compared to the prior president anyone is a great orator
Posted By: wacko on 2009-03-20
In Reply to: more evidence that the prez - Unbelievable!
Listening to one of his speeches is a breath of fresh air compared to listening to Bush.....I'm betting O will make less speaking mistakes in his entire presidency than Bush made in any one given month during his.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Read prior messages...
Messages seem to say prepared = gun ownership/usage
My point is that prior presidents have had their day..sm
and time when they were covered in mud and IMHO none of it is right, except to say in most cases the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
But, to answer Jeb's and Bush's family mishaps with the what about the Kennedy's line is dodging the point to me.
Bringing up the Lynch and Dean ordeal that's something worth listening to, but you guys just can't let go of old democratic presidents. It's like a thorn still sticking in your side. Everytime something comes up with Bush, you talk about Clinton, or even the Kennedy's, as if that dismisses Bush somehow. Whatever gets you though.
healthcare a problem prior to THIS war and they did
x
Re: "associations" -- you never answered a prior
Jes' curious............
compared to
what exactly?
To answer this I would only repeat my prior statements..nm
Re: "Closing Time" - Was cut off in prior post; please see this one.
This didn't come through very well in my other post. I'm hoping it's better in this one. Sorry. 
Closing Time
Jim Kirwan
12-10-8
Since Reagan we've been trying to make "Trickle-Down economics" work: For those to whom promises were made, Trickle- Down has been, not just a failure but it has been the major vehicle responsible for the most massive redistribution of wealth, from the population that has worked toward something, to those that wanted everything. Never has there been such a near total transfer of wealth in the history of the planet. This criminal-conspiracy has done what it was created to do and it must be terminated with extreme prejudice, immediately, if we are to survive.
When 'Trickle-Down' was the political-priority of the day, the high-point in prosperity was to become a 'Millionaire.' Forbes magazine tracked those lucky few very carefully. Today Forbes 500 no longer bothers with 'millionaires' because there are just far too many of them-they have become inconsequential. Thanks to "Trickle-Down economics today the heavy-hitters financially are 'Billionaires' and above: which is all you need to know about how well this hostile-takeover of the American economy has worked.
The problem that this transfer of wealth has created has resulted in the Federalization-of-Privatization: As a result we are all facing another huge round of trickle-down economics, but this time it's being cloaked in a series of stealth-protected measures. These new tactics are commonly called BAILOUT or RESCUE packages, and nothing about their origins or their purposes has been made clear to those of us that will be forced to pay tens of trillions for our own destruction.
What's happening is this: First they used compromised laws to squash diversity and opinion within the entire field of communications, under Clinton and Powell's kid that ran the FCC. Together, competition was eliminated and monstrous empires were created that absorbed their competition outright. Once this happened, the entire edifice for total information management was in-place, using household names to lie to the public every minute of every day, whether on television or in print-with very few exceptions. With that completed effort it was easy to move directly onto the openly fascist path to WAR on a variety of fronts, supported and applauded by the very organs that were supposed to question whatever government does, on behalf of the people, as part of their constitutionally protected-jobs as so-called journalists. With the constitution gone, and the only allegiance worthy of that name having become the private for-profit motives that greed and arrogance breeds; in the sewers of those ruined lives where these so-called leaders "live," the current outcome is all that we should have ever expected from these new-age barbarians. (1)
We're still in the Twilight Zone; where Obama is just another man waiting to start a job, except that he seemingly can't wait to begin so he formulates their plans and then rushes to the nearest podium to expound upon the glories of what these programs (or pogroms) are pointedly designed to do; for them and 'to' us. And the sheep wait patiently to board the trains that will take them to the slaughterhouse.
The larger picture has or course remained hidden from the general public. What continues to go unnoticed is the number of profligate cities and towns, not to mention states that will have to be bailed out by the feds. Once this begins to happen, 'the rights' of states will disappear completely along with any independence from the federal-government. Remember the formula upon which bailouts are based: The crucial money provided is conditioned upon a federal "ownership stake" in everything that needs the money, and when this is applied to the states then all they have left to trade with is their broken-economies and their people who shall both become the property of the federal government that is today a private-corporation that serves only the privately-owned central banks and by extension the multi-national corporations. This is about to happen now to several states, including California; the sixth largest economy in the world. (2)
'BTW the "corporation" mentioned above has been bankrupt since 1933, and the result of that bankruptcy is that the USA went into receivership to the privately-owned Federal Reserve. The Dictator was correct when he said: "The constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper," he was actually telling the truth. It was probably the only truthful statement he ever made in nearly eight years.
The owners have simply allowed us to believe we have a constitution. Every law, code and statute world wide is based on the Uniform Commercial Code and has been in place since 1950. Of course no one in a position of power ever bothered to mention this to us did they? One must understand the UCC to understand how and why so many have gotten away with so much: And now they are upping the ante, to take it all.'
This explains why every courtroom and every government building has flags hanging that really are not American flags even though they appear to be. Each of them has gold/yellow fringe around them. They give us smoke and mirrors that mask what they created, which allows them to continue to say 'we have a constitution and a democracy.' Of course America was created to be a constitutional republic, not a democracy. There is a huge difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic. The rights of the few and the many, can only be protected under a Republic, while under a democracy, the majority rules-absolutely.
There are however a few places that are still holding out against the one-world-order and the New Barbarians. Among these are Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, parts of Pakistan, possibly Iran and certainly Greece.
