The Obama Administration thread

[Smoking Guns]

aside from failing to pay a little bit in taxes, what is your beef with him?

lol. A little wouldnt do it so the little got more n more. Let me guess, he is the only person in America capable of doing the job?


  

I think the President was pretty clear what he intends to do.   Look at the agenda on whitehouse.gov.

Where is the bi partisanship I heard about throughout the campaign?

Also, why is he dead set on going after parts of the media, like Rush?  You need oposition.  I didn't mind Olbermann, why do they mind Rush?  Fucking horseshit

Because dissent is a threat to socialism

How about the closed door meetings..  Treating some repubs like second class.  I am just saying, and you can read my posts, that some things done already go against what the hell we were told during the election.

His nominee for Treasury Sec. is so laughable.   How pathetic.

[younggunner]

Its time to put that partisan bullshit aside, the republicans lost big this last election.   Its time to try new shit.

the President feels the same way

Rush wants Obama to fail, meaning he wants America to continue to decline for the next 4 years all so he can say "I told you so".       This isn't a fucking game

And whats wrong with that? Democrats didnt want Bush to fail? But now that the messiah is in office we must bow and not question anything?

If this isnt a game then why is Obama playing games? What is his GITMO plan? I know its a process Mr Press Secretary President but what is the process?

How do building bridges etc help our economy. Especially in the short term.  How come white male construction workers wont be given the labor?


Mr president why does Nancy Pelosi think human elimination will stimulate the economy?

Mr President dont you have better things to do then to tell me who should or shouldnt control the airwaves?

[Smoking Guns]

Some of the brainwashing has already begun.  I am hopeful his vision is just hazy and just appears to be a mess.  This is all so calculated.  I don't know what to think now.  Oh well, I hope I am wrong.

[western_chaos]

Some of the brainwashing has already begun.  I am hopeful his vision is just hazy and just appears to be a mess.  This is all so calculated.  I don't know what to think now.  Oh well, I hope I am wrong.

Care to elaborate more?

[Smoking Guns]

Rush said if Obama acts like a uniter like Regan, keeps the Bush tax cuts, etc, he will support Obama.  But he knows he won't, so he wants him out as soon as possible more or less is what he is saying.  He thinks Obama acting like Clinton would be a success, he just doesn't think he will.

[younggunner]

Some of the brainwashing has already begun.  I am hopeful his vision is just hazy and just appears to be a mess.  This is all so calculated.  I don't know what to think now.  Oh well, I hope I am wrong.

What really is sad/scary is that even if Obama is wrong who is going to call him out? Journalism has been dead for awhile now. He has such huge expectations and has been put on such a pedastel that no one will admit anything. And that is sad.

[Smoking Guns]

Some of the brainwashing has already begun.  I am hopeful his vision is just hazy and just appears to be a mess.  This is all so calculated.  I don't know what to think now.  Oh well, I hope I am wrong.

Care to elaborate more?

The excuses and love fest with 95% of the media.  The other 5% is Rush and Fox news.  Just too unbalanced.  I am suspicious of it all.

[Smoking Guns]

Some of the brainwashing has already begun.  I am hopeful his vision is just hazy and just appears to be a mess.  This is all so calculated.  I don't know what to think now.  Oh well, I hope I am wrong.

What really is sad/scary is that even if Obama is wrong who is going to call him out? Journalism has been dead for awhile now. He has such huge expectations and has been put on such a pedastel that no one will admit anything. And that is sad.

Exactly, Maddow, Olbermann, Couric, Williams, will NEVER, EVER call him out.  They just won't.  And when Hannity, O'Reilly, or Rush do, they will be dismissed as Jealous, Racist, Neocons.  Pathetic. 

[Smoking Guns]

All MSNBC will do now is tell us how cracy Fox News is, the won't ever look in the mirror. 

[younggunner]

MSNBC is a disgrace.

[Jim Bob]

Kind of like Keith Olbermann.  You need to hear both sides, i don't give a fuck if its rush or me, shutting it our so everyone agrees is NEVER the best thing to do. 

nobody is being silenced.   Rush isn't making all that money for nothing.     That fairness doctorine scare is just more right-wing fear propganda.

