Well, now that the first 100 days of You Know Who's Administration is just about upon us I would like to pose a question to everyone here.

I can think of at least several dozen things this person has done WRONG since January 21, 2009 but can anyone here name

Anything he's done right so far?

A minimum of 10 things that he's done right and I'll shut up and got sit down. I'm personally having a hard time coming up with even one thing.

Ooh Twinks you must really not like this person if you know it's been 100 days.

EDIT:: Momentary moment of stupidity.

Sarah

Well, Muddy, it's hard to miss this "milestone" date when the news keeps reminding us of this.

How about kissing the hand of the leader of the "land of oil"... no wait... wasn't Bush accused of doing the same thing, but a different part of the anatomy? Confused again... (sigh).

a different part of the anatomy? Confused again...(sigh).

Nah, that was Clinton! :eek:

Don''t fret . I'm sure sometime during the love fest Wednesday ,the Press (especially CNN which plans a "campaign night like" special )will be sure to point out all his missteps as well as his great achievements .

Here is the 100 day retrospective worthy of reading :
100 DAYS, 100 MISTAKES FOR BARACK OBAMA - New York Post (http://www.nypost.com/seven/04252009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/100_days__100_mistakes_166177.htm)

Tom - Thanks for the heads up on the CNN Special. It should be a 30 minute special with about 29 1/2 minutes of commercials.

I can think of at least several dozen things this person has done WRONG since January 21, 2009 but can anyone here name Anything he's done right so far? Hello twink,

10 things, huh? Ok..

1) He ended torture

2) The prosecution of the torturers is going to happen.

3) He is restoring our good name in the world.

4) He's fixing the economy.

5) He's cutting taxes for the middle class.

6) He's ending the war in Iraq.

7) He's stepping up the "good war" in Afganistan.

8) He's restoring "diplomacy" as a tool.

9) He's UN-politisizing the Justice Department.

10) He extended un-employment benefits.

11) He's going to approve legislation that will help the American worker organize.

12) He's fixing the health care system.

13) He's fixing the education system.

14) He's restoring the American Dream.

I got more if you need 'em.

excon

Excon, I think you've just listed 10 things that he didn't do. Especially #8 and #3. He's happily trashed the US to the entire world making us the laughingstock.

And to #7, he wants to go into Afganistan due to the bumper crop of opium.

And best of all #14. So far I can't really see any restoring The American Dream. Want to help me see this a bit clearer as all I can see is more folks on unemployment, homeless, on food stamps, losing their jobs, losing their homes, losing their cars. Or are you reading the funny papers? What new jobs has he "created"?? In Ohio there are more and more people in need of jobs and fewer and fewer jobs advertised.

And the part about having the workers organized... Some Unions want a fee up front for a job and you can wait literally months to get that job or you have to pay the Union the fee the moment you're hired. How are you supposed to live in the meantime? On "dirt sandwiches"?

I think the only thing he actually did that was right was to extend the unemployment benefits for more weeks.

excon, I think you've just listed 10 things that he didn't do. Especially #8 and #3. He's happily trashed the US to the entire world making us the laughingstock.


No. Under Bush you were a laughing stock. Obama is widely popular throughout the world and a lot of respect lost under Bush is being restored.

Hello twink,

10 things, huh? Ok..

1) He ended torture

No he didn't because it wasn't torture. What he did was put an end to valuable techniques for obtaining information from our enemies.


2) The prosecution of the torturers is going to happen.

Prosecutions for something that never happened is a good thing? For who?


3) He is restoring our good name in the world.

Sure, if you call laughing at us "restoring our good name". So far he's managed to insult the UK PM (twice), the UK Queen, and the Russian government, while at the same time kissing up to dictators like Chavez and the Castro boys.


4) He's fixing the economy.

How? I'm curious how you think that increasing the national debt is going to solve a national debt crisis, and how increasing spending is going to close a budget deficit.


5) He's cutting taxes for the middle class.

Really? When did that happen?


6) He's ending the war in Iraq.

No he isn't. The war is still going on. The only thing that he MIGHT be doing is to pull out our troops. The war will go on. And in fact, he isn't even going to do that much. He's leaving 50,000 troops in Iraq.


7) He's stepping up the "good war" in Afganistan.

I've seen that he PLANS on sending some more troops to Afghanistan. I haven't seen it happen yet. Nor have I seen anything that resembles a change in the ROE in Afghanistan necessary to "step up" prosecution of tha war. All he's doing is shifting soldiers from one place to another... and he hasn't even done that yet.


8) He's restoring "diplomacy" as a tool.

Yeah... he's talking to Cuba, Iran, North Korea and China. Because diplomacy has worked so well with these countries in the past.

I thought we were talking about doing GOOD things.


9) He's UN-politisizing the Justice Department.

You mean the same Justice Department that just released a bunch of memos about CIA interrogation techniques for purely partisan reasons?


10) He extended un-employment benefits.

Well, you found ONE good thing.


11) He's going to approve legislation that will help the American worker organize.

No, he's going to approve legislation that is going to force the American workers and the businesses they work for to be unionized whether the worker or the employer wants it or not. And he's doing it to support the labor unions that can't get membership unless they can force people to unionize. Unions are some of the biggest donors to Obama's campaign coffers, so he's returning the favor... regardless of what the effect on workers, businesses or the economy as a whole ends up being.


12) He's fixing the health care system.

You mean the same healthcare system that Church Schumer just yesterday called the best in the world (regarding travel to the USA in the wake of the swine flu outbreak)?


13) He's fixing the education system.

How? By throwing more money into a broken system? He isn't fixing anything. He's just spending more on the same broken system.


14) He's restoring the American Dream.

More like the American nightmare. A nation so deep in debt that our grandchildren are going to be paying for it, so lacking in respect that the Third World $h!tballs of countries are laughing at our "naivete", so unprepared for a military emergency that the terrorist are licking their chops at the chance to get us again.

I hope YOU can sleep well.


I got more if you need 'em.

Excon

Yep. You have a knack for being wrong more often than almost anyone I know. I'm sure you can do it over and over again. You've certainly proven that.

Elliot

I'm just going to add to EX's list .

The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay act of 2009

As I said before your only defense for Bush was we haven't been attacked so by your own parties account Obama is doing a perfect job.

No. Under Bush you were a laughing stock. Obama is widely popular throughout the world and a lot of respect lost under Bush is being restored.

Yes, I'm sure that the Austrians respect his ability to speak Austrian.

I'm sure that PM Gordon Brown is enjoying those DVDs he can't play on his DVD player.

