The Official Barack Obama Discussion Thread

With a new president coming into office in just a few days, I believe a thread is in order to discuss Barack Obama issues on both sides. With other threads starting to go off-topic this can be an appropriate place to discuss whatever likes, dislikes, news updates, etc. about Barack Obama, his new implemented policies, etc.


As for when drunken_monkey spoke about flip-flopping and changing you mind I would say there IS a difference. When you are trying to gain as much popularity as you can over a short period of time by promising countless agendas and then retract some of them after sealing the deal I would say that is either being dishonest or flip-flopping. Kind of convenient that he never spoke of all the things he (nor most any other politician) couldn't do as president upon trying to gain votes.

For that matter, why does anyone expect any politician to keep his promises? If anybody thought BO was going to be able to fix what's wrong with the world, they've been living under a rock for the past few years.

To be fair, things have gotten to the point where people are grasping at straws for improvement. He knew what to say and whom to say it to. It wasn't rocket science.

Now, where is all this "stimulus" money going to come from? Hyperinflation, anyone?

As for when drunken_monkey spoke about flip-flopping and changing you mind I would say there IS a difference. When you are trying to gain as much popularity as you can over a short period of time by promising countless agendas and then retract some of them after sealing the deal I would say that is either being dishonest or flip-flopping. Kind of convenient that he never spoke of all the things he (nor most any other politician) couldn't do as president upon trying to gain votes.


But it is his fault that it appears this is how to "work" politics in your country?
It's akin to the UK Conservative Party showing a sudden position of being against the new runway at Heathrow; pandering to a sector of the voting populace.

But again, what things since the election has he said he now cannot do?
Were those things originally said before or after the Economic Crisis (sorry for the use of such a label)?

I am off to work so I will make this brief, but will be on later. One major thing Obama has admitted is that his stimulis plan won't work after his ongoing promises of getting the country out of debt. I believe in his words he said something about how even if his stimulus plan went into affect we would still be trillions of dollars in deficit for years to come. I can already see the "change we can all believe in." :rolleyes:

I am off to work so I will make this brief, but will be on later. One major thing Obama has admitted is that his stimulis plan won't work after his ongoing promises of getting the country out of debt.

Link stating that Obama doesn't think his stimulus plan will work please!

I believe in his words he said something about how even if his stimulus plan went into affect we would still be trillions of dollars in deficit for years to come. I can already see the "change we can all believe in." :rolleyes:

Of course we will still be trillions of dollars in debt. We already are thanks to your outgoing administration. Pretty much every economist in existence agrees the only way to pull ourselves out of this mess is to spend our way out. Without a huge economic stimulus, unemployment continues to rise and tax revenues and consumer spending decrease still further in a self-perpetuating cycle that would cripple the economy. This will be a long, hard, road, and Obama's main task at the moment is to jump-start the economy. Once things are moving again, it will then be his job to balance the budget and start reducing our deficit, as he has stated on several occasions. McCain would have been in the exact same position saying the exact same things had he been elected, so I really don't see what the knee-jerk partisan reaction is all about.

If BO can't put together a decent stimulus package the way he wants it, he'll have his own party to blame as much as anything. The GOP will be the least of his worries.

There is a massive deficit. Wall street greed and corrupt lending practices tanked the world economy. Congress gave them 350 billion and they can't/won't tell us where it all went, but it didn't help consumer confidence/spending one single bit. Unemployment is rising; no one is buying much, so there's no need for new goods or services.

Obama (to be fair, it would be anyone else who got elected, for that matter) wants to give us a huge stimulus package while also implementing a tax cut.

Let's see, collect less taxes, spend massive amounts of money the government doesn't have, and our problems are solved.

The dollar will be worth less (worthless?) and I'll be expected to go out and spend what I do have on useless consumer items to "help the economy".

:popcorn:

Here is one chunk of it. Agian, I am on the run here so be patient with me. :lol:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/risky-business/2009/1/13/obama-admits-jobs-tax-rebate-wont-work.html

Luckly people like Bartlett are there to give criticism so that they can tell our president who greatly lacks in experience that it would have been a trillion dollar+ mistake.