And whats wrong with that? Democrats didnt want Bush to fail? But now that the messiah is in office we must bow and not question anything?

nobody wanted Bush to fail.  hell, he had something around 90% approval after 9/11.     Nobody wanted the world to end up in the state its in today.   It has nothing to do with partisan politics.

nobody is saying you can't question Obama's decisions, I don't agree with everything he's done.  But rooting for him to fail is rooting for America to fail.   Not very patroitic now is it? 

MSNBC is a disgrace.

and Fox isn't?   At least MSNBC doesn't try to claim its fair and balanced.   What is Joe Scarborough anyways?  a liberal?

[younggunner]

/

nobody wanted Bush to fail.  hell, he had something around 90% approval after 9/11.     Nobody wanted the world to end up in the state its in today.   It has nothing to do with partisan politics.

That was after 9/11.  You, me or Buckethead could have been President ater 9/11 and we all would have had a 90% approval rating... What happened after that? Do you really think people will mock and make fun of Obama like they did with Bush? cmon...and if they ever do it will never be vicious but more in good fun.
Our economy is in its current state not soley because of Bush. btw...did Bush not protect you from another attack on our soil?

Im not trying to make Bush a saint. He def was wrong with a lot of things. But he was also faced with some of the biggest challenges a President has and will ever face. Did he make mistakes..of course But what i do know is that the guy stuck to his guns and beliefs. He didnt waver despite the media bashing. And that is what I want from a leader. With Obama I just feel like everything is calculated and scripted and can change at any minute.

A perfect example of this right out of the gate is the GITMO scenario. He doesnt even have a process/plan set up yet. Yet he signs off on these orders. Why? To please the people who helped him get where he is.

And you show a short term memory. Democrats/liberals/cynics were all bashing Bush before he stepped foot in office. Get this, people were even questioning the amount of money that was being spent on his ceremonies. Imagine if we were in a recession! Obama really needed a 4 day circus during these times? Whethere he did or didnt isnt the point...the point is that it wasnt even questioned!

nobody is saying you can't question Obama's decisions, I don't agree with everything he's done.  But rooting for him to fail is rooting for America to fail.   Not very patroitic now is it?

No its not. If I believe that America is better off with lesser Gov't influence then how am I unpatriotic? The only department in which I hope Obama doesnt fail, even though I probably will end up disagreeing with his forein policies, is the war on Terror and homeland security. I will root for him to prevail in that area. Other then that I hope he and this big bubble pops.

Do I think your unpatriotic for thinking differently? Absolutely not. I think your wrong. But not unpatriotic. Big difference.

and Fox isn't?   At least MSNBC doesn't try to claim its fair and balanced.   What is Joe Scarborough anyways?  a liberal?

Fox' biggest show is not even close to Matthews or Olberman in terms of being fair and balanced. OReilly is much more practical and less nauseating then those 2 clowns. It not even close

Scarborough is the man. Wish they would put him in one of their prime time slots or atleast put him with one of the clowns.

[AxlsMainMan]

Socialism....give me a break.

This is the new buzz word.

"Weapons of mass destruction" just doesn't have the same effect anymore.

[pilferk]

Kind of like Keith Olbermann.  You need to hear both sides, i don't give a fuck if its rush or me, shutting it our so everyone agrees is NEVER the best thing to do. 

Please point out where Olbermann said "I hope President Bush fails".

Not "I think he's failing".  Not "He's screwing up our country".  I mean ACTIVELY campaigning that he wishes the leader of our country would fail.

Again, I don't think there is a problem with pointing out where you disagree with the President's actions.  There's no problem pointing out where you THINK he's failed. 

MY issue is with actively saying you WANT him to fail.  Given where we are in this country, I think that's about as crappy a sentiment as you can express.  You have every right to express it....but it's bullshit, IMHO.

[pilferk]

How about the closed door meetings..  Treating some repubs like second class.  I am just saying, and you can read my posts, that some things done already go against what the hell we were told during the election.

His nominee for Treasury Sec. is so laughable.   How pathetic.

Look, the Repubs lost.  End of sentence.

"Bipartisan" doesn't mean catering to the Republican agenda like they were still the majority and still holding the White House.

