Obama already felt failure?

Pocono Joe

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

People should cut Obama a little slack. After all, he has only had a month in office to mess up, when GW had years of practice.

Now that’s rich (and maybe the single most inane comment I’ve read here so far).

In that one month, this president submitted to Congress the single largest increase in federal spending in the history of the United States. It’s estimated the package would cost every family in the country $52,000 over the next ten years in interest payments alone. On top of that, almost every day I’m hearing about another multi-billion dollar government spending plan being proposed in a march to a new American socialist experiment. One by which the government owns banks and car companies, directs employers on how to pay and treat their employees, limits industrial output, and runs the healthcare system.

I want to know who is in favor of all this, other than the liberals who only make up 22% of the electorate, democrat stooges (and a few RINOs), and the drive-by media?

Now, instead of working hard so our children can have a better life tomorrow, we are making our children, our children’s children, and their children work harder so that we don’t have to make tough choices today.

So how long should we wait until we gather the proverbial pitchforks and torches and storm the castle Capital... two months, three, one year, or 2012 when the government controls the distribution and usage of pitchforks and torches?

Black Swan

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Now that’s rich (and maybe the single most inane comment I’ve read here so far).

Can't debate an issue without making a rude personal insult?

The Mad Hatter

Pocono Joe wrote: »

In that one month, this president submitted to Congress the single largest increase in federal spending in the history of the United States. It’s estimated the package would cost every family in the country $52,000 over the next ten years in interest payments alone. On top of that, almost every day I’m hearing about another multi-billion dollar government spending plan being proposed in a march to a new American socialist experiment. One by which the government owns banks and car companies, directs employers on how to pay and treat their employees, limits industrial output, and runs the healthcare system.

Well, the healthcare system in the US is third-world standard - you should count yourself lucky that you've (finally) got someone who's doing something about it.

Now, instead of working hard so our children can have a better life tomorrow, we are making our children, our children’s children, and their children work harder so that we don’t have to make tough choices today.

Hang on, how are universal healthcare and proper education going to make your children have to work harder? How is supporting the idea of fair pay and conditions for work going to cause your children to work harder?

So how long should we wait until we gather the proverbial pitchforks and torches and storm the castle Capital... two months, three, one year, or 2012 when the government controls the distribution and usage of pitchforks and torches?

If no-one marched to the White House when Bush II was occupying it, then it's a safe bet that no-one's going to march to it.

Overheal

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Now that’s rich (and maybe the single most inane comment I’ve read here so far).

In that one month...

Lets just see here:

1/20/2001 and counting...

Day 1 Reversed dozens of Clinton's initiatives including environmental protections

Day 3 Blocked US funds to international family planning groups who provide abortion counseling and services in foreign countries.

Day 4 Reform and funding for higher education standards introduced the voucher system which benefitied charter schools rather than public.

Day 10 Created office to distribute US funds to faith based groups for social service work; criticized as breaking down the wall between church and state.

Day 18 Treasury Secretary O'Neill defends Bush's budget plans, says there will be a "trillion dollars ... over this next 10-year period. ... [sic]... We have in front of us a continuation of ... a golden era of economic prosperity."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/economy/jan-june01/oneill_2-8.html

Day 20 Budget proposal includes refund of $ 1.6 trillion via tax cuts

Day 24 Bush ask for $5 billion increase in military spending

Day 27 US Navy submarine rams and sinks Japanese fishing boat carrying high school students, killing 9, says "Oops, sorry" to Japan. Commander gets official slap on the wrist and honorable discharge.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june01/collision_02-12.html

Day 28 Bush orders air strikes on radar stations in Baghdad, killing 2.

Day 39 First address to Congress televised to the public, outlining his administration's goals.

Day 40 Presents $1,960,000,000,000 ($1.96 Trillion) budget: increased funding for education (mixed + & - to the plan), reduced funding for research and energy conservation, eliminated funding for anti-drug programs in public housing, ended program for marine and coastal protections.

Day 50 Bush advisors promote reduced carbon dioxide emissions to fight Global Warming.