Edit:



Obama (to be fair, it would be anyone else who got elected, for that matter) wants to give us a huge stimulus package while also implementing a tax cut.

Let's see, collect less taxes, spend massive amounts of money the government doesn't have, and our problems are solved.


:popcorn:

Just like the kids in the classroom with the icecream story. Promise a bunch of great things upon being elected without explaining how you will pay for them.

the immediate question that comes to mind is what McCain (or indeed, any other potential presidency candidate) could/would do that would be so different and/or more effective?

Of course we will still be trillions of dollars in debt. We already are thanks to your outgoing administration.
...You mean the Democratic controlled Congress?

McCain would have been in the exact same position saying the exact same things had he been elected, so I really don't see what the knee-jerk partisan reaction is all about.
There's a hell of a lot of stuff coming out of Osama's mouth that you would never hear come from McCain.

...You mean the Democratic controlled Congress?
No, I mean the Republican administration and Congress spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year in Iraq. You think taxpayers are footing that bill? Not a chance.


There's a hell of a lot of stuff coming out of Osama's mouth that you would never hear come from McCain.

Please show, with specifics, how McCain would be handling the situation differently with regards to the economic stimulus. Don't forget to touch on the fact that the vast majority of political figures and economists (conservative and liberal) agree that a massive stimulus plan is necessary.

Ugh, Goddamnit! Obama said things would be different! That son of a bitch lied to us! I knew I should have voted for McCain!

:lol:

No, I mean the Republican administration and Congress spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year in Iraq. You think taxpayers are footing that bill? Not a chance.


Why, yes, we ALL know that the Democrats staunchly opposed that war and not a single one of them voted for it. The incoming Madam Sec. of State springs readily to mind here. :eek7:

Look, many have ranted and raved about how Clinton couldn't be cited for some of the things that Bush had to deal with. What will you now say when the Obama camp says, "it's not our fault, that other guy did it"?

I'm not going to go that far and play that game, because there's no way ANY incoming president can fix this (sorry, I think it's too far gone, time to circle the wagons), but BO was part of a senate that had a hand in running things under GW's watch.

...You mean the Democratic controlled Congress?


There's a hell of a lot of stuff coming out of Osama's mouth that you would never hear come from McCain.


Please keep your posts pertaining to this topic. From my take on this, you are taking the thread off topic by referring to someone other than the POTUSE.

Consider this warning number one.

.... but BO was part of a senate that had a hand in running things under GW's watch.
"...and the Senator from Illinois? Your vote sir?"
BO: "Present."

McCain would NOT be attacking any corporations in such a way as to drive them further offshore with their business. "Gee let's make it harder for them to do business here so they have to open factories in India, Mexico, Canada....or elsewhere."

While McCain isn't the most conservative person in Washington.....he is FAR from the Marxist that is to sit in the Whitehouse for the next 4 years.

"...and the Senator from Illinois? Your vote sir?"
BO: "Present."

And what about McCain having missed more votes than any other senator?
What is worse, voting "present" or missing votes?

You say that you don't want anything to do with Obama in another thread. What does that mean?
Are you now going to emmigrate because he will be running the USA?

Barack Obama will screw it big time including the congress and senate.I do not trust Democrats,raise taxes and want to take away guns.Most of the senate and congress are anti gun.Nancy Pelosi,Diane Feinstein and Harry Reid are big time anti gun including Obama.Barack will not make it,someone will assasinate him and it will be a white supremesist.Barak is a big idiot to me and a joke to our society.

Why, yes, we ALL know that the Democrats staunchly opposed that war and not a single one of them voted for it. The incoming Madam Sec. of State springs readily to mind here. :eek7:

Look, many have ranted and raved about how Clinton couldn't be cited for some of the things that Bush had to deal with. What will you now say when the Obama camp says, "it's not our fault, that other guy did it"?

I couldn't agree more. There is no question that Clinton had a hand in deregulation and other factors that played a large part in this whole mess. But that isn't to say that Bush and co. didn't also play a large part. Nobody saw this coming, not the republicans, not the democrats, not the economists. To place blame on any specific person or entity is simply ridiculous.