"Bipartisan" means presenting legislation that can at least be found ACCEPTABLE to a good portion of the Republicans.  No on needs look any further than the stimulus package for evidence that Obama IS trying to attempt to be somewhat bipartisan.  He's including some tax breaks and Republican requests in that package, rather than going whole hog into the Dems agenda and spending entirely on infrastructure.  And he doesn't HAVE to do any of it.  The Dems have an overwhelming majority in the house, and a pretty good sized one in the Senate.  That, my friends, is a mandate.

Should he completely ignore that?  Of course not.  And yet he IS still seeking some compromise....even in the face of their OVERWHELMING majority.

Some of you seem to think you WON the '08 elections...or that Obama should continue to push the Republican agenda of the last 8 years because he promised to reach across the aisle to bring us back toward centrist politics.  That's not the point...and has never been the point.  You assigning that to him is just an attempt to set him up to "fail" in your eyes.  It's not being objective, or evaluating his performance fairly.  It's doing exactly what the Repubs have done for 8 to 10 years.....and has now failed that party entirely.

I've got news for you folks:  Your party is in trouble.  You have 2 choices, as a party: 

1) You can be the voice of "dissent and prevent"...blocking as much as you can and bitching about the rest.

2) Or you can be the voice of "contrary assent"....trying to evoke as much compromise as possible to get SOME of the Repub agenda incorporated into this administration and session of Congress as possible.

Both choices have potential pitfalls and upsides. 

[Layflats]

For the sake of everything real, STOP LISTENING TO BROADCAST JOURNALISTS TO GET YOUR NEWS ABOUT POLITICS.

Unbiased?  Impossible, too much at stake with ratings.  You feed into their agenda and never get an accurate picture.

The solution, I'm still trying to work through it.  I know I trust anything more than the flapping lips of a broadcast journalist.

[pilferk]

Its time to put that partisan bullshit aside, the republicans lost big this last election.   Its time to try new shit.

the President feels the same way
[/qutoe]

And he should.  Because that's what the country told our government during the November elections.

YOU might not want to...but given the way the results came in, it sure looks like you're in the minority.  As the Dems were the past 2 elections.  So, by all means, point out the foibles and where you disagree.....

But don't, for a second, assume that this administration or Congress should ignore the obvious mandate because you disagree.

Rush wants Obama to fail, meaning he wants America to continue to decline for the next 4 years all so he can say "I told you so".       This isn't a fucking game

And whats wrong with that? Democrats didnt want Bush to fail? But now that the messiah is in office we must bow and not question anything?

I'll say it again:

There is a difference between pointing out you disagree, or that you THINK an administration is failing and WANTING it to fail.

I can't recall ANY prominent democrat, or ANY poster on these boards, actively "hoping" that Bush would fail.  I certainly never did (though, admittedly, I'm not a dem).

If this isnt a game then why is Obama playing games? What is his GITMO plan? I know its a process Mr Press Secretary President but what is the process?

Interesting you'd ask him to be more transparent when Bush was as "non-transparent" a president as there ever was.

I suspect that the "process" is still in development, at least partially.  That they have a general plan in place, but the specifics are going to depend largely on the evaluation process of the cases...a process that will likelyy be defined further as they get into it, and figure out just what kind of mess the former administration left them.  By all accounts, the "evidence" in these cases is scattered across the administrative branch, with a little bit here and a little bit there, sort of willy nilly.

How do building bridges etc help our economy. Especially in the short term.  How come white male construction workers wont be given the labor?

1) It creates jobs
2) Which gives people more money to spend
3) Which creates more jobs in ancillary services, retail
4) Which gives people more money to spend
5) Which creates more jobs in the management sector
6) Which gives people more money to spend
And so on, and so forth...

And at the end, we're left with better infrastructure to handle the (you'd hope) increased needs for it.  Better bridges that hold greater weight limits so you can haul more goods over them.  Better electric grids to carry more (better/cleaner) power to the new businesses/homes/customers.  That kinda stuff. 

This isn't rocket science...it's pretty basic economics, and it's not exactly "crackpot/leading edge" theorizing.

Short term?  Where we are, there is no "short term".  There isn't anything anyone can do that will end this recession within the next 30 to 90 days.  We MIGHT start seeing recovery in 6 to 9 months...best case scenario.

Mr president why does Nancy Pelosi think human elimination will stimulate the economy?

Isn't that a better question for Nancy Pelosi?

Mr President dont you have better things to do then to tell me who should or shouldnt control the airwaves?

