said. “I will be outlining hundreds of billions more in savings in the days to come.”

    But with some estimates putting the cost of healthcare reform at $1.2 trillion, Obama conceded those savings will not be enough.

    “That’s why I’ve proposed that we scale back how much the highest-income Americans can deduct on their taxes back to the rate that existed under the Reagan years and we can use that money to help finance health care,” he said.

    Back in Washington, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee was scheduled to hold a hearing on a plan that would prohibit insurers from denying coverage or charging more due to medical history.

    Many congressional Republicans have criticized Democratic proposals for including a public insurance program that would compete with private insurers.

    Defending that idea, Obama said, “The reason is not because we want a government takeover of health care … But we want some competition. If the private insurance companies have to compete with a public option, it will keep them honest and help keep prices down.”

  94. basil9
    tell me you have blocked him
    If we can get 50,000 people to actively block, CBS we hear our vote finally because money is at stake. Big Media disregarded everyone over 25 but I say its time that they learn the lesson about who is footing the bill

  95. OT/ excuse a brief interruption on the current fact finding sleuthing:

    We shouldn’t let this article go without clear concise rebuttals before it finds it’s way into mainstream US newspapers.

    McAuliffe defeat is another blow to Clinton legacy!

    What the thrust of the article does besides declaring another derogatory smear on the Clintons is legitimize Obama’s grand all out winning of the presidency.

    h… and w….breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98OLFE00&show_article=1

  96. Henry,

    I live with 4 parrots and they haven’t yet learned how to turn the tv on. (They do, however, know how to destroy my remotes and I’ve had to replace the current one 3 times so far.)

    And I NEVER watch CBS, much less Letterman.

  97. Excerpted section from “The Deficit Blame Game”, by Megan McArdle in the Atlantic.

    meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/06/the_deficit_blame_game.php

    [snip]
    The problem with the budget deficit is not any particular program, or even any particular tax cuts. It is not that George Bush or Obama is a bad person who does bad things. The problem with the budget deficit is that, unlike the deficits George Bush ran, the deficits projected under Obama (and beyond) are actually large enough to potentially precipitate a fiscal crisis. If our interest rates suddenly spiked up, perhaps because lenders were worried about the size of our budget deficits, we’d find ourselves in the kind of nasty fiscal jam that regularly plagues third-world countries. The difference is, no one has enough money to bail us out.

    Obama is the one who will have to prevent this. Yet instead of plans, we’re getting fairy numbers from the OMB. That’s worrying, and it’s sure not George W. Bush’s fault. His OMB liked to inflate the deficit projections, so that they could take credit for a mostly imaginary reduction.
    [snip]

    &&&&&&&&&&

    aside from the above, it’s got lots of good info.

  98. DELICIOUS…

    What If Obama’s Out of His Mind?
    =======================
    Seriously. And don’t act as if you haven’t wondered. Because if we ask nothing else about our presidents, we should ask if they’re madmen.

    By Charles P. Pierce
    June 10, 2009, 12:01 AM

    What if he’s crazy? Do we trust him, even though he’s not talking amiably to the empty air? Are we comfortable having him around, even though he’s the only one not playing with his toes in the punch bowl? Do we just ignore him, over there in the corner of the room, talking about the fact that there’s not enough food, and that the sink in the kitchen is backing up, and that the fire in the laundry room is getting out of control, and that there’s a hole in the floorboards where the stove just fell through while all the rest of us are worrying about the giant carnivorous bat-creatures — the ones only we can see — that are waiting to come swooping in through the windows if we dare open them to let a little fresh air into the place? If the village is full of idiots, what do you call the guy who has to sit on the wall and get the dung flung in his direction?

    Listen to him. He’s talking in what seems to be a glossolalic deluge of issues. One plan a week, each thrown out there while we’re still digesting the previous one. He’s moving too fast for us to keep up with him. He’s talking a private language, to himself, like crazy people do, because he certainly can’t be talking to us, his strange, atrophied people, our capacity for large projects and great achievement, let alone for the participation in enlightened self-government that such projects and achievements require, something safely kept reserved for HBO historical miniseries. The muscles have gone slack, the nerve endings gone dead. He’s talking about phantoms, about ghosts, about things that aren’t really there. He’s speaking in tongues is what he’s doing.

    It took a county commissioner from Ohio to convince me. It is important to note here that county commissioners are of a lower political phylum than most other politicians. They do not walk entirely upright across the savanna, and their political thumbs are not necessarily opposable. As witness Mike Kilburn, a commissioner in Warren County in Ohio. In April, the county was supposed to receive $373,000 in federal stimulus money from President Barack Obama’s economic recovery plan. This money was meant to go to the laudable purpose of buying buses and vans for the rural communities. The Warren County Board of Commissioners turned down the money, and Kilburn announced, with a curious kind of pride, “I’ll let Warren County go broke before taking any of Obama’s filthy money.”