Barack Obama will screw it big time including the congress and senate.I do not trust Democrats,raise taxes and want to take away guns.Most of the senate and congress are anti gun.Nancy Pelosi,Diane Feinstein and Harry Reid are big time anti gun including Obama.Barack will not make it,someone will assasinate him and it will be a white supremesist. is a big idiot to me and a joke to our society. I hate anything and anyone associated with thinking and opinions that are different from mine

Fixed:uhoh:

Barack Obama will screw it big time including the congress and senate.I do not trust Democrats,raise taxes and want to take away guns.Most of the senate and congress are anti gun.Nancy Pelosi,Diane Feinstein and Harry Reid are big time anti gun including Obama.Barack will not make it,someone will assasinate him and it will be a white supremesist.Barak is a big idiot to me and a joke to our society.


Funny since there has been nothing but tax cuts discussed as soon as Obama takes office. If you seriously believe that the Democrats are going to be taking your guns, I think you have other things to worry about. Particularly the men in white suits.

Funny since there has been nothing but tax cuts discussed as soon as Obama takes office. If you seriously believe that the Democrats are going to be taking your guns, I think you have other things to worry about. Particularly the men in white suits.


Well, Obama's brethren in congress are talking about how unfeasible some of his proposed cuts are going to be.

He might be talking about cuts, but I'm not looking forward to watching even more increased spending with decreased income. Look at deficits now. A spit in the ocean compared to how it will look even a couple of years from now.

They won't have to take away guns. Slap a huge tax on it and ammunition will soon be unaffordable. Guns - ammo = big metal club.

Nobody saw this coming, not the republicans, not the democrats, not the economists.

You know, it's simply unbelievable to me that they can claim that. These people are spending their lives watching and adjusting the markets and the industry and they couldn't see how impossible it was to sustain the kind of growth they wanted? I'd have to call it incompetence (more like pure greed), and there's plenty to go around.

Obama answers to his corporate backers the same way presidents before him did. It's now his to fix or screw it up even worse. God help us all.

I am a member of the NRA and the NRA found about the truth about Nancy Pelosi,Diane Feinstien,Harry Reid and Obama.They all voted for gun bans which is not the answer.They need to learn guns do not kill,peole kill in the wrong hands!Obama voted for hand gun bans and making it a crime to shot an intrudor when he was in the Illinios state senate

are you still going on about that one article you read in an NRA magazine?

Yes and this is true.Obama has history of voting yes on raising taxes.During the campain he pointed the finger at the wrong person for lost jobs,John McCain.He should of pointed the finger at his dmeocratic buddy and former president Bill Clinton for signing NAFTA in 1992.NAFTA is the worst thing to come out and I knwo proof of this.

BO is building a pretty good track record here. Richardson backs out over ethics issues, Daschle backs out, Geithner should have backed out, and the pick for the White House performance officer also backed out.

Who would have thought that paying income taxes was so hard?

Maybe we can all just not file returns this year and claim we "made some mistakes" when they call us on it.

BO is building a pretty good track record here. Richardson backs out over ethics issues, Daschle backs out, Geithner should have backed out, and the pick for the White House performance officer also backed out.

Who would have thought that paying income taxes was so hard?

Maybe we can all just not file returns this year and claim we "made some mistakes" when they call us on it.


Let's try it...I am sure we will all be off the hook like they will be. :rolleyes:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/03/obama-plans-cap-executive-pay-government-assisted-financial-institutions/

Obama to Limit Executive Pay for Bailout Recipients

AP

Tuesday, February 03, 2009

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration plans to limit pay to $500,000 a year for executives of government-assisted financial institutions in a new get-tough approach to bankers and Wall Street, a senior administration official said Tuesday.

Obama plans to announce the new limits with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner at the White House on Wednesday.

"If the taxpayers are helping you, then you've got certain responsibilities to not be living high on the hog," President Barack Obama said in an interview with "NBC Nightly News".
............................................

With each successive tax cheat nominated for his cabinet, this administration is less and less qualified to comment on anybody's pay and performance.

