Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1878 times:
Quoting D L X (Reply 2): Most of those are really scraping at the bottom of a barrel, looking for a way to call it a mistake.
That's why I give it no creedence. These are the same yahoo's who apologized for every thing George W. Bush did in 8 years in office. It's just right-wing bellyaching, which is all they seem to have left at the moment.
Galapagapop From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 910 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 1802 times:
A) It's the NY Post. (Nothing more to be said really)
B) It's really really scraping the barrel on many of them
There are several valid ideological points to be made about certain Campaign Promises that aren't being kept. But every president does that to some extent. I feel much of the media is way to impatient all the time. Give it some time maybe as this is indeed a terrible recession. To me the only real red flag I wave on Obama is for his team's math abilities with regard to economic growth over the next few years. All the numbers and forecasts are showing that Obama's planned economic growth this year were rosy at best, and really are about as realistic as Bush 43 being remembered on Mount Rushmore as a great. I mean is there going to be any digging up on the new estimated deficits we will see now that the GDP is shrinking at 6%, rather than growing 1-2% for the year? Recovering those deficits was going to be like walking through a mine field and that was with a 1-2% GDP growth for the year. Is that 1-2% just gonna be tacked onto 2010?
I can care less about social engineering or universal health care, or even that more taxes are to be levied upon the same group of people who play over 50% our government's taxes already. I'm merely talking about numbers. The government may not be a business and can borrow quite a bit of debt and maybe can operate with a marginal deficit YOY, but no one can try explain the rationality of the current budget as it stands today, let alone when the corrections are made for ridiculous market outlooks. Stimulus? Bailouts? Fine, but you gotta be able to pay for them, I really don't mind how unfair they are to some in the slightest, or that not enough will be spent by 2010. Just how are we going to pay for them? I haven't seen a proposal of any tax policies that even comes close to scraping away even $500 billion off our annual deficit, that doesn't include all the bailout and stimulus costs, this is just year to year operations of our government. Anyone care to actually give and answer to that, instead of just calling me or anyone else a conservative Bush lover? I actually voted FOR Obama, but anyone with a fair balanced outlook of the issues (Or anyone who's simply taken a basic accounting course) cannot honestly defend any of the ridiculous numbers coming out of the WH.
Planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3547 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1772 times:
There've been millions of mistakes all over the world in the 100 days since Obama has been in office. I'd say if a president only makes one mistake a day, that's a pretty good ratio.
Some of these listed are particularly asinine:
- Not adopting a dog from a shelter. - Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega went on a 50-minute anti-American rant, calling Obama "president of an empire." Obama didn't leave the room. "I thought it was 50 minutes long. That's what I thought," he said.
Can you really criticize a president for staying seated when a head of state is speaking? And isn't Obama president of an empire? What do you expect people to think when we go fight wars to oust leaders in sovereign countries? (not saying whether or not such wars are bad ideas ... but America is somewhat imperial ...)
- "The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today."
Ummm ... mentioning a possible threat to homeland security is a mistake?
- Nixes a "buy American" provision in the stimulus bill.
The provision was nixed because there is almost no standard to say what is actually "made" in America these days ... airlines wouldn't be able to purchase Boeing aircraft, as parts come in from suppliers on more than two continents, diddo with automobiles.
- Sanjay Gupta was in discussions to become Surgeon General, but the TV personality withdrew after he was criticized for his flimsy political record.
I don't particularly care if my Surgeon General has a flimsy political record ... it's not a particularly political position. He's a doctor - not a congressman/president/senator/mayor, etc ...
- Obama's doom-and-gloom comments and budget bill push the Dow below 7,000, from which it's only recently recovered.
Obama didn't pull a handle that made the Dow go down to 7,000 ... it went down more points before he took office.
- Not adopting a dog from a shelter.
For F's sake ... I really can't believe something like this can be called a mistake. The Obama's had to get a hypoallergenic dog, thanks to their daugther's allergies, and Portuguese water dogs aren't traditonally found in shelters ... instead, they took one off the hands of a family that wanted to give their dog away anyway.
I'm surprised they didn't pick out one of the mistake's I've made in the past 100 days and blame it on Obama ...
"One Illinois resident didn't attend church last weekend."
"A 25 year-old suburbanite nearly cut a driver off on the Eisenhower Expressway on March 10th."