I'm sure 83-year-old Queen Elizabeth is enjoying her iPod.

I'm quite sure that Russian Foreign Minister Lavarov is enjoying his "overcharge" button.

Yes, we're getting that respect back real fast...

Elliot

I'm just going to add to EX's list .

The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay act of 2009

As i said before your only defense for Bush was we haven't been attacked so by your own parties account Obama is doing a perfect job.

Yes... a brilliant move. Let's make companies open to even more frivolous lawsuits, increase the costs of diong business and lower profitability... right in the middle of a recession.

I thought we were talking about things he has done right so far.

Pay the person fairly no law suit. Simple how that works.

Pay the person fairly no law suit. Simple how that works.

Negotiate the salary BEFORE you take the job. If it isn't fair, don't take the job. See how simple that works?

ET while that may work for some jobs we both know that is not the case at all companies.

ET while that may work for some jobs we both know that is not the case at all companies.

Say what?!

If you don't like the pay, don't take the job. If you take the job but don't like the pay, find another job. But if you take a job and don't like the pay, don't complain that someone else made you do it. You shouldn't blame the employer for getting the best deal he could find. He's in the business of making money, not paying salaries that are higher than he is able to negotiate.

It works that way in every capitalist society in the entire world at every company. Heck, it works that way in many non-capitalist societies around the world.

At what company does it NOT work that way?

Elliot

Say what?!?!?

If you don't like the pay, don't take the job. If you take the job but don't like the pay, find another job. But if you take a job and don't like the pay, don't complain that someone else made you do it. You shouldn't blame the employer for getting the best deal he could find. He's in the business of making money, not paying salaries that are higher than he is able to negotiate.

It works that way in every capitalist society in the entire world at every company. Heck, it works that way in many non-capitalist societies around the world.

At what company does it NOT work that way?

Elliot

The act is so people don't get taken advantage of. You can't sit there and say to a woman everyone starts $10.00 per hour there is no negotiation. Then a man walks in for the same job same qualification but he starts at $12.00 simply because he has a pair. It is not about liking the salary it is about treating everyone as an equal but I wouldn't expect the right to understand that concept.

Say what?!?!?

If you don't like the pay, don't take the job. If you take the job but don't like the pay, find another job. But if you take a job and don't like the pay, don't complain that someone else made you do it. You shouldn't blame the employer for getting the best deal he could find. He's in the business of making money, not paying salaries that are higher than he is able to negotiate.

It works that way in every capitalist society in the entire world at every company. Heck, it works that way in many non-capitalist societies around the world.

At what company does it NOT work that way?

Elliot

How can you honestly say that you know that the pay you are offered/negotiate is comparable to the pay of persons in your same position?

Should men really be paid at a higher consideration then women for doing the same job?

Even if I agreed with the law I know I would not agree to the retroactive aspect of the law as written which removes statutes of limitations. All it does is make work for slip and fall lawyers .

I expect any victory would expand to class action actions against individual employers and industries.

Also you should worry about employers now being risk adverse of hiring women for fear of future litigation and law suits .It will also have a negative effect on the rewarding productive workers. Employers may fear that rewarding an employee for exceptional work will come under a cloud of litigation from a disgruntled employee who claims wage discrimination.

I work in employment litigation and it doesn't work like that.

So I guess then the real problem was that the female employee was the only unproductive worker and the male employees should have been earning 15% - 41% more than their female counterpart?

Spit and JustWantFair:

First of all, since when did "fair pay" mean that everyone had to earn the same thing as everyone else? Just because the other guy is earning $12 doesn't mean that I get to earn $12 too. It all depends on what I negotiate before I sign on to the job.

Am I getting paid what I BELIEVE IS FAIR COMPENSATION FOR ME? Can I live on the agreed upon salary? Those are the questions that I need to ask myself before I take a job. I can also do some research on the job market and find out if what is being offered is market rate. If I don't like it, I don't have to take the job.

But if I take the job and some other guy comes along and negotiates a better deal that I did, what does that have to do with me? That's between the other guy and the employer. It's got nothing to do with me. And if I don't like it, I can ask for more, and if I don't get it I can quit.

This idea that everyone has to get equal pay is a joke. Perhaps my work is better than yours. Perhaps I'm better at smiling at clients than you are. Perhaps I'm just a better negotiator. Or perhaps we are exactly the same, and I got lucky. So I'm making $ per hour more than you. Your boss agreed to pay you $10 per hour. You agreed to the job on that basis. You want more? Get another job, if you can find it.

You guys are operating under the impression that if I get more than you, it's because you are being "oppressed"... that the extra money that is coming to me is somehow coming out of your pocket. You are acting like a bunch of victims. This victim mentality among libs drives me nuts sometimes.;

If you are getting the amount that was agreed upon, why do you care what anyone else is making? Who cares what sex the other person is? Who cares what their race is? I made a deal with the boss, and that's between me and him. You made a deal with the boss and that's between you and him. And neither of us has an effect on the other's deal.

I have been working in Banking for 15 years. Some of the people that I trained with back in the day are now making significantly more than I am. None of them are Jewish, and I am. Am I being descriminated against because of my religion?

Maybe they were better at negotiating a deal than I am? Or they made better career moves than I did. Or perhaps they are just luckier than me.

That's life. It ain't descrimination. It's business. If the woman doesn't like it, she can find another job at a company that doesn't "descriminate" by offering her as low a salary as they can get away with... the same as they do with everyone else they offer jobs to.

Elliot

I work in employment litigation and it doesn't work like that.

So I guess then the real problem was that the female employee was the only unproductive worker and the male employees should have been earning 15% - 41% more than their female counterpart?

Perhaps she was.

Perhaps she was incompetent.

Perhaps she was a troublemaker.

Perhaps she was untrained compared to her counterparts.

Or perhaps she was exactly as productive and as well trained as every single one of them... or even better than them... and she just made a bad deal for herself.

Why is that the employer's fault? Why is that DESCRIMINATION?

Not everyone is a victim. Sometimes life just happens.

Elliot

Or perhaps she was exactly as productive and as well trained as every single one of them... or even better than them... and she just made a bad deal for herself.

Why is that the employer's fault? Why is that DESCRIMINATION?

Not everyone is a victim. Sometimes life just happens.

Elliot

She worked for the company for 19 plus years, so you believe that she was unfairly compensated because she just made a bad deal for herself?

Yes, if after 19 plus years every male is compensated 15-41% higher than I am then there is a fault with the employer for unfair treatment. If the reason is because I am a female then that is called DISCRIMINATION.