Day 53 Bush reneges on campaign promises for environmental controls saying "It's too expensive," undermining his EPA chief and succumbing to special interest groups.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/environment/jan-june01/co2_3-14.html

Day 60 Bush reverses Clinton initiative to reduce arsenic levels in drinking water.

Day 63 Bush's EPA chief announces the U.S. withdrawal from the 1997 Kyoto Global Warming Agreement, its desire to open up the pristine National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling in Alaska, and other environmental initiatives like the "Clean Air Act."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/environment/jan-june01/bushenv_3-29.html

Day 73 US spy plane collides with Chinese fighter jet off the coast of China, creating international crisis as 24 US crew men held in China. "Oops, we did it, but no apology."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june01/china_plane.html

Day 82 Bush finally says "I'm sorry" without admitting guilt to get 24 US navy crewmen released.

Day 87 Bush upholds two Clinton environmental policies regarding wetlands protections.

Day 91 Three day summit with North American leaders to discuss Free Trade Agreement.

Day 100 Hosted lunch for 535 members of the Senate and House of Representatives.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june01/100_days.html

The curtain goes up to the next 100 days

Day 194 Bush goes on vacation for the month of August.

Day 214 Bush's Incredible Shrinking Budget Surplus: "Congressional Budget Office numbers ... will be presenting us with a projection of budget deficits, exclusive of Social Security and Medicare-- for some years to come. And that means we've got to sit down with this budget and rethink our priorities.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/economy/july-dec01/surplus_8-21.html

Day 235 U.S. mainland is attacked in a 3 pronged assault by foreign terrorists for the first time in history, killing 2,752 civilians.

Day 666 Bush administration promises to limit environmental protections and make it easier for ranchers to graze livestock on public lands. "The Department of Interior is seeking ways to prevent federal laws like the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act from restricting grazing on public lands. We should not be using the Endangered Species Act... as a land management tool. It is not there as a tool for zoning on federal lands."

Immediately upon taking office, Roosevelt set the U.S. on a 100-day course to recovery.

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-179441

Trouser_Press

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Now, instead of working hard so our children can have a better life tomorrow, we are making our children, our children’s children, and their children work harder so that we don’t have to make tough choices today.

Is that a verse from a Whitney Houston ballad, or an extract from a Bobby Jindal speech?

Manic Moran

Overheal wrote: »

Lets just see here:

Reversed dozens of Clinton's initiatives including environmental protections

Probably some good reversals as well. It's pretty much standard procedure.

Reform and funding for higher education standards introduced the voucher system which benefitied charter schools rather than public.

Are you saying that Charter Schools are not worthy of them? Part of the function of charter schools is that they are held accountable for their performance. What's wrong with giving them money if you're holding them to it?

Created office to distribute US funds to faith based groups for social service work; criticized as breaking down the wall between church and state.


Yet Obama has no particular objection to faith-based initiatives either.

Treasury Secretary O'Neill defends Bush's budget plans, says there will be a "trillion dollars ... over this next 10-year period. ... [sic]... We have in front of us a continuation of ... a golden era of economic prosperity."

Well, I don't think anyone really had grounds to think otherwise at the time.

Budget proposal includes refund of $ 1.6 trillion via tax cuts

Cool!

Bush ask for $5 billion increase in military spending

Best decision of the list so far. Shown to be correct by events later on.

US Navy submarine rams and sinks Japanese fishing boat carrying high school students, killing 9, says "Oops, sorry" to Japan. Commander gets official slap on the wrist and honorable discharge.

"Oops, Sorry" is the correct thing to say in Japanese culture. Commander took retirement after receiving Admiral's Mast, which is a career-killer. Court-Martial proceedings were deemed by the court of inquiry to be inappropriate, so a 15-6 was followed. In a nutshell, it was an honest accident with a few contributory causes.

Bush orders air strikes on radar stations in Baghdad, killing 2.

He waited longer than Obama did, then (2 days, killing 25).

Presents $1,960,000,000,000 ($1.96 Trillion) budget: increased funding for education (mixed + & - to the plan), reduced funding for research and energy conservation, eliminated funding for anti-drug programs in public housing, ended program for marine and coastal protections.