Time to put your money where your mouth is, Mr. President. I say we open the books and examine the tax returns of every single member of both houses. Start with yourself. Let's go back a few years while we're at it.

People who live in glass houses can't afford to throw stones. (transparency = glass house?)

With the recent 93k raise in petty cash that congress voted themselves, they aren't qualified to tell anyone how to even clean an outhouse. :mad:

I think you have other things to worry about. Particularly the men in white suits.

After Hurricane Katrina citizens attempting to flee or assist in rescueing other civilians had their firearms confiscated, blatantly stomping their right to personal protection into the dirt.

Firearm confiscation isn't some paranoid, scitzophrenic delusion. It's happening.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/19/obama-compares-bowling-score-special-olympics-tonight/100days/


Obama on 'Tonight Show' Discusses Economy, Makes Special Olympics Joke
Some have questioned whether the president's light-hearted chat with Leno would strike a humorous tone when a serious one was merited

FOXNews.com

Thursday, March 19, 2009

President Obama sat down with Jay Leno on Thursday for a late-night TV interview that spanned a range of topics -- from the economic crisis to the presidential dog -- and even, at one point, featured the president joking that his bowling ability was suitable for the Special Olympics.

The bowling comment was a reminder of his poor performance on the lanes last year during one of his campaign stops. Obama bragged to "The Tonight Show" that he recently bowled 129 on the White House alley.

"It's like Special Olympics," he said.

Obama said he was stunned when he learned of the bonuses that bailed-out insurance giant AIG was paying its employees, and the payments raise moral end ethical problems. The administration's going to do everything it can to get them back, he said.

But Obama added the bigger problem is the culture that allowed traders to claim them. He says that's got to change if the economy is to recover.

"The larger problem is we have to get back to an attitude where people know enough is enough, and people have a sense of responsibility and they understand that their actions are going to have an impact one everybody," Obama said. "If we can get back to those values that built America, we're going to be okay."

According to NBC, Obama was the first sitting president ever to appear on "The Tonight Show." He'd already appeared twice as a candidate.

Obama's TV appearance Thursday came during a series of stops in California intended to rally support for his budget proposal and his solutions to the widespread economic troubles facing the country, but some have questioned whether a light-hearted chat with Leno would strike a humorous tone when a serious one was merited.

"It's not an accident that no sitting president has ever done a show like this," media analyst Steve Adubato told FOX News on Thursday before Obama's TV appearance.


.................................................. ........

Maybe Barry should stop campaigning and stay in the White House?:dunno:

Probably not a big deal, since the 'tards wouldn't get it, anyway. :rolleyes:

Luckly I record Leno on my DVR so I went and watched it after posted that. I am rather surprised he made that joke. It's not something you would think the POTUS would joke about.

In and of itself, it's probably not that big a deal, but the prez (any prez) ought to know better. Agree.

It's interesting that Barry seems to get a pass for it when you know G dub would have been tarred and feathered for it.

Then again, G dub wouldn't be on Leno, either. Not good form for the prez to be on a talk show while the nation needs him to be in the White House doing his job. There might be a reason no other sitting president has done that.

Normally BHO is noted as a great orator, but w/o the teleprompter....he's worse than GWB by a long shot.
He don't be thinkin' too good on his feet.

For anyone that had the opportunity to shoot the breeze with G.W he is much better in person than giving a speech off a teleprompter. Whether you believe it or not actually quite sharp. :uhoh:......:lol: My son's graduating class at West Point had the opportunity to chat with him in a military style town hall meeting. He visited the Academy before he left office to talk to the Seniors and give thanks to those who decided to serve after 9/11 and become our nation's future military leaders. My son left impressed so that is good enough for me. Bush had equally good reception at the Air Force and Naval Academies.

Also, Obama is finding out that it is easier running for President than being President especially when it comes to campaign promises and reality. :runaround:


Source: MSNBC/AP

Obama the candidate vs. Obama the president
U.S. leader finds campaign promises don’t always mesh with reality

Link to Article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29818063)

Joe Biden sez...
“Axelrod really wanted me to do this on teleprompter -- but I told him I’m much better when I wing it. … I know these evenings run long, so I’m going to be brief. Talk about the audacity of hope. … President Obama does send his greetings, though. He can’t be here tonight -- because he’s busy getting ready for Easter. (Whisper) He thinks it’s about him. …
From Politico.com

It's quite telling that these guys seem to get a pass for things GW was lambasted for. If you even bring it up, people are quick to say, "hey, give the guy a break."