Not everyone is a victim, but they don't hand out verdicts for the plaintiff's that are not victims.

If you pay someone less because of their sex race or religion it is discrimination. That is the entire point of the act. So say this a women goes and negotiates the same way a man does the boss says sorry ms. jones the raise is the raise. The man goes in negotiates the same way and the boss says Mr. Smith you got it. That is discrimination. Do you get it yet BUB

Spit and JustWantFair:

First of all, since when did "fair pay" mean that everyone had to earn the same thing as everyone else? Just because the other guy is earning $12 doesn't mean that I get to earn $12 too. It all depends on what I negotiate before I sign on to the job.

Am I getting paid what I BELIEVE IS FAIR COMPENSATION FOR ME? Can I live on the agreed upon salary? Those are the questions that I need to ask myself before I take a job. I can also do some research on the job market and find out if what is being offered is market rate. If I don't like it, I don't have to take the job.

But if I take the job and some other guy comes along and negotiates a better deal that I did, what does that have to do with me? That's between the other guy and the employer. It's got nothing to do with me. And if I don't like it, I can ask for more, and if I don't get it I can quit.

This idea that everyone has to get equal pay is a joke. Perhaps my work is better than yours. Perhaps I'm better at smiling at clients than you are. Perhaps I'm just a better negotiator. Or perhaps we are exactly the same, and I got lucky. So I'm making $ per hour more than you. Your boss agreed to pay you $10 per hour. You agreed to the job on that basis. You want more? Get another job, if you can find it.

You guys are operating under the impression that if I get more than you, it's because you are being "oppressed"... that the extra money that is coming to me is somehow coming out of your pocket. You are acting like a bunch of victims. This victim mentality among libs drives me nuts sometimes.;

If you are getting the amount that was agreed upon, why do you care what anyone else is making? Who cares what sex the other person is? Who cares what their race is? I made a deal with the boss, and that's between me and him. You made a deal with the boss and that's between you and him. And neither of us has an effect on the other's deal.

I have been working in Banking for 15 years. Some of the people that I trained with back in the day are now making significantly more than I am. None of them are Jewish, and I am. Am I being descriminated against because of my religion?

Maybe they were better at negotiating a deal than I am? Or they made better career moves than I did. Or perhaps they are just luckier than me.

That's life. It ain't descrimination. It's business. If the woman doesn't like it, she can find another job at a company that doesn't "descriminate" by offering her as low a salary as they can get away with... the same as they do with everyone else they offer jobs to.

Elliot


It is often times among middle management, the lowest salaried personnel are African-American or female, so are you telling me that everywhere African-Americans and women can not do the same jobs with the same skills as Caucasian White Males? These are statistics.

The reason that acts like this are in place is because it is discriminitory to evaluate an employee based on race and sex. These are actions of oppression and they do take place in America. Companies should be aware of these practices and not be participating in them. That doesn't mean that productive employees should not be compensated and rated accordingly.

it doesn't work like that.


What doesn't work like that ? An employer being risk adverse because of the possibility of future litigation ?

Does a dismissed as frivolous action mean that the plaintiff has to pay compensation for bringing on the suit... including court costs ?

Let me predict what will happen as a result of this act. Employers will not let wages rise to equal levels... they will take steps to shrink them to equal levels.
If businesses start paying workers the same amount even though their productivity differs because they fear that judges and juries will not be able to understand how productivity is determined, the law would impose significant costs on businesses .Employers will vet a prospective employee in advance to try to determine if that individual will likely be a "trouble maker " who would bring litigation in the future.

Losing the statute of limitations is a complete joke. Ledbetter waited until she retired to bring the lawsuit against Goodyear. If she truly was being discriminated against she should've filed sooner when particular events related to her complaint was still fresh in witnesses minds. Memories fade witnesses move on and key documents related to the complaint get destroyed over time.

Hello twink,

10 things, huh? Ok..

1) He ended torture

2) The prosecution of the torturers is going to happen.

3) He is restoring our good name in the world.

4) He's fixing the economy.

5) He's cutting taxes for the middle class.

6) He's ending the war in Iraq.

7) He's stepping up the "good war" in Afganistan.

8) He's restoring "diplomacy" as a tool.

9) He's UN-politisizing the Justice Department.

10) He extended un-employment benefits.

11) He's going to approve legislation that will help the American worker organize.

12) He's fixing the health care system.

13) He's fixing the education system.

14) He's restoring the American Dream.

I got more if you need 'em.

excon

Do you actually believe all that? Or are you just yankin' our chains?

I'm sure 83-year-old Queen Elizabeth is enjoying her ipod.

Elliot

Are you saying because she's old she wouldn't be able to comprehend such technology?
If not, it is common knowledge the Queen loves listening to music. In fact she alreaqdy has an iPod. Why wouldn't she be grateful for a thoughtful gift?

My mom taught me if I had nothing nice to say...

But let us say I was a LIBERAL :

1] $400,000 to planned parenthood abroad

2] opening up tax dollars to EMBRYONIC stem cell research despite the lack of positive human results.

3] hiring "do as I say, not as I do" folks like Geithner, Sebellious for cabinet positions

4] meeting with Hugo Chavez and accepting his book

5] calling Americans "arrogant"

6] bowing to the saudi king

7] closing Gitmo

8] scaring the crap out of New Yorkers

9] firing a CEO

10] RAISING TAXES ON THE RICH





:)






G&P

Are you saying because she's old she wouldn't be able to comprehend such technology?

Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying.

Exactly how many 83-year-olds do you see walking around with ipods? There's a reason for it. There is a reason that younger people tend to be more technology savvy than older people of the same intelligence. As we age, our brains actually begin to harden, and we become less capable of the brain flexibility necessary to learn new technology. This has been shown in numerous neurological studies (I'll try to see if I can find a citation, but don't bet on it right now).

Even if they somehow understand computer technology and how to use a cell phone (which also happens to be a rarity among octogenarians), she can barely hear or see... she's 83 friggin years old. An iPod with a 2 inch screen and earbuds is not exactly a piece of technology she can get much use from.



If not, it is common knowledge the Queen loves listening to music. In fact she alreaqdy has an iPod. Why wouldn't she be grateful for a thoughtful gift?

I am quite sure she appreciates music. But she wouldn't know what the heck to do with an iPod, and wouldn't be able to use one effectively if she did.

Elliot

She worked for the company for 19 plus years, so you believe that she was unfairly compensated because she just made a bad deal for herself?