So what got increased then? The $5bn for defence doesn't account for the gap.

Bush reneges on campaign promises for environmental controls saying "It's too expensive," undermining his EPA chief and succumbing to special interest groups.

Fair gripe. He wasn't be first, I doubt he'll be the last.

Bush reverses Clinton initiative to reduce arsenic levels in drinking water.

The famous 'Arsenic Trap.' "I've got a great idea. Let's set a standard which looks good to the public by way of an executive order just before I leave office. Either my successor will go broke trying to meet it, or he'll look bad for not caring about arsenic levels." Quite a few cities would have had financial problems trying to meet a standard created by the stroke of a pen. After the Bush reversal, Congress went and passed it anyway, only to see the EPA have to provide exemptions for States from Nevada to Maryland because they couldn't meet them.

Bush's EPA chief announces the U.S. withdrawal from the 1997 Kyoto Global Warming Agreement, its desire to open up the pristine National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling in Alaska, and other environmental initiatives like the "Clean Air Act."


The same Kyoto agreement that the Clinton administration recommended that Congress not ratify, because it sucked. Of course, it cost them nothing to sign it but they got the column inches at the time.

US spy plane collides with Chinese fighter jet off the coast of China, creating international crisis as 24 US crew men held in China. "Oops, we did it, but no apology."

They did not do it. An old propeller airliner doesn't just crash into a fighter jet, the jet-jocky was showing off and fecked up. (He was known by name to the Americans based off prior incidents).

Bush finally says "I'm sorry" without admitting guilt to get 24 US navy crewmen released.

Cost nothing, but got the men back. Sounds like a good deal to me. So it apparently did to 72% of the voters, according to a CNN poll.

Interesting to note that 100 days in, his approval rating was higher than that of Clinton's when he was 100 days in. (62% vs 55%)

NTM

Nodin

Manic Moran wrote: »

You know, we sleep on the outside of the tank? Where the big flat areas are?

The troopers at the DMZ seem to like it, as long as they're not married. One of the few places left in the Army where they still do Army stuff. You know, drills, maneuvers with the tanks, that sort of thing.

...without the sand and the whole sniper/roadside bomb thing. As long as nobody has to eat that kimchi stuff...apparently its an "aqquired taste"....

Trouser_Press wrote:

Is that a verse from a Whitney Houston ballad, or an extract from a Bobby Jindal speech?

Bobby is now yesterdays man. Apparently 'Republican activists' prefer Mitt Romney.....I'd say they'd be better off with Whitney.

Trouser_Press

Nodin wrote: »

Bobby is now yesterdays man. Apparently 'Republican activists' prefer Mitt Romney.....I'd say they'd be better off with Whitney.

I sense that while Mitt might be today's man by tomorrow he'll be yesterday's, if you know what I mean. I have a Republican friend (just the one, mind) who assures me that the baseball chap Curt Shilling is the future. I'm excited.

Black Swan

Nodin wrote: »

As long as nobody has to eat that kimchi stuff...apparently its an "aqquired taste"....

Please pass the kimchi to me, I want seconds! Especially that fermented in earthen pots found on the outlying farms I ate while in So Korea. Yum!

Nice job Overheal on the historical comparison. Well cited too! The Mad Hatter did well to point out how American healthcare suffered under GW Bush (46.6 million uninsured, including millions of innocent children without healthcare), as well as the No Child Left Behind joke (where teachers taught to the test, rather than focusing on learning).

Who was president in 2005? Did he care through action (not political rhetoric)? Obama seems to care, but only time will tell.

Data released today by the Census Bureau show that the number of uninsured Americans stood at a record 46.6 million in 2005, with 15.9 percent of Americans lacking health coverage. “The number of uninsured Americans reached an all-time high in 2005,” said Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “It is sobering that 5.4 million more people lacked health insurance in 2005 than in the recession year of 2001, primarily because of the erosion of employer-based insurance.”