"A writer in the Chicago area misspelled 'Saugus,' Massachusetts in a subhead for an article he wrote."
PSA53 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3117 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1706 times:
My IMHO from center right:
As usual with democrats,stronger on domestic issues then international ones.I don't know what it is with democrats and why their so worried about their hairdo images aboard and why they take a backseat.That's why I'm very concerned we could be tested somewhere in the world,like JFK and Carter, with very dangerous consequence.Iraq violence is up and Pakistan is close to anarchy.
On the Domestic front,I give Obama high marks.He wasn't shy about blasting Wall St and financial CEO's about their criteria,or lack of,which Republicans would never do.Bravo! Although I'm concerned about all the pork and spending,Obama did act fast to try to head off from things getting any worse.
The Gitmo torture issues,low marks.Let it go! You can't tell me democrats weren't brief on this issue while GWB was in office.Flip-flop,again!And it could be Obama,being a little naive,might be walking into a polilitcal hornets nest.Plus other US wars of torture methods.
Gimmie a break.
Overall,along with some other minor issues,I give Obama a C-.But,I also agree,it way to soon to begin the impeachment process!(LOL)
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1676 times:
Quoting PSA53 (Reply 11): The Gitmo torture issues,low marks.Let it go! You can't tell me democrats weren't brief on this issue while GWB was in office.
I'm sure the Democratic leadership was briefed, but they weren't consulted, and most were against Gitmo from the start. How does he get low marks for following through with what he said he'd do-which is close Gitmo? I give him high marks for it, as I was against Gitmo, and I think for the good of the nation, it needs to go.
By the way here's a more balanced synopsis of the first 100 days, without any vitrol from luts like Glen Beck:
AirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1500 times:
That press conference was a sham. Just because the country had some overspending based on a phony economy doesn't mean that we have to turn it into socialism. All it takes is some cut backs to let the economy stabilise while offering many forms of taxcuts. The worst part is that he keeps saying that's what he was voted in for, to turn the U.S into socialism. That's not the kind of change people wanted Mr. President. By the way the economy today has shrunk to levels not seen since 50 years ago. I'm sure the massive spending will help that.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21592 posts, RR: 53
Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1473 times:
Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 16): That press conference was a sham. Just because the country had some overspending based on a phony economy doesn't mean that we have to turn it into socialism.
And I have not seen Obama proposing that. The US republican idea of what "socialism" is supposed to be has almost nothing in common with reality.
Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 16): All it takes is some cut backs to let the economy stabilise while offering many forms of taxcuts.
When people don't buy because they've been kicked out of work, tax cuts don't help them much. Neither don't they help businesses unable to sell their stuff to people and other businesses cutting back on their expenses while the government also restricts its spending. That would be an extreme situation which would reinforce itself to a veritable death spiral.
Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 16): The worst part is that he keeps saying that's what he was voted in for, to turn the U.S into socialism.
Tax cuts are a nice idea in principle and can make a lot of sense in a stable and sustainable economy, but you've had decades of misconceived tax cuts and deregulation without actual substance to back it up and look where that got you.
The US population is obviously fed up with that losing strategy of cutting taxes on the upper end and starving the incomes on the lower end at the same time.
The new tax cuts for lower and medium incomes are a good step in the right direction again. Now the real economy will have to kick in again after the ficticious economy has collapsed or there will be neither corporate profits nor stabilizing private incomes.
Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 16): By the way the economy today has shrunk to levels not seen since 50 years ago. I'm sure the massive spending will help that.
Without recovering the economy on the demand side as well all the supply in the world would just be pointless and wouldn't lead to any increased revenue.
Now that people don't have ficticious wealth to spend any more (from ficticious house values or just plain debt), the recovery will have to be actually earned again. A totally new experience for many people, it appears, as many republicans seem to still think there could be a return to the makebelieve economy of bygone years where tax cuts were supposed to be the cure to heal all ills in the world. They just aren't. They are just one of many useful tools under certain circumstances.
Seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 12606 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1426 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 16): The US republican idea of what "socialism" is supposed to be has almost nothing in common with reality.
From what I have been understanding from the right-wing cheerleaders, anything "socialist" is anything endorsed by Democrats.
100 mistakes in the first 100 days? Hell, that can be seen in ANY administration. From Washington all the way through to Obama. Every single president no exception. If one looks hard enough, they will find what they are looking for.