Yes, if after 19 plus years every male is compensated 15-41% higher than I am then there is a fault with the employer for unfair treatment. If the reason is because I am a female then that is called DISCRIMINATION.

THEN QUIT AND FIND A NEW JOB THAT PAYS YOU WHAT YOU THINK YOU DESERVE!! I'm sure that someone with 19 years experience who doesn't have any problems in their past can find a better paying job if she is underpaid. Even if she is being underpaid because she's a woman (which is pretty hard to prove in any case, unless you can prove a pattern of it occurring within that company... and if she is the sole female employee you can't prove a pattern of descrimination in pay for women), so what? She has other employment options!! She can get another job!!


Not everyone is a victim, but they don't hand out verdicts for the plaintiff's that are not victims.

Oh, puhleese. Do you truly believe that?

Do I need to bring up the case of the lady who bought a coffee from McDonalds, held the coffee in her lap while driving, even though she had cup holders in the car (a point not often talked abut in that case), and spilled the coffee on herself and sued McD's and won $2.86 million ($160,000 in damages and $2.7 million in "punitive damages")?

Here are a few more cases of awards to non-victims:
A woman was playing golf and hit a shot which ricocheted off railroad tracks that run through the course. The ball hit her in the nose and she won $40,000 because the golf course had a "free lift" rule. (This allows golfers to toss balls which land near the rails to the other side.) The woman alleged that because the course allowed a free lift, they were, in effect, acknowledging the rails to be a hazard.

A man who had purchased a BMW took his new car to a detailing shop for a fancier look and discovered that the car had been partly repainted before it was sold, due to damage done by acid rain. The man was awarded $4,000 in compensatory damages, and $4 Million in punitive damages. The court upheld the verdict, but cut the punitive damages to $2 million.

A jury awarded $178,000 in damages to a woman who sued her former fiance' for breaking their seven-week engagement. The breakdown: $93,000 for pain & suffering; $60,000 for loss of income from her legal practice, and $25,000 for psychiatric counseling expenses.

A 27-year-old man from Michigan was involved in a rear-end collision. Four years later, he sued the owners of the truck that was responsible for the accident. Having suffered minor injuries, he stated that from then on, his sexual relationship with his wife deteriorated, as he was unable to maintain their sex life. He claimed that he had been so affected by the crash that his personality had been forever changed. In fact, he maintained that the accident turned him into a homosexual. He left his wife, moved in with his parents, began hanging out in gay bars, and became a fervent reader of gay literature. He won his case and was awarded $200,000, while his wife received $25,000.

THis one is from Canada: An Ontario woman who got drunk at an office party and crashed her car has successfully sued her employer for allowing her to drive -- even though her company offered a cab ride or accommodation if she gave up her keys. Linda Hunt, 52, won more than $300,000 in damages and interest from Sutton Group Realty Ltd. of Barrie, Ont. after arguing her boss should have stopped her from driving home in a snowstorm following a 1994 Christmas party." The judge assessed Hunt's damages from the resulting accident at C$1.2 million, but reduced that by three quarters to reflect her own fault in the matter. He "went on to declare it the duty of employers to monitor the alcohol consumption of employees at company functions."

In 1997, Larry Harris of Illinois broke into a bar owned by Jessie Ingram. Ingram, the victim of several break-ins, had recently set a trap around his windows to deter potential burglars. Harris, 37, who was under the influence of both alcohol and drugs, must have missed the warning sign prominently displayed in the window. He set off the trap as he entered the window, electrocuting himself. The police refused to file murder charges. Harris’s family saw it differently, however, and filed a civil suit against Ingram. A jury originally awarded the Harris family $150,000. Later, the award was reduced to $75,000 when it was decided Harris should share at least half of the blame.

Are you really prepared to argue that courts don't give awards to people who aren't victims? They do it all the time.

Hello again, El:

Your solution, of course, would be to limit the awards, even badly injured people get. I swear you own insurance company stock.

excon

Hello again, El:

Your solution, of course, would be to limit the awards, even badly injured people get. I swear you own insurance company stock.

excon

No, excon. I have told you what my solution is. I think we should have a grand jury system for civil cases. That way, the frivolous cases get thrown out quickly and the meritorious ones move on to trial.

But I seem to be the only one with that concept.

Still, you are again going off topic. The question here isn't what to do about frivolous lawsuits. My point is a refutation of the statement that "people aren't awarded money by courts if they aren't victims".

You seem to be having trouble staying on topic, excon. Are you suffering from ADD?

(I don't have ADD... it's just that... oh, look, a bunny!! )

Elliot

But I seem to be the only one with that conceptHello again, El:

I've noticed. Isn't it getting lonely?

excon

Watchdogs are heeling for Obama (http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E8DD9E89-18FE-70B2-A8B6E697CFA6AE41)
By: Richard Benedetto
April 28, 2009 04:37 AM EST

Last week, I asked my journalism and political science students at American University to grade the news media covering the Obama administration for the first 100 days. The consensus fell between a C+ and a B-.

However, if I asked President Barack Obama's media strategists to grade the press corps covering their boss, I bet they would mark their cards with an A.

Why? With few exceptions, the mainstream news media have been dutifully pushing the Obama message, burnishing his carefully crafted image and offering few challenges when he makes questionable or misleading pronouncements, gestures or policy statements. In short, they seem mesmerized by the glamour of this new and different president. He is keeping them so busy with skillfully staged daily travel, speeches, meetings and photo ops that they hardly have time to ask tough questions or add context to their stories. Whatever Obama says, or doesn't say, is usually good enough for them.

No comment from the president on pirates taking hostage the captain of a U.S.-flagged ship? No problem.

Get a new dog? Three days of extensive coverage everywhere.

Obama strategists must be giving each other fist bumps as they chortle, “Boy, have we got them eating out of our hands.”
See also

The message they've been successfully pushing from Day One is that Obama is not bad old George W. Bush. Everything they have Obama do or say, from apologizing for American arrogance in Europe to releasing CIA memos outlining interrogation techniques used against suspected terrorists, carries a not-Bush subtext.

And the news media have been only too happy to press that message, even when facts suggest otherwise. The Bush brand is so damaged, and Obama is so cool, they see no need to set the record straight when it's necessary.

For example, when Obama spoke to the Turkish Parliament earlier this month, the big news story was his declaration that the United States “is not and never will be at war with Islam.”

The phrase was headlined everywhere as a major departure from the bellicose Bush, who, by implication, was at war with Islam.

But one fact was missing from most news stories. Bush said the same thing many times, including in September 2006, before the United Nations General Assembly — hardly an obscure forum.