Hmmm. Where were these idjits when everybody was crucifying GW for wearing the wrong color socks? :screwy:

Bob, +10. I'd much rather serve under GW, even though I didn't agree with him very much, than serve under BO.

Bob, +10. I'd much rather serve under GW, even though I didn't agree with him very much, than serve under BO.

I know what you mean Doug. Me three! :lol:

But anyone on active duty in the military today should take an apolitical approach and set aside politics while serving. To be fair to Obama nonetheless he is the Commander in Chief and at least he went with the status quo on the military for now and actually supports many of Bush's policies as far as Iraq and Afghanistan. He kept Robert Gates on as Secretary of Defense. Of course, if there were no wars it may be different. IMO it would be similar to the days when Carter was President and even under the Clinton administration. Obama still plans on giving the military a 2.9% pay increase for FY 2010 which is better than nothing. Also, I find it interesting that Obama failed to tell the public that although he will withdraw troops from Iraq starting with two Brigade Combat Teams in 2010, remainder down to about 50,000 in 2011 he is still sending thousands of troops from National Guard units over to Iraq this year. In other words continuing Bush's back door draft that I disagreed with in the past and today. Hypocrisy? You be the judge. :dunno:

:uhoh:

Man, I can't believe I said the above. Now if our liberal friends would ever tone down their rhetoric and have anything good to say or not be one sided I would probably fall out of my chair. :lol:

Normally BHO is noted as a great orator, but w/o the teleprompter....he's worse than GWB by a long shot.
He don't be thinkin' too good on his feet.
Case in point:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20339.html
Kroft to Obama: Are you punch-drunk?
By CRAIG GORDON & JONATHAN MARTIN 3/22/09 6:55 PM EDT Updated: 3/23/09 10:10 AM EDT

President Barack Obama said he believes the global financial system remains at risk of implosion with the failure of Citigroup or AIG, which could touch off “an even more destructive recession and potentially depression.”

His remarks came in a“60 Minutes” interview in which he was pressed by Steve Kroft for laughing and chuckling several times while discussing the perilous state of the world’s economy.

“You're sitting here. And you're— you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, ‘I mean, he's sitting there just making jokes about money—’ How do you deal with— I mean: explain. . .” Kroft asked at one point.

“Are you punch-drunk?” Kroft said.

“No, no. There's gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day,” Obama said, with a laugh.

and what about the rest of the interview?

your quoted section must be all of fifteen seconds.
What was the other 59 minutes and 45 seconds like?

and what about the rest of the interview?

your quoted section must be all of fifteen seconds.
What was the other 59 minutes and 45 seconds like?

:confused:............:lol:

It wasn't a 60 minute interview but aired on CBS's 60 Minutes news show which airs on CBS every Sunday. I'm assuming you don't get it in the U.K.? However, see link below for more details and other videos.

Click here (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/18/60minutes/main4873938.shtml)

and what about the rest of the interview?

your quoted section must be all of fifteen seconds.
What was the other 59 minutes and 45 seconds like?


I see you don't know that the show is named '60 Minutes' not that the interview is 60 minutes.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

:confused:............:lol: <------

It wasn't a 60 minute interview but aired on CBS's 60 Minutes news show which airs on CBS every Sunday. I'm assuming you don't get it in the U.K.? However, see link below for more details and other videos.

Click here (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/18/60minutes/main4873938.shtml)


That was pretty much my thought train as well. Oh well, I am sure DM could embarass us with a UK show. :D

That was pretty much my thought train as well. Oh well, I am sure DM could embarass us with a UK show. :D

:lol:

Alex, I think the media in the U.K. covered it so we will beat him to the punch. The actual interview lasted about 90 minutes. See link.