Census data show that 46.6 million Americans were uninsured in 2005, an increase of 1.3 million from the number of uninsured in 2004 (45.3 million). The percentage who are uninsured rose from 15.6 percent in 2004 to 15.9 percent in 2005. The number of children who are uninsured rose from 7.9 million in 2004 to 8.3 million in 2005.

“The increase of 360,000 in the number of uninsured children is particularly troublesome,”

Source: http://www.cbpp.org/8-29-06health.htm

Pocono Joe

Mr. Obama is proposing a major expansion of the federal commitment to health care even though the government can barely afford the health insurance programs it already has. The financial condition of Medicare is deteriorating because of the recession, according to new information from federal officials, and the Medicare trust fund could be depleted several years sooner than expected.

And according to Obama, he would tax upper-income households and require new "efficiencies" in health care to pay for the new plans. "Efficiencies" and the "US Government" is an oxymoron to be sure. He also tells us that all this is going to work because the economy is going to be growing by 3.2 percent a year from now. Does anyone really believe that?

Now lets talk about that 46 million uninsured number some like to bandy about.

According to the US Census Bureau, 17 million of those without health insurance live in households having over $50,000 in annual income. That's 38% of the uninsured in America. In fact, 9 million - 20% of the uninsured - reside in households pulling down more than $75K a year. Most of us would agree that people like that should probably be able to afford some type of coverage.

And then there are the young who consider themselves invincible. Over 18 million of the uninsured are people between the ages of 18 and 34. They spend more than four times as much on alcohol, tobacco, entertainment and dining out as they do for out-of-pocket spending on health care. They represent 40% of the uninsured in America.

14 million people without health insurance are eligible for government health care programs like Medicaid and S-CHIP but choose not to enroll. They represent %31 - nearly one third - of the uninsured in America.

An then the U.S. has 12 million illegal immigrants and "anchor babies" who don't buy health insurance but still get health care. They are also included in these figures as Uninsured.

So, how many does that leave that are truly uninsured not by choice or illegal? (Also realize there are some crossover data in the figures listed above)

Granted the recession is contributing to the growing number, but lets be real... we’re talking about 8 million legitimately uninsured here.

Pocono Joe

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Hang on, how are universal healthcare and proper education going to make your children have to work harder? How is supporting the idea of fair pay and conditions for work going to cause your children to work harder?.

Lets see here. Our entire national debt is about $11 Trillion. Obama is proposing a $3.6 Trillion budget. The Wall Street Journal notes that federal outlays in fiscal 2009 will rise to almost 30 percent of the gross national product. I addressed the healthcare above, and simply just throwing money at education has historically never worked. So either our children will have to pay for most all that Obama is proposing, or we’ve got to hope for another sneak attack by Japan.

Trouser_Press

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Lets see here. Our entire national debt is about $11 Trillion. Obama is proposing a $3.6 Trillion budget.....

The really disturbing thing here, Pocono Joe, is that Obama has been handed an economy in pristine condition (and just the two wars) and he's, clearly, set on a path that will destroy that wonderful legacy.

It beggars belief. I share your pain. Truly.

Manic Moran

There are many different types of Kimchi. Very few of which I find even remotely palatable.

Bulgogi, on the other hand...

Then again, they really do have odd tastes. Dad's office used to be at the entrance to Nam-dae-mun market. Shoe shop, bag shop, shoe shop, bag shop, leather shop, bag shop, tailor, bag shop, food stall, bag shop...

Walking down one day, was attracted to the smell and sound of frying at one of the stalls. I'm sorry. There's no comparison between a California food stall selling BBQ Tri-tip vs a Korean food stall selling fried beetles. Call me ethnocentric if you will, but I didn't even consider trying them.

NTM

Pocono Joe

Trouser_Press wrote: »

The really disturbing thing here, Pocono Joe, is that Obama has been handed an economy in pristine condition (and just the two wars) and he's, clearly, set on a path that will destroy that wonderful legacy.

It beggars belief. I share your pain. Truly.

Maybe Obama would garner more support if someone explained to him the difference between Stimulus and Porkulus.

And with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd still in charge and calling the shots on what caused this entire mess in the first place, we have nothing at all to fear (I like to use sarcasm also, even if it is the lowest form of wit).