“President Bush tried to quell anti-Americanism in the Middle East yesterday by assuring Muslims that he is not waging war against Islam,” The Associated Press reported at the time.

Bush's declaration might have fallen on deaf ears for many reasons. Nonetheless, Obama was only echoing his words. To say so is context in reporting. Lending the impression that Obama said it first is not. But it is precisely the impression the White House hoped to create. The news media obliged.

Another example: Last week, when Obama attended the Summit of the Americas, he again seemed to draw a contrast with Bush by suggesting that anti-American sentiment in Latin America stemmed from the U.S. (Bush) ignoring the region's humanitarian needs.

“If our only interaction with many of these countries is military, then we may not be developing the connections that can, over time, increase our influence,” Obama said in a news conference.

The widely reported statement went unchallenged in the press. But the fact is that in fiscal 2008, the U.S. under Bush sent nearly $1 billion to Latin America for such nonmilitary needs as schools, health care, anti-poverty programs, refugee assistance and economic development.

A few news outlets, notably The New York Times on April 3, have sporadically noted some similarities between the policies of Obama and Bush, especially in foreign affairs. Yet the media honeymoon continues:

• Rock-star coverage by the TV networks of the president and first lady's tour of Europe.

• An April 12 puff piece on White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel on the front page of The Washington Post, followed two days later by a similar profile of his deputy, Mona Sutphen.

• A touching April 19 New York Times article, fed to the paper by the White House, on how the president reads 10 letters a day from ordinary citizens who write him.

This is all well and good, as long as we do not forget our function as government watchdog. So far, we have.

B- is a bit generous. C+ is about right. It's time to start barking.

Richard Benedetto is a retired USA Today White House correspondent and columnist. He now teaches journalism and politics at American and Georgetown universities.

So far in his 1st 100 days he's at least managed to mesmerize the media. They apparently drank the Koolaid.

So far in his 1st 100 days he's at least managed to mesmerize the media. They apparently drank the Koolaid.Hello Steve:

They did. People like Brian Ross of ABC, Mort Kondrake, Rich Lowry, Jonah Goldberg, David Gregory, and most of the MSM did.

They haven't changed since they lead the charge into Iraq. Their trumpeting is as wrong now as it was then. There are a few bloggers who didn't sip the koolaid, though. Neither did Keith Olbermann.

excon

Hello again, El:

I've noticed. Isn't it getting lonely?

excon

If it's right it's right, and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks.

I don't base my ideas on what others say or think... not even Rush Limbaugh.

Contrary to your opinion of me, I do think for myself.

Elliot

My grandmom is 87 and uses her Ipod I bought her 2 years ago everyday when she goes for her walks. She even downloads music from Itunes.

It is a real shame that you are so ignorant about things. Seniors can't work technology, people don't get paid the same because they can't negotiate salaries, hybrids get plugged in.

Anything he's done right so far?


Seven right off the top of my head...

He currently has managed not to initiate any new unnecessary wars (time will tell). The go green campaign is still in full swing. Detroit auto makers have to have their ducks in a row before any handouts, and the idea that bailouts come with some oversight since using our money was reintroduced. Awaiting patent, the Charter Arms company (an American firearms company) will be coming out with new rimless revolvers, spurred on by the anxiety of losing our semi-automatics. My parents will receive an extra $250 check for social security. You can take advantage of purchasing a house and receiving 8K credit towards taxes next year, or pocket the cashola if you have it coming back. There are millions of African-American children with hope that they can accomplish the highest seat in the land, the U.S. office of presidency.

Hi, Bobby, long time no speak.


Seven right off the top of my head...

He currently has managed not to initiate any new unnecessary wars (time will tell).

The question is what he DID, not what he didn't do.


The go green campaign is still in full swing.

This is a good thing... why?



Detroit auto makers have to have their ducks in a row before any handouts, and the idea that bailouts come with some oversight since using our money was reintroduced.

You mean like the $26 billion he handed GM in February with no strings attached? You mean that oversite?


Awaiting patent, the Charter Arms company (an American firearms company) will be coming out with new rimless revolvers, spurred on by the anxiety of losing our semi-automatics.

That's not something Obama did. That's something being done DESPITE Obama.


My parents will receive an extra $250 check for social security.

And in doing so, he's bankrupting Social Security for future generations. Brilliant.


You can take advantage of purchasing a house and receiving 8K credit towards taxes next year, or pocket the cashola if you have it coming back.

Great... so now more people who can't afford houses are going to buy them anyway. Isn't incentivizing home ownership for people who can't afford them what got us into this mess in the first place?


There are millions of African-American children with hope that they can accomplish the highest seat in the land, the U.S. office of presidency.

That has yet to be seen. If he turns out to be as miserable a President as I think he is going to be, it may very well end the chances of any other African Americans being elected for decades to come.

Detroit auto makers have to have their ducks in a row before any handouts

Like giving the UAW 40 percent ownership of GM (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/general-motors-zipper-peas-336323-3.html#post1698530) and the feds taking half for themselves?

Hi, Bobby, long time no speak.

What's up? The Yankees are ripping my heart out and killing me. Thankfully they stopped the bleeding with Hughes on the mound yesterday. I plan on going to a game next season and hopefully it will be a winner. I've been busy with family and trying to keep my job. Good news is that work has been busier lately. We had huge poker tournament last week. After the editing process is done you'll see it on TV in a few weeks.



The question is what he DID, not what he didn't do.

And to be counted as a positive. In this case that's a good thing. I don't think we need more on our plate.



This is a good thing... why?

If for no other reason it's causing industrial growth in new areas. Not that I'm on the green bandwagon, but I do think a cleaner environment is a good thing and having a few more people employed is relevant.




You mean like the $26 billion he handed GM in February with no strings attached? You mean that over site?

Yup. It was brought to our attention. And I do think the repercussions for large corporate CEO's is forthcoming.



Like giving the UAW 40 percent ownership of GM (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/general-motors-zipper-peas-336323-3.html#post1698530) and the feds taking half for themselves?

Yes. Steve, 40% of 27 million. Percentage wise they lost nothing. In other words the UAW percentage of ownership remained just about the same. Actually the UAW came out ahead by 800K.


That's not something Obama did. That's something being done DESPITE Obama.

We had eight years under the last admin in a stale limited firearm market. We now will have the rimless 9mm, 40, and .45 calibers. Personally I want the 9mm since it will also fire the .380 cartridge.



And in doing so, he's bankrupting Social Security for future generations. Brilliant.