Obviously Obama favors CBS's 60 Minutes since it leans to the left or is classified as the "liberal biased media". :rolleyes:



Source: Telegraph

Analysis: is US President Barack Obama 'punch drunk'?

It was about halfway through a friendly and respectful 90-minute interview with 60 minutes, a programme much favoured by the White House, that President Barack Obama's interlocutor exclaimed: 'Are you punch drunk?'

Link to Article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5038709/Analysis-is-US-President-Barack-Obama-punch-drunk.html)

It wasn't a 60 minute interview but aired on CBS's 60 Minutes news show which airs on CBS every Sunday. I'm assuming you don't get it in the U.K.? However, see link below for more details and other videos

oooh.
My bad.
I assumed that seeing an interview with any President would be a big thing and filled in the wrong blanks. On the other hand, a 90 minute interview is something I'd like to see happen here with our Prime Minister.

Is it normal for your President to give such long interviews with press directly?

Is it normal for your President to give such long interviews with press directly?

No. It's also not normal for the president to go on late night talk shows and joke about mentally handicapped citizens.

That's the point some of us are making. This president needs to keep his butt in the White House and do his stinking job. The campaign is over; he won. Now he needs to stop trying to be such a TV celeb and take care of business.

But I digress.:uhoh:

That was pretty much my thought train as well. Oh well, I am sure DM could embarass us with a UK show. :DDM: "In a Top Gear interview Jeremy Clarkson and The Queen discussed the world's economy...."

American: "Well, okay maybe they were in top gear, but I want to know what kind of car it was and how much throttle they were using...."


:iceslolan

I think that's situational dependent.
I've always been of the mind that politicians of any level shouldn't be placed on any sort of pedestal and should simply do what is neccessary, as required. As I said, I'd like see some sort of serious public question time with our Prime Minister (which does happen by the way, just not often enough) instead of only being questioned by peers as per Parliament.


Not related but was reminded of this.

Tony Blair's part in last year's charity event for Comic Relief.

46r4KdzoOmI



"In a Top Gear interview Jeremy Clarkson and The Queen discussed the world's economy...."

it might happen.
remember their experiment in farming your own "green" fuel?

DM: "In a Top Gear interview Jeremy Clarkson and The Queen discussed the world's economy...."

American: "Well, okay maybe they were in top gear, but I want to know what kind of car it was and how much throttle they were using...."

:iceslolan

Touche! Another good one. Man, Chris you are on a roll. Better head to Vegas. :lol:


Well, I got good news today. Prez Obama decided to be the commencement/graduation speaker at the Naval Academy in May and not at USMA West Point which is a relief to me and many other parents. :uhoh: Now I can enjoy my vacation up there.

According to my brother in law Prez Obama likes the Marines who also attend the Naval Academy. I guess he had a childhood fantasy of being a Marine. :dunno:

I guess he had a childhood fantasy of being a Marine
Once a Marine, always a Marine! If you were never a Marine, you never will be! I think he would make a better looking Messiah! :eek7:


http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/6239/bobamessiah.jpg

Obama needs to be kicked out!This guy is an idiot and is screwing up already.He has proposed a gun ban bill already which will be killed.Obama does not know the NRA is way too powerful.The republicans are going to reject the stimulas money,way too much.The Duke Men's basketball coach is critizing him too.

Oh wow! Gore invents it and now Obama uses the Internet in a "town hall" meeting. :rolleyes:

I guess he has nothing better to do in addition to playing basketball in his spare time.

BTW - The top questions were on cannabis.


Source: Telegraph

Barack Obama's internet 'town hall' meeting hijacked by cannabis questions
US President Barack Obama had to answer a question about legalising cannabis after deciding to 'open up the White House to the American people' to a live question and answer session.

Link to Article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5056835/Barack-Obamas-internet-town-hall-meeting-hijacked-by-cannabis-questions.html)

Oh wow! Gore invents it and now Obama uses the Internet in a "town hall" meeting. :rolleyes:

I guess he has nothing better to do in addition to playing basketball in his spare time.

BTW - The top questions were on cannabis.