    Until that moment, I didn’t fully realize how deeply what Obama’s been trying to do had penetrated the entire country, and how deeply it had sunk into the lizard brain that had controlled American society for the previous eight years. On January 20, Barack Obama became president of a deranged nation. He did so apparently taking no notice of the fact that a good portion of the country, a country that otherwise repeatedly voiced its support for him in poll after poll after poll, continued to be completely out of its mind. He was calm and reasoned, and he spoke in measured tones about the challenges he and the nation were facing. And then he seemed to go manic on us.

    Early this year, he put together an economic team full of Clintonian retreads and fashioned an economic plan that somehow joined John Maynard Keynes and Charles Schwab, arguing for economic stimulus spending while simultaneously hiring some overfed foxes — Larry Summers? Again? Is there a hiring hall somewhere for these people where they all sit around and wait for administrations to change? — to watch a chicken coop that their own economic philosophies helped burn to the ground. He went to Europe and wowed the crowds. He scored the biggest victory won by an American president over pirates since Thomas Jefferson. He got his kids a dog.

    One week in early April, he got up before the country and said that it was time for comprehensive reform of the immigration laws, an issue guaranteed to inflame the passions of a goodly number of his fellow citizens to no good effect. A week later, he made a pitch for high-speed rail transportation. He went to Europe to mend fences, and he went to Latin America and told them that it’s time to build bridges again, even to Cuba. He’ll be on to health-care reform any day now. There isn’t a single major public issue of the past twenty years that he hasn’t at least addressed, and he’s acted on most of them. At the same time, he shifted his promise to reinstate the ban on assault weapons to the back burner, and he was noticeably dilatory on the subject of the torture that had been carried out under the administration prior to his. If it’s possible to move judiciously and precipitously at the same time, Obama managed to find a way to do it.

    And what happened? Well, he got a lot of what he asked for, but he did so in the same deranged country out onto which he gazed in the third week in January, so nobody was entirely sure what had been accomplished. It all went by too fast. He was asking for feats of long-term memory in a country with a nasty case of ADD. By the time he was talking about immigration and supertrains, the political culture was still trying to figure out what he was up to with his economic plan. The putative opposition, the Republican party, had gone out of what was left of its mind. On April 15, all around the country, there was an inchoate outburst of public disapproval. There were caricatures of him dressed as Hitler and as Lenin, which is a considerable, if utterly ahistorical, parlay. There was the spectacle of thousands of lower-middle-class people making the noise of hundreds and expressing outrage that Obama intended to raise the marginal tax rate on people making more than $250,000 a year to somewhere around where it was during Ronald Reagan’s second term. It was a pathetically thin if noisy spasm of ill-conceived outrage. And then, at last, there was Commissioner Kilburn, acting as though he were being asked to accept a briefcase full of unmarked hundreds from Pablo Escobar instead of being asked to take some of his state’s own federal tax dollars back in order to make sure his elderly constituents had an easier time getting to the Wal-Mart.

    That’s when it became clear what Obama had done. By acting so quickly on so many things, he had forced upon his political opposition a kind of instant obsolescence. He had arranged things so that the country could look at the contortions of the lizard brain in comparison with the frenzy of political activity, and those contortions looked tepid and ineffectual, something out of a different and slower time. Say what you will about the policy implications of seeming to do everything at once. Politically, it came onto his opponents like Stonewall Jackson’s soldiers pouring out of the forest at Chancellorsville. The basic, important subtext to what so bothered Commissioner Kilburn and so convinced me was that, Jesus, this guy’s liable to do anything. In a radically different context, Richard Nixon once called this the “madman” strategy.

    Think about it. Jack Kennedy told us we were going to the moon, but he gave us a decade to do it, which might as well be a century, the way we look at politics today. Bill Clinton came into office wanting to do everything, but he chose to try to do everything one thing at a time. His opponents realized that if they could jam him on the early stuff — health care, certainly, but before that, gays in the military — they could gum up his whole agenda until he began to trip over his own dick, figuratively and otherwise. They forced a small-scale presidency on a man desperately in love with big ideas until he said “The era of big government is over” in front of Congress because it was more dignified than saying “uncle.” If nothing else can be said of Barack Obama’s first days in office, it can be said that what Clinton said about big government was at best considerably premature. The sudden reemergence of big government left all the people who’d built their careers on what they perceived was its grave — and there are nearly as many Democrats about which this can be said as there are Republicans — scrambling to dust off arguments that they never thought they’d have to use again. (“Socialism!” hasn’t gotten this kind of workout since the death of Robert Taft.) They may never catch up with the sheer velocity of what they’re trying to stop. The received wisdom was that big government was clumsy and moved too slow. Obama has turned that wisdom on its head. Big government is now too fast and agile for the people who want it to die. They can’t get a clear shot at it anymore.