No, no, no. For heavens sakes it's a one time check for $250 for the elderly.




Great... so now more people who can't afford houses are going to buy them anyway. Isn't incentives home ownership for people who can't afford them what got us into this mess in the first place?

Correct. Many people have just filed bankruptcy and had their houses foreclosed on. However, for those of us that have budgeted and can maintain having a job (income) the program is there to our advantage.



That has yet to be seen. If he turns out to be as miserable a President as I think he is going to be, it may very well end the chances of any other African Americans being elected for decades to come.

Personally I think that it has more to do with shear numbers of minority growth and shifting of population, but if failures due to race was an issue we wouldn't have any more white candidates elected president either.



PS. When you have the time check the Judaism board.

Seven right off the top of my head...

. You can take advantage of purchasing a house and receiving 8K credit towards taxes next year, or pocket the cashola if you have it coming back. There are millions of African-American children with hope that they can accomplish the highest seat in the land, the U.S. office of presidency.

The credit is available only to first time home buyers.

I think it would do the housing economy if this were applied to ALL home buyers, maybe $3000 instead of $8000. I am in a situation where, I would buy a home if my current home sells. In speaking to many real estate agents this is more common a problem than the lack of "property virgins" not buying .



Yes, Obama debunks the myth that in America only rich white men have power. There is no longer "the man" to blame. :rolleyes:
It does give hope to the ever increasing number of children raised in single parent homes :)




G&P

The Yankees are ripping my heart out and killing me. Thankfully they stopped the bleeding with Hughes on the mound yesterday. I plan on going to a game next season and hopefully it will be a winner
Didn't know you were a Yanks fan .

I have tix for Sunday v the Angels in the nose bleed section (I think Huges comes up in the rotation again Sunday)and good seat for a June game against the Rays.

The credit is available only to first time home buyers.

I think it would do the housing economy if this were applied to ALL home buyers, ,maybe $3000 instead of $8000. I am in a situation where, I would buy a home if my current home sells. In speaking to many real estate agents this is more common a problem than the lack of "property virgins" not buying .



Yes, Obama debunks the myth that in America only rich white men have power. There is no longer "the man" to blame. :rolleyes:
It does give hope to the ever increasing number of children raised in single parent homes :)




G&P


I couldn't agree more. This has been a horrific nightmarish awakening for many families. My sister-in-law just went through one disaster after another. Off the subject a bit, but she seems only to come to me for advice after the damage is done. Then I get to help clean the mess as much as possible.

BTW it's not your first home purchased ever under the program guidelines, which seems to be a common misunderstanding that much of the public believes. Actually first time home buyers is defined as not having owned a home in the past three years and your income under a certain amount. I forget the exact number. Fortunately for myself I sold my home approx four years ago. So a purchase over 80K gives a credit of 8K, and anything less is 10 percent. In other words, if you found a great deal and you agreed to purchase a condo, lets say for 70K, and haven't owned a single home dwelling in the past three years then you qualify for 7K.

didn't know you were a Yanks fan .

I have tix for Sunday v the Angels in the nose bleed section (I think Huges comes up in the rotation again Sunday)and good seat for a June game against the Rays.


I'm a huge Yankee fan. I'm not sure about this new stadium though. Wang and Marte are useless, and so far I can't say the money spent for Sabathia was worth it. It's NYC in baseball and D'Boys in football. Although my early childhood I spent rooting for the Jets because my hero then was Joe Namath.

I am quite sure she appreciates music. But she wouldn't know what the heck to do with an ipod, and wouldn't be able to use one effectively if she did.

Elliot

Completely wrong Elliot. In fact she had already previously bought an iPod at the urging of her son Andrew. In fact the Queen loves the iPod and "was impressed by how small and handy the iPod is".

So your right, sort of. It probably was a thoughtless gift. But not because she couldn't use it. But because she already had one.

Keep up Elliot. That's old news. They mustn't have reported in Fox.

Barack Obama gives the Queen an iPod - Articles - MP3 Players - Digital Life (http://www.smh.com.au/news/digital-life/mp3-players/articles/barack-obama-gives-the-queen-an-ipod/2009/04/02/1238261694371.html)

Well besides giving the queen a new iPod and DVD's in the wrong format to the British PM, failing to get more combat troops from NATO for Afghanistan, watching as the Taliban moves within 70 miles of Islamabad and the Norks launch a long-range missile, telling the Europeans we don't understand multiparty democracy, giving the Russians an embarrassingly mislabeled "reset" button, bowing to the Saudi king and hoping Ortega wouldn't blame him for things that happened when he was 3 years old during his worldwide apology tour, Obama's foreign policy is off to a booming start in his first 100 days. They've even managed to visit the country of Texas.

http://hotair.cachefly.net/images/2009-04/TexasCountry.png

Maybe they took Rick Perry seriously ?:D

maybe they took Rick Perry seriously ?:D

Looking at the dates it might be the other way around. Maybe Texas can eventually become the 59th state of Obamaland?

Maybe Texas can eventually become the 59th state of Obamaland?Hello speech:

We're going to call it Obama-rama-land, if you don't mind. And, you Texans can fend for yourselves. Tell Rick Perry don't let the door hit him in the a$$.

excon

Well, now that the first 100 days of You Know Who's Administration is just about upon us I would like to pose a question to everyone here.

I can think of at least several dozen things this person has done WRONG since January 21, 2009 but can anyone here name

Anything he's done right so far?

A minimum of 10 things that he's done right and I'll shut up and got sit down. I'm personally having a hard time coming up with even one thing.

He's only a human being and he came into office facing a goliath size load of problems, he can only do so much, people need to be patient and realistic the disaster that was left for him will not be fixed overnight.

Hello speech:

We're gonna call it Obama-rama-land, if you don't mind. And, you Texans can fend for yourselves. Tell Rick Perry don't let the door hit him in the a$$.

excon

OK, Obama-rama-land it is. I think I've already told Perry that before by the way. If I didn't I sure have thought it. :D

Hello again:

The Leader of Obama-Rama-Land, and his faithful disciple.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/members/excon-albums-excon%27s+private+stash-picture291-obamawater.jpg

excon

Good one, ex. Looks like he's walking on water with a swagger to me.

Good one, ex. Looks like he's walking on water with a swagger to me.

Funny you say swagger speech. I tuned into the press conference last night and thought to myself as he was walking up to the podium, Man he really has a swagger to his walk.

Funny you say swagger speech. I tuned into the press conference last night and thought to myself as he was walking up to the podium, Man he really has a swagger to his walk.