Black Swan

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Lets see here. Our entire national debt is about $11 Trillion. Obama is proposing a $3.6 Trillion budget.

The 2008 GW Bush budget totaled $2.9 trillion?

That $11 trillion estimate of the federal deficit left by GW Bush after 8 years in office is consistent with what I have sourced from the US Dept of Treasury site. It should also be noted that during the 8 years of Clinton, the federal deficit only grew by roughly $1 trillion to $5.6 trillion total when leaving office, which GW Bush almost doubled to the $11 trillion quoted figure. Certainly not a positive endorsement of the GW Bush administration for fiscal responsibility?

I am very concerned about bailout monies lack of oversight during this severe recession. GW Bush failed to control abuse by corporate America during his final year in office, with posh resort Marriott $400,000 parties by AIG after bailout (part of which was for $23,000 in massages) for example, and now a $1 million party with live rock bands by an east coast bank after receiving a $1.5 billion bailout during the first month of the Obama administration. The GAO should investigate, and if abuse found, carry the case to the US Justice Dept for prosecution of the CEOs and the executives that report to them.

If I were president, I would push to take the bailout monies back from corporations that abuse the benefit, allowing their collapse to be a warning to other corporations. If they didn't collapse, through the Office of Federal Contract Compliance I would deny these abusive corporations an opportunity to bid on federal contracts for 4 years.

Pocono Joe

Blue... there are some things we do agree on! Abusers of the bailout funds should be hammered... big time! I was just speaking to an executive at the bank our firm utilizes. I asked him what they used their portion of the bailout money for. His answer was they bought another bank almost the same size as they were. Now how did that stimulate the economy?

And you also bring up something notable. The deficit (national debt) grew every year under Clinton (granted by no means as much as Bush), so how then can he claim a SURPLUS? A quandary methinks.

Black Swan

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Blue... there are some things we do agree on!

Shhhhhhhhh, keep that a secret!

Pocono Joe wrote: »

And you also bring up something notable. The deficit (national debt) grew every year under Clinton (granted by no means as much as Bush), so how then can he claim a SURPLUS? A quandary methinks.

I struggle with this issue too. I have found news media sources reporting considerably lower federal deficit numbers, no matter the administration in office. And yes, some report a Clinton surplus. That's why I go to the US Treasury site for this information, which shows the deficit growing going back decades under all the administrations. It's like a scary clock that keeps ticking upwards, with the US government pulling out the federal credit card and mortgaging present and future generations of Americans to a life of debt.

Nodin

Trouser_Press wrote: »

The really disturbing thing here, Pocono Joe, is that Obama has been handed an economy in pristine condition (and just the two wars) and he's, clearly, set on a path that will destroy that wonderful legacy.

It beggars belief. I share your pain. Truly.

You wonder why others can't see that "I'm on a highway to hell" glint in his eye.....

Pocono Joe

Nodin wrote: »

You wonder why others can't see that "I'm on a highway to hell" glint in his eye.....

Although I’m more partial to AC/DC’s "Highway to Hell," a take on the chorus of Roger Miller’s "Dang Me" might be more apropos here.

Damn me, damn me,
They're gonna take a vote to hang me.
Can tolerate me to a certain degree,
Then GuanYin will put a ban on me.
Beup Beup Beup Beup Beup Beup Buep
Beau Beau Beau Beau Beum
Boop Boop Boop Boop Boop Boop Boow
Boop Boop Boop Boow Boow

Trouser_Press

Pocono Joe wrote: »

I like to use sarcasm also

Are you Sarah Palin?

Pocono Joe

Trouser_Press wrote: »

Are you Sarah Palin?

NO!

JohnMc1

Trouser_Press wrote: »

Is that a verse from a Whitney Houston ballad, or an extract from a Bobby Jindal speech?

Regardless of where he got it from. It is true. We're putting future generations of Americans in debt for this. This will not be paid off while we're still living [I'm in my early 30s so that should give some perspective on that] it will be on the shoulders on our descendants and theirs. This is irresponsibility of the highest order and anybody regardless of what side of the aisle they align themselves should be able to see that.