    It is an accelerated age. Everything moves faster. We have grown accustomed to speed and, though we may rail against all those things that have been lost because they couldn’t keep up, we have accepted the acceleration that our technologies have brought to every aspect of our lives, including our politics and what we expect from them. Political dilemmas arise in the wink of a pixel. Crises erupt instantly and all at once together. Obama may be the first politician to grasp fully the implications of this, and he has used that realization to his consummate advantage. He’s fashioning political leadership to this accelerated age, making energy and forward movement something very close to an ideology in and of itself, the way Kennedy used the burgeoning technological promise of the Space Age to energize his New Frontier.

    Of course, Obama’s doing so in a political context of accumulated inherited crises — a financial catastrophe, two wars of dubious prospect, a vandalized constitution, and a fundamental unease with the American identity that had its roots in the attacks of September 11, 2001, and the country’s panicked reaction to them and the exploitation of that reaction by the greedy and the amoral — the way that Franklin Roosevelt addressed the myriad issues arising from the Great Depression. He is trying everything in order to see what works. He has lashed New Deal politics to New Frontier “vigah” and thrown the whole thing into overdrive to meet the challenges of an accelerated age. In doing so, he is attempting to solve the crisis in American identity by dealing all at once with the more concrete crises that he’s inherited. In doing so, he is reestablishing the American identity as a people who can solve the problems of their own making.

    And so far, the country has followed him; an AP poll in late spring showed that, for the first time in a long while, more Americans believed the country was headed in the right direction than otherwise. This has had the effect of squeezing the opposition down to its craziest essentials until it now looks like a sharp, clear diamond of pure insanity. That’s where Commissioner Kilburn comes in, but he’s not alone. The Republican governor of Texas talked seriously about secession, which worked out so well for the country the last time. A Republican congresswoman from Minnesota proposed a constitutional amendment to keep the dollar as the official U. S. currency in perpetuity, because she thought an international cabal was trying to replace it with the euro, or the franc, or perhaps live chickens. Who could say? Other Republican politicians declined to comment without getting a “Mother, may I?” from Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News found a ratings bonanza in a raving lunatic named Glenn Beck, who is what the Peter Finch character in Network would have been had the movie been written by fourteen gibbering marmosets. Not only is there no serious opposition left to what Obama is doing, there isn’t even any effective opposition to it, a curious distinction that a number of Republicans made their careers on during the Clinton years. Obama has not only outpaced the serious ideological objections to what he has done; he’s also neutered the ridiculous ones, which often can do far more damage.

    Obama has outpaced it all, and he has brought much of the country with him, albeit groaning as its atrophied muscles of self-government are thrown all at once into a kind of sprint. It may not last. The country had been adrift for so long that it may not have the stamina to keep up with the dizzying agenda that is being put before it. It may well have forgotten how to debate three things at once, or how to keep four thoughts about five things in its head at the same time. But that is what it is being asked to do again — to live up to what had become the hollowest of its boasts during a period in which a president cut our taxes during wartime and asked us to face down our enemies by heading to the mall. It was leadership by lassitude and misdirection. For such an allegedly epochal time, events seemed to slow down, largely because so much was done behind closed doors. There was no perceptible movement because few people were allowed to see what was really going on. This past six months has been different. The pace of what Barack Obama has done — and the number of things he has tried to do — has forced a renewed sense of civic involvement on all of us, if only to simply keep up, if only so that we don’t sound ignorant at cocktail parties, or on unemployment lines.

    So is Obama crazy? Good question.

    Some people — they call themselves “birthers” — who believe that the president is Kenyan-born and so not eligible to be president (and also in unicorns) have made it their cause to mandate that future presidents establish their Americanness beyond the shadow of a doubt before being allowed to offer themselves as national candidates. But after the last eight years, it is the sanity of the president that we ought to be more inclined to care about. If there were no other baseline qualification for the job, it should be that one. Of lesser concern during times when presidents aspire to do small things, certainly, but as we find ourselves at present in the maelstrom of the Obama Revolution, we can only hope that the president is as sober as he appears to be. For he may have campaigned on hope, but he’s governed with implacable audacity.

  99. Re Letterman, as of an hour or so ago this number was still working, did accept a message, though it also gave another number where it tried to direct Letterman calls. Sorry I didn’t get the other number down.

    Call CBS and let them know your disgust. Call CBS: 212-975-4321

Comments are closed.