Aha, and here we thought the swagger left on Jan. 20th.

More on the first 100 days... "As a result of its ownership of GM common stock, the U.S. Treasury will be able to elect all of our directors and to control the vote on substantially all matters brought for a stockholder vote." -from GM statement

We have:


A Nationalized GM.

A government that refuses to allow banks to repay TARP funds

Pending legislation to allow the Feds to set salary levels of any business in which the Feds have a stake

A DHS concerned with "right-wing" extremists like soldiers

An administration that selectively releases classified information for political purposes

An administration attempting a takeover of the entire health care industry

Advancing "hate crimes" legislation that will criminalize unapproved thought

The coming Orwellian "mandatory" volunteerism

An administration terrorizing NY with low flying jets

An administration pushing a phase 5 panic over something milder than the average winter flu that's affecting .0003 percent of the population thus far

An administration frightening people about riding subways and airplanes (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/30/tapper-to-gibbs-can-you-clarify-bidens-moronic-comment-about-subways/)

A media asking the tough questions like "What is it about the office that’s “enchanted” you?"

Yep, things sure have changed.

Think about it... who names their dog after themselves??

Uh oh the Obamamessiah reference reminded me of some more recent media reminders .

NOAH G POP FAM :: Painter Michael D'Antuono To Unveil Controversial New Work in NYC's Union Square on Obama's 100th Day in Office (http://sev.prnewswire.com/art/20090424/NY0498524042009-1.html)
http://worldnetdaily.com/images/090425obamathetruth.jpg
http://worldnetdaily.com/images/obamadonkey2.jpg
Obama's triumphal entry:<BR>Gentle, riding on donkey (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=87040)


Here lies a fallen god His fall was not a small one, We did but build his pedestal A narrow and a tall one.”
Frank Herbert

Think about it ..... who names their dog after themselves ????

He's ruined the good name of my first Heeler.

My parents will receive an extra $250 check for social security.
For anyone here who will get the SS check please read this. You may end up having to return some of it in next year's tax filing.


The Social Security Administration is sending out $250 payments to more than 50 million retirees in May as part of the economic stimulus package. The payments will go to people who receive Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, railroad retirement benefits or veteran's disability benefits.

The payments are meant to provide a boost for people who don't qualify for the tax credit. However, they will go to retirees even if they have earned income and receive the credit. Those retirees will have the $250 payment deducted from their tax credit -- but not until they file their tax returns next year, long after the money may have been spent.

News-Leader.com | Springfield Blogs - Inside Missouri Politics | Springfield News-Leader (http://www.news-leader.com/article/20090430/BLOGS09/90430047)

Well besides giving the queen a new iPod and DVD's in the wrong format to the British PM, failing to get more combat troops from NATO for Afghanistan, watching as the Taliban moves within 70 miles of Islamabad and the Norks launch a long-range missile, telling the Europeans we don't understand multiparty democracy, giving the Russians an embarrassingly mislabeled "reset" button, bowing to the Saudi king and hoping Ortega wouldn't blame him for things that happened when he was 3 years old during his worldwide apology tour, Obama's foreign policy is off to a booming start in his first 100 days. They've even managed to visit the country of Texas.

http://hotair.cachefly.net/images/2009-04/TexasCountry.png

Is this real? That's friggin hilarious.

http://worldnetdaily.com/images/obamadonkey2.jpg


Which one is the a$$?

Is this real? That's friggin hilarious.Nope, it's another fake being passed as truth:
Countries Visited and Mileage: 2009 (http://www.state.gov/secretary/trvl/c29835.htm)

We've seen this before.

Or maybe they realized the mistake and changed it.

Whatever.

Nope, it's another fake being passed as truth:
Countries Visited and Mileage: 2009 (http://www.state.gov/secretary/trvl/c29835.htm)

We've seen this before.

I love a self-assured liberal... especially when I get to deliver a smack down.

State Department Lists Texas as a Foreign Country (http://www.politicususa.com/en/State-Dept-Texas-Foreign-Country)

State Dept. Listed Texas as Foreign Country (http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/us_world/State-Dept-Listed-Texas-as-Foreign-Country.html)

State Department Lists Texas As A Foreign Country (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/17/state-department-lists-te_n_188151.html)

I can't imagine why State would want to scrub that mistake from their website.

Website typos happen all the time. I fix them as part of my job. Is that what you are laughing at? You need very little to amuse yourself.

Website typos happen all the time. I fix them as part of my job. Is that what you are laughing at? You need very little to amuse yourself.

No. What we're laughing at is the fact that the so-called "smartest administration" has a STATE DEPARTMENT that mistakes Texas for a foreign country. The "smartest administration" seems to be pretty stupid if they can call the second largest state of the USA (in terms of land mass AND population), the one that the prior President comes from, a foreign country. We're not laughing at them fixing it. We're laughing at the fact that they made the mistake in the first place. Fixing it was a GOOD thing.

Elliot

Website typos happen all the time. I fix them as part of my job. Is that what you are laughing at? You need very little to amuse yourself.

At this particular time I'm not laughing at the Obama administration. You figure it out.

You figure it out.Nah, I'll let you do that - that's *your* job.

NK, I cannot believe that you really want to push this argument.

The State Dept. under Princess Hillary and the Genius Messiah Obama screwed up, and the error was very funny. Just accept it and move on.

Elliot

Oh You didn't know they made that mistake on the web site on purpose. They figured you guys needed a little laugh since your party is going the way of the Dodo.

Nah, I'll let you do that - that's *your* job.

Maybe one of these this will help you figure it out.
http://gifts4as.net/images/Wall%20Mirror.jpg

Wasn't Obama going to be the great uniter?

Hello twink,

10 things, huh? Ok..

1) He ended torture

2) The prosecution of the torturers is going to happen.

3) He is restoring our good name in the world.

4) He's fixing the economy.

5) He's cutting taxes for the middle class.

6) He's ending the war in Iraq.

7) He's stepping up the "good war" in Afganistan.

8) He's restoring "diplomacy" as a tool.

9) He's UN-politisizing the Justice Department.

10) He extended un-employment benefits.

11) He's going to approve legislation that will help the American worker organize.

12) He's fixing the health care system.

13) He's fixing the education system.

14) He's restoring the American Dream.

I got more if you need 'em.

excon

How many of these do we see actual proof of so far?
Smoke and mirrors! I won't believe it until I actually see things turn around for the good.
The lefties said ONE American soldier being killed was one too many. 100 days later how many have been killed?