CaraFawn

The thing that truly scares me in all that mess, is that they do not seem to know what they are doing in terms of injecting money into those banks.

I remember in August when AIG said they needed 80 BN right now, it was clear it was for immediately handle the cash drop, not the long term.
I mentioned on another forum this was very short term only and that they will need even more.
I remember people were laughing at me when I said this. It was pretty obvious they needed more.

So in september they got 150 BN from the federal reserve and today in March they need another 35 BN.

I am sorry but WTF? Our governements from all over the world are all doing bailouts, clearly throwing cash at private banks faces (Well less and less private now) and so what, nothing has improved, the situation is getting worse and worse day after day.

I do not claim to know the solution, but as a basic citizen of the world, it is obvious since the last year this would never work.

Today we are in a even worse situation that we were in summer 2008, and it is not really improving...

I personally would support any military coup in Europe and in the US

Time for a real change, real skilled professionals managing the economy and public finances, not stupid politicians with no skills. Time has come for technocracies.

Nodin

CaraFawn wrote: »

Time for a real change, real skilled professionals managing the economy and public finances, not stupid politicians with no skills. Time has come for technocracies.

Like a few bankers and investors running the finances....

Trouser_Press

JohnMc1 wrote: »

We're putting future generations of Americans in debt for this
it will be on the shoulders on our descendants and theirs.

Is that a verse from a Hank Williams Jr ballad or an extract from a Rush Limbaugh speech?

(I'm guessing you have posters of both on your bedroom wall?)

JohnMc1

Trouser_Press wrote: »

Is that a verse from a Hank Williams Jr ballad or an extract from a Rush Limbaugh speech?

(I'm guessing you have posters of both on your bedroom wall?)

If you something to say then spit it out. If you disagree with what I said then that is your perrogative but atleast be mature enough to say it and not in a roundabout borderline trollish manner like you have in this one and your previous post.

Pocono Joe

More TARP I see... and yesterday it was announced AIG is getting more money. AIG has 75,000,000 customers in 130 countries. I would like to know how much money the other 129 countries have kicked in?

Manic Moran

More disappointment from his own side. (Actually, both sides, but from the opposite side is expected)

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/05/obama.pork/index.html

As a spending bill loaded with pork makes its way through Congress, President Obama is getting pushback from members of his own party who are questioning his vow to end wasteful spending

<snip>

And in a prime-time address before a joint session of Congress, Obama last week praised the $787 billion stimulus package signed into law, telling the nation, "I'm proud that we passed a recovery plan free of earmarks, and I want to pass a budget next year that ensures that each dollar we spend reflects only our most important national priorities."

But some in the audience found that hard to swallow.

"There was just a roar of laughter -- because there were earmarks," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri.

<snip>

The scoffing continues as the president hammers away at reducing wasteful spending and saving taxpayers money while lawmakers on Capitol Hill load up a spending bill with more than 8,000 earmarks totaling nearly $8 billion.

<snip>

The spending bill made it through the House last week. A vote in the Senate could come as early as Thursday, but it's unclear if there are the 60 votes necessary to send it to the floor since some Democrats aren't supporting it.

Obama is expected to sign the bill when it reaches his desk.

<snip>

Democrats blocked amendments by Sens. John McCain, R-Arizona, and Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, that would have narrowed the spending on earmarks.

Meanwhile, AG Holder is still getting flak from Ds as well for his recent comments. Pelosi and Reid both expressed concern over the proposed firearms legislation, and both Montana's Democratic senators published an open letter basically telling Holder to back off.

NTM

Overheal

Im starting to wonder now if we wouldnt be better off if we had simply let the banks and institutions fail. They arent exactly using the funds to save themselves.

Trouser_Press wrote: »

Is that a verse from a Hank Williams Jr ballad or an extract from a Rush Limbaugh speech?

(I'm guessing you have posters of both on your bedroom wall?)

While I often find myself at odds with JC1, that snipe was just uncalled for.

JohnMc1

Overheal wrote: »

While I often find myself at odds with JC1, that snipe was just uncalled for.

Thanks Overheal.