ACTUALLY, the head of the FCC is a presidential appointee....    

Now, if you're talking about his comments on what Rush said.....he didn't REMOTELY do what you're insinuating, above.

He simply voiced his opinion that it would be best for the country if people didn't listen to what Rush was saying.  That the sentiment Rush was espousing is counterproductive to the recovery of our country and that if you're going to actively hope (and assumingly work toward perpetuating) Obama's failure.....well, you can see where he's going with it.

I think he's uniquely qualified to make that statement, actually.  And it's one I happen to agree with, for the most part.  He didn't tell Rush (or others) to stop disagreeing.  He didn't tell Rush (or others) to stop dissenting.

[pilferk]

That was after 9/11.  You, me or Buckethead could have been President ater 9/11 and we all would have had a 90% approval rating... What happened after that? Do you really think people will mock and make fun of Obama like they did with Bush? cmon...and if they ever do it will never be vicious but more in good fun.

If he fails, he will be mocked by someone.  Bush was incredibly popular, at points, but once the failures started to mount up...THAT'S when the criticism really ramped up.  And it didn't reach it's "breaking point", really, until the Levees did.  Katrina was pretty much the final straw for him.

Our economy is in its current state not soley because of Bush. btw...did Bush not protect you from another attack on our soil?

The buck stops....where?  You can't, in one breath, assign him sole responsibility for "protecting us from another attack on our soil" (which, in itself, is a fancy bit of misdirection....exactly HOW many attacks "on our soil" have their been in the modern age? ) and skirt the blame for the shape of our economy or the shambles that is our foreign policy/relations.

Im not trying to make Bush a saint. He def was wrong with a lot of things. But he was also faced with some of the biggest challenges a President has and will ever face. Did he make mistakes..of course But what i do know is that the guy stuck to his guns and beliefs. He didnt waver despite the media bashing. And that is what I want from a leader. With Obama I just feel like everything is calculated and scripted and can change at any minute.

He stubbornly took us into a wrongheaded war, stuck to tactics that didn't work.  He refused to acknowledge his mistakes and adapt.  It sounds like you're essentially saying you admired his thick headedness, which I just don't get.

I'd much prefer someone who is capable of thinking on their feet.  Who has a plan, but is willing to adapt and change as situations change.  I think that makes a far more effective leader.  At the end of the day, we'll see.  But the guys been in office for a WEEK....not 100 days, not even 10 DAYS.  And yet, he's been more organized, and accomplished more (agree or disagree with those accomplishments) than any administration that I can recall.  Certainly better than Clinton or GW Bush.

A perfect example of this right out of the gate is the GITMO scenario. He doesnt even have a process/plan set up yet. Yet he signs off on these orders. Why? To please the people who helped him get where he is.

He doesn't HAVE a plan/process?  Or he hasn't told you what it is yet? 

He signed off on the orders because everyone from the top brass at the military, to the Joint Chiefs, to his Secretary of Defense (you remember him, he worked for our LAST president, too?), to the top interagators in Iraq and Afghanistan were telling him he should close it.  That Gitmo was as much a symbol, and recruiting tool for Al Queada, as it was a "bad" prison camp.

And you show a short term memory. Democrats/liberals/cynics were all bashing Bush before he stepped foot in office. Get this, people were even questioning the amount of money that was being spent on his ceremonies. Imagine if we were in a recession! Obama really needed a 4 day circus during these times? Whethere he did or didnt isnt the point...the point is that it wasnt even questioned!

No, YOU show a selective memory.  Devisiveness of the 2000 election aside, Bush was pretty much given a free pass for his first 100 days.  You might REMEMBER the liberal/dem bashing, but it certainly wasn't prevalent, nor had it infiltrated public opinion or the mainstream media.  It was left to people like Bill Press and "Big Eddy" Shultz (who I can't listen to, for long periods, any more than I can listen to Rush).  And even THEY weren't actively "hoping Bush would fail".

nobody is saying you can't question Obama's decisions, I don't agree with everything he's done.  But rooting for him to fail is rooting for America to fail.   Not very patroitic now is it?

No its not. If I believe that America is better off with lesser Gov't influence then how am I unpatriotic? The only department in which I hope Obama doesnt fail, even though I probably will end up disagreeing with his forein policies, is the war on Terror and homeland security. I will root for him to prevail in that area. Other then that I hope he and this big bubble pops.