Twinkerdoodle
Don't forget to add that expensive 'rent a rock' errrr I mean fly over ground zero to the list. What American President has ever let anything like that happen before?

Wasn't Obama gonna be the great uniter?

Of course. He is going to be the great unifier the same way that Fundamentalist Islam is the great unifier... "Do it my way or else."

Genghis Kahn was a unifier too... He killed all his enemeis. "He created a desert and called it peace." After that, everyone was unified.

I'm not saying that Obama is planning on killing anyone or using force to get his way (at least not yet). But his idea of unification is to get rid of the opposition, which makes him no different from any other despotic "unifier".

Elliot

But his idea of unification is to get rid of the oposition, which makes him no different from any other despotic "unifier".Hello El:

Of course, we see it differently. I see reality. You're dreamin. The problem here, is the opposition is destroying itself and blaming Obama.

Another problem is you guys think "unifier" means adopting at least SOME of your totally repudiated right wing viewpoints... I have NO idea where you dreamed THAT up.

What "unifier" means in the REAL world, is that Obama has politely invited your side to "unify" itself with the correct side. Of course, your side said no. That's why it's disintegrating.

excon

PS> You should be happy about one thing. Obama has supported Bush in not letting the detainees have habeas corpus.

That's BIG. You should be kissing Obama's butt.

What "unifier" means in the REAL world, is that Obama has politely invited your side to "unify" itself with the correct side. Of course, your side said no. That's why it's disintegrating.

Politely? Did you miss the link I just posted about him allegedly threatening to sic the White House press corps on private investors that don't take his Chrysler proposals and like it?

Did you miss where he told us basically to get over it because "we won?"

Are you clueless as to Rahmbo Emmanuel? He makes Karl Rove look like a field mouse. "Rahm wants it" is the official White House phrase.

Did you miss that one of his first acts was to stick his finger in the eye of pro-lifers like me?

It's like we used to say about Bush, watch what he does not what he says. What he says sounds good, what he does has nothing to do with unifying the country and I don't consider it "polite" to expect me to abandon my principles so I can be on his side.

Hello El:

Of course, we see it differently. I see reality. You're dreamin. The problem here, is the opposition is destroying itself and blaming Obama.

Another problem is you guys think "unifier" means adopting at least SOME of your totally repudiated right wing viewpoints... I have NO idea where you dreamed THAT up.{/quote]

That seems to have been the definition of bi-partisanship that was dreamed up by the left while Bush was in office... they blamed him for not being "bi-partisan" (meaning that he didn't accept their totally repudiated left-wing viewpoints). They complained bloody hell when he didn't do what they wanted. Seems to me that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If that is their definition of bi-partisanship and unification, they ought to be following the same definition when WE use it.

Not that I expect Obama to be a unifier of ANYTHING during his time in office.

[quote]What "unifier" means in the REAL world, is that Obama has politely invited your side to "unify" itself with the correct side. Of course, your side said no. That's why it's disintegrating.

That's why what's disintegrating?

And we didn't say "no". I seem to remember Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid making sure that Republicans never got any input on the Stimulus Bill. Heck, they didn't even give anyone time to read the damn thing. There has been no "unification". This has been a one-party administration from day one, and it will remain so until at least January 2011. We'll see in November 2010 what happens after that.


excon

PS> You should be happy about one thing. Obama has supported Bush in not letting the detainees have habeas corpus.

That's BIG. You should be kissing Obama's butt.

Why? Why should I be "kissing Obama's butt" when all he is doing is what every other President in our history has done. What bothers me is that he even contemplated NOT doing it.

Elliot

It's like we used to say about Bush, watch what he does not what he says. What he says sounds good, what he does has nothing to do with unifying the country and I don't consider it "polite" to expect me to abandon my principles so I can be on his side.

Bush isn't really a good example. What he said sounded sh1t, and what he actually did was sh1t!

Of course. He is going to be the great unifier the same way that Fundamentalist Islam is the great unifier... "Do it my way or else."

Genghis Kahn was a unifier too... He killed all his enemeis. "He created a desert and called it peace." After that, everyone was unified.

I'm not saying that Obama is planning on killing anyone or using force to get his way (at least not yet). But his idea of unification is to get rid of the oposition, which makes him no different from any other despotic "unifier".

Elliot

Yep that is why Obama is talking about that GIVE organization of youth
They will be trying to 'reprogram' us that do not go along with HIS program.
He wants Grids and some sort of GPS type thing set up at each house before 2010.
Its go along with the program or else!

Obama's first 100 days have been a failure. He has failed to restore what he destroyed during the campaign.

How many times during his race for office did he say that the economy is the worst since the great depression? It becama a mantra and it also became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

What is the single most important thing to our economy?

I submit that it is CONFIDENCE.

When the public has confidence, the economy runs pretty well and will come out of the downsides if fairlly shor order. When the public does NOT have confidence, the economy flounders.

My son, a tool and die maker, has found this to be true. Laid off due to lack of work, he found several prospective employers who would like to hire him EXCEPT they are afraid to make any moves because of what this administration may do to them in the way of additional taxes or controls.

Until Obama finds a way to fix what he broke, the economy will continue to lag.

He wants Grids and some sort of GPS type thing set up at each house before 2010.Why, is the house on the move? Lol!
The things people believe without understanding is priceless!

Here's another Obama failure (so far).

I heard him claim during the campaign that he would unify the country.

If he has appointed any conservative to any post in his administration, I missed it.

He has gone on a tour to apologize to just about everyone on the planet on our behalf.

He has reached out to various dictators .

But he has not reached out to those who cling to their Bibles and their guns, preferring to ridiucule those working, tax paying, God fearing, Constitution honoring Americans.

Well, now that the first 100 days of You Know Who's Administration is just about upon us I would like to pose a question to everyone here.

I can think of at least several dozen things this person has done WRONG since January 21, 2009 but can anyone here name

Anything he's done right so far?

A minimum of 10 things that he's done right and I'll shut up and got sit down. I'm personally having a hard time coming up with even one thing.


Oh, ms. twinky dinky... maybe you should sit down and take note of YOUR stance on government assistance, tax-payer programs! After all, President Obama's going to make it easier for EVERYONE to take advantage of these programs! I CAN"T wait until you have your "poll" on how EVERYONE is entitled to these programs! Let's ALL give twinky dinky a great big hand! Yeah!

So far, no one has put forth anything like 10 things that Obama has done right.

He HAS surrounded himself with czars who are retread revolutionaries from the 60's and their goal is the same now as it was then.

They want to destroy the machinery that made this nation the greatest in history.

That just has to be some form of insanity.