[/i]Don't forget Bob; he is trying to improve his bowling skills so he does not look like he is a participant in the "Special Olympics"! :lol2: The Secret Service is going to have a hard time keeping this wild-man off the talk shows, cell phone-blackberry and internet. :lol:

Don't forget Bob; he is trying to improve his bowling skills so he does not look like he is a participant in the "Special Olympics"! :lol2: The Secret Service is going to have a hard time keeping this wild-man off the talk shows, cell phone-blackberry and internet. :lol:

:lol:

If I was a SS agent I would look for another job. And speaking of people getting upset. I mentioned I didn't have to worry about Obama being the graduation speaker at my son's graduation in May but there are plans to have him speak at Notre Dame and Arizona State in addition to the Naval Academy.

Although a President speaking at a graduation is an honor and historical event you can still boycott the speech which are boring anyways and just attend the awarding of diplomas and special honors. But in many cases the commencement speaker helps give out the diplomas. :runaround:


Source: AP

Criticism over Obama invite mounts at Notre Dame

Link to Article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090327/ap_on_re_us/obama_notre_dame)

Chicago style politics in the Whitehouse.....
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123862834153780427.html
The President Is 'Keeping Score'
Chicago politics has moved into the White House.
By: KARL ROVE
"Don't think we're not keeping score, brother." That's what President Barack Obama said to Rep. Peter DeFazio in a closed-door meeting of the House Democratic Caucus last week, according to the Associated Press.
A few weeks ago, Mr. DeFazio voted against the administration's stimulus bill. The comment from Mr. Obama was a presidential rebuke and part of a new, hard-nosed push by the White House to pressure Congress to adopt the president's budget. He has mobilized outside groups and enlisted forces still in place from the Obama campaign.
Senior presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett and her chief of staff, Michael Strautmanis, are in regular contact with MoveOn.Org, Americans United for Change and other liberal interest groups. Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina has collaborated with Americans United for Change on strategy and even ad copy. Ms. Jarrett invited leaders of the liberal interest groups to a White House social event with the president and first lady to kick off the lobbying campaign.
Its targets were initially Republicans, as team Obama ran ads depicting the GOP as the "party of no." But now the fire is being trained on Democrats worried about runaway spending.
Americans United is going after Democrats who are skeptical of Mr. Obama's plans to double the national debt in five years and nearly triple it in 10. The White House is taking aim at lawmakers in 12 states, including Democratic Sens. Kent Conrad, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor. MoveOn.Org is running ads aimed at 10 moderate Senate and House Democrats. And robocalls are urging voters in key districts to pressure their congressman to get in line.
Team Obama is also ginning up the Democratic National Committee. A special group at the DNC has been created called "Organizing for America." It is headed by Mr. Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, and is lobbying for the administration's spending proposals.
Organizing for America's first effort has not been terribly effective. It emailed 13 million Obama election workers, recruited 1,200 neighborhood canvassers, and, after a couple of weeks and more email pleas to the Obama list, produced 642,000 signatures. Having less than 5% of your own activists sign a petition is unimpressive and perhaps evidence that adding $9.3 trillion to the deficit alarms even some of Mr. Obama's most fervent supporters.
Every White House is faced with finding ways to nudge Congress without antagonizing it. But this overt campaign could infuriate members who won't appreciate being targeted by a president of their own party. They could react by becoming recalcitrant. Should that happen, team Obama will have to recalculate its efforts, especially as the public sours on big spending plans.
In March, a Gallup Poll found that positive impressions of the Obama budget dropped five points. Only 39% now harbor supportive views of it. A CNN/Opinion Research Poll in mid-March found that support for the stimulus bill Mr. Obama signed into law shifted 11-points against the bill in five weeks, with 66% of Americans opposed to a second stimulus bill.
Support continues to decline for the proposition that a big boost in government spending will lead America to prosperity. A NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll early last month found that 61% of Americans were concerned that "the federal government will spend too much money" (up 12 points from December), and only 29% were concerned "it will spend too little money to try to boost the economy."
This growing skepticism will not be assuaged by White House Budget Director Peter Orszag's bewildering response when asked by a reporter last week about increasing federal debt. He said, "I don't know what spiraling debt you're referring to."
Members of Congress should also worry about how Mr. Obama is "keeping score." He is steeped in the ways of Chicago politics and has not forgotten his training in the methods once used by Saul Alinsky, the radical Chicago community organizer.
Alinsky's 1971 book, "Rules for Radicals," is a favorite of the Obamas. Michele Obama quoted it at the Democratic Convention. One Alinsky tactic is to "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." That's what the White House did in targeting Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santelli and Jim Cramer. (The president's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, went so far as to lash all three from the White House press podium.) It may also explain Mr. Obama's comments to Mr. DeFazio.
After all, Alinsky's first rule of "power tactics" is "power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have." Team Obama wants to remind its adversaries it has plenty of power, and it does. The question is whether the White House will wield it responsibly. The jury is still out, but certain clues are beginning to emerge. "Don't think we're not keeping score, brother," even if said with a wink and a smile, isn't quite the "new politics" we were told to expect.
Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.