Which essentially means you're hoping for the COUNTRY to fail, which..by it's very definition..is unpatriotic.  You can try to wiggle out of it, but it is what it is. 

Now, I'm not going to sit here and tell you that you have to be 100% patriotic all the time.  Patriotism can be a double edged sword.  But I can tell you that I think hoping for your country to fail is both crappy and counterproductive.

Again, you can disagree with Obama.  You can disagree with what he's doing or has done.   You can think he's wrong.  NONE Of that is the same as actively "rooting" for him to fail, which is what you say you're doing.

Do I think your unpatriotic for thinking differently? Absolutely not. I think your wrong. But not unpatriotic. Big difference.

He's not actively rooting against our president or country....so he's not doing anything unpatriotic.

and Fox isn't?   At least MSNBC doesn't try to claim its fair and balanced.   What is Joe Scarborough anyways?  a liberal?

Fox' biggest show is not even close to Matthews or Olberman in terms of being fair and balanced. OReilly is much more practical and less nauseating then those 2 clowns. It not even close

Scarborough is the man. Wish they would put him in one of their prime time slots or atleast put him with one of the clowns.

Morning news IS a prime time spot.  But I don't know why you'd program a conservative pundit against Hannity or O'Reilly in the evening.  Doesn't seem to make good sense from a programming scheduling perspective.

[pilferk]

For the sake of everything real, STOP LISTENING TO BROADCAST JOURNALISTS TO GET YOUR NEWS ABOUT POLITICS.

Unbiased?  Impossible, too much at stake with ratings.  You feed into their agenda and never get an accurate picture.

The solution, I'm still trying to work through it.  I know I trust anything more than the flapping lips of a broadcast journalist.

I agree...and disagree.

The solution isn't to stop listening to broadcast journalists to get political news....because then you get NO political news.

The solution is to apply a liberal (if you'll excuse the pun) "filter" to everything you hear.  Read and listen to as much as possible, and form your own opinions.  Don't simply believe the opinions and regurgitate the talking points. 

[freedom78]

Also, why is he dead set on going after parts of the media, like Rush?  You need oposition.  I didn't mind Olbermann, why do they mind Rush?  Fucking horseshit.

dude Rush goes after HIM and has been attacking him unfairly for the last couple years.    Obama never even mentioned that limp dick clown's name until the other day when all he said was Republicans need to not listen to him if they want to get things done.. and he is right.   Its time to put that partisan bullshit aside, the republicans lost big this last election.   Its time to try new shit.

Rush wants Obama to fail, meaning he wants America to continue to decline for the next 4 years all so he can say "I told you so".       This isn't a fucking game.

Kind of like Keith Olbermann.  You need to hear both sides, i don't give a fuck if its rush or me, shutting it our so everyone agrees is NEVER the best thing to do. 

Who said anything about shutting Rush down?  I'm pretty sure the argument here is that he's a bad person and that, if the GOP wants to play a role in policy making, then he's not a great source of advice.  No one is talking about censoring him.

How about the closed door meetings..  Treating some repubs like second class.  I am just saying, and you can read my posts, that some things done already go against what the hell we were told during the election.

You mean the meetings with the Democratic caucus, just like those he'll be having with Republicans today (or sometime soon...can't recall).

Some of the brainwashing has already begun.  I am hopeful his vision is just hazy and just appears to be a mess.  This is all so calculated.  I don't know what to think now.  Oh well, I hope I am wrong.

What does this even mean?  Seriously.

nobody wanted Bush to fail.  hell, he had something around 90% approval after 9/11.     Nobody wanted the world to end up in the state its in today.   It has nothing to do with partisan politics.

That was after 9/11.  You, me or Buckethead could have been President ater 9/11 and we all would have had a 90% approval rating... What happened after that? Do you really think people will mock and make fun of Obama like they did with Bush? cmon...and if they ever do it will never be vicious but more in good fun.

So...support for Bush doesn't count as support, but jokes at his expense counts as wanting him to fail.  Gotcha.

And, no, I don't think people will mock Obama as they did Bush.  That's because he can command the English language to the extent that one sentence in each paragraph won't be full of hilarity.

Bush wasn't mocked because people wanted him to fail.  He was mocked because he was incompetent and said hilariously stupid things.