The Mighty ACORN
By Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com
Thursday, Apr 02, 2009

In conservative circles, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, is the devil. This group mobilizes left-wing voters and champions liberal causes, sometimes using tax money (state and federal grants) to pay expenses. Of course, that makes right-wingers seethe with indignation.

ACORN employees across the country have been indicted for voter fraud and, by its own admission, the group has submitted at least 400,000 questionable voter documents, according to a New York Times report dated October 24, 2008.

Now, two whistle blowers, Anita MonCrief and Marcel Reed, who used to work for ACORN, have testified under oath before the House Judiciary Committee that the organization took money to intimidate capitalist organizations like the Carlyle Group and H&R Block and worked closely with the Obama presidential campaign to get voters to the polls. It is here where the story begins to rise to the next level.

According to Ms. MonCrief, New York Times reporter Stephanie Strom was getting close to documenting a story directly linking the Obama campaign to ACORN through the "Project Vote" organization. President Obama himself worked for "Project Vote" in the 1990s. There is speculation that "Project Vote" did a number of illegal things last November during the voter registration process. Apparently, Ms. Strom was zeroing in on the situation.

But then the Times investigation suddenly stopped dead, prompting a call from Ms. Strom, the reporter, to Ms. MonCrief, her source. A voice mail by Strom was left on October 21, 2008:

"Hi, Anita, it's Stephanie. I've just been asked by my bosses to stand down... they want me to hold off on coming to Washington. Sorry, I take my orders from higher up."

The Times did run a story about ACORN's left-wing partisanship, but stopped there. The paper would not make Stephanie Strom available to talk with me. Spokeswoman Catherine Mathis sent a statement saying, "Every day we make news judgments about which stories to publish and which ones not to pursue. Political considerations played no role in our decision about whether to cover this story."

Of course, the motto of the New York Times is "All the News That's Fit to Print." "Standing down" on a story with presidential implications does not seem to fit that motto. Or am I wrong?

But Congressman John Conyers, a fervent Democrat and head of the Judiciary Committee, is not standing down. He is calling for a full House investigation of ACORN's role in the Presidential election and beyond. Good for him.

The story is somewhat technical, thus does not hold much appeal for TV news operations, but it is important. According to the whistleblowers, ACORN is a corrupt organization with close ties to the Obama administration. That sounds kind of ominous. Let's hope Conyers continues to step up.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/thesmokinggun.com/graphics/art4/0424093mugs4.jpg
You gotta love them photogenical BHO supporters!

But wait....there's more!
http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/thesmokinggun.com/graphics/art4/1217081mugyear20.jpg

Are these mug shots or are they all on welfare? :lol:

Are these mug shots or are they all on welfare? :lol:

I think both. :lol:

Looks like a bunch of crack titans to me! :evillol: No wonder Obama seeks to change crack sentences (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97S6O9O3&show_article=1&catnum=0), if he don’t, he will loose most of his supporters! :rofl::rofl:

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/1714/homelessmedium.jpg

Are these mug shots or are they all on welfare? :lol:

......from the BHO Fan Club Directory

......from the BHO Fan Club Directory

C'mon, give us a link.

Smokinggun.com

Right click on the picture and you can see where it came from.