"Socialist leader George Papandreou called for early elections, saying the conservative government could no longer defend the public from rioters.
The government has a single-seat majority in the 300-member Parliament and opposition parties blame hands-off policing for encouraging the worst rioting the country has seen in decades.
'The government cannot handle this crisis and has lost the trust of the Greek people,' Papandreou said. 'The best thing it can do is resign and let the people find a solution ... we will protect the public.'" (3)
If America is to survive then we must stop this wholesale giveaway of everything that was once part of this society. The relationship between profits and earnings must be freed from the stranglehold that management has created in order to siphon off all the profits and wreck the companies they work for. In addition, the idea that government can function in any capacity as a major stakeholder in any form of private enterprise beggars the imagination far beyond any real possibility for saving anything; except the criminals and their enterprises that created this "crisis" in the first place. The 'economy' must be based on a bottom-up profit motive, based on the real wages of those that create the wealth for those at the top - and not upon the insanity that it is now! People must come first, and the corporations must be controlled at every level by the public!
There is no longer anything like responsibility anywhere in government or the private sector to anything except what can continue to be stolen, either by flawed and fraudulent bailouts, or through the strong-arm tactics that are currently acting "under- cover of law" and that are neither legal nor functional. Obama in this venue is neither a savior, nor a friend to the people that supposedly 'elected' him-he is just the instrument of the new global-government engine designed to finish the job and to close down this nation, once and for all! Americans need to watch what happens in Greece and follow their example, if there is to be an America to fight over in the future.
In the meanwhile, here is some of what's happened here already.
"With the focus on privatization, public-private partnerships, (dismantling local control); anyone with any common sense about them can see that; incrementally the power of the people is being given over to corporate control through various venues. Once upon a time we were subjects, then citizens, and now consumers. Everything is for sale. TV 'programming' is set up to entice "consumers" through the 3000 daily ads to buy, buy, buy! Utilities-waste- nursing homes, and even the people's water (once in local control) is open to the highest bidder or those with the most influence. In "public private partnerships or privatization" (despite the lofty high pitch sales rhetoric) means only one thing, a plundering of the people's money. Profits take precedence over any and all health or environmental concerns. It's pigs at the trough time, locally- state wise and nationally. This is not just happening in one or two isolated places but across the nation. Because we are narrowly focused (many times only one newspaper) parochially; we have little to no idea of the larger picture and what is being set in place.
As I read of various happenings across the nation; I am struck with the usage of terms and language being introduced into the public arena; with no explanation as to their meaning (if any). I asked a state politician a few years back what this terminology we're hearing lately of, "regional or regionalization" meant? He brushed the whole thing aside as inconsequential and told me that is was of no importance. Obviously, for me, that was an unsatisfactory answer. Most especially, since on the local level, I could see that it meant a great deal. It appeared to me, that ever so insidiously, local control was gradually being usurped by "regional" control of unelected officials. Consultants (strangers) were replacing local people in places of city government (at lucrative salaries). The sense of community (calling city hall etc.) was being replaced by various business entities, having little to no attachment to the heartbeat of the people. How could they, being strangers, with no sense of native pride or concern? Words like "regional, stake holder, empowerment zones, enterprise committees, visioning councils, smart growth, sustainable development etc;" had replaced understandable language! I didn't imagine that the usage of these terms across the nation (if you look) meant "nothing"." (4)
It's 'Closing Time' America, because unless you begin to do more than just watch, this place won't even be a footnote to the ruin that is planned for these people and this place that once held so much promise for everyone.
kirwanstudios@sbcglobal.net |
A search warrant under FISA prior to 9/11
As you can see from the article cited below, Holder did not have that evidence. He was not the only person responsible for "not allowing" the laptop contents search. Seems there was a problem with intelligence sharing between the US and France. His decision was also defended by the FBI director. Unless being able to predict the future is a qualification for the AG, it seems that you could find a better reason to be losing sleep.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/08/60II/main508362.shtml
Prior military wife myself - know how it works -
x
Perhaps you would prefer the "original" I got prior to my editing.....
The Little Red Hen called all of her Democrat neighbors together and said, 'If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?'
'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen, and so she did. The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.
'Who will help me reap my wheat?' asked the little red hen.
'Out of my classification,' said the pig.
'I'd lose my seniority,' said the cow.
'I'd lose my unemployment compensation,' said the goose.
'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen, and so she did.
At last it came time to bake the bread.
'Who will help me bake the bread?' asked the little red hen.
'That would be overtime for me,' said the cow.
'I'd lose my welfare benefits,' said the duck.
'I'm a dropout and never learned how,' said the pig.
'If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination,' said the goose.
'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen.
She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, 'No, I shall eat all five loaves.'
'Excess profits!' cried the cow. (Nancy Pelosi)
'Capitalist leech!' screamed the duck. (Barbara Boxer)
'I demand equal rights!' yelled the goose. (Jesse Jackson)
The pig just grunted in disdain. (Ted Kennedy)
And they all painted 'Unfair!' picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.
Then the farmer (Obama) came. He said to the little red hen, 'You must not be so greedy.'
'But I earned the bread,' said the little red hen.
'Exactly,' said Barack the farmer. 'That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle.'
And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, 'I am grateful, for now I truly understand.'
But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the 'party' and got her bread free. And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established.
Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared...so long as there was free bread that 'the rich' were paying for.
Bill Clinton is getting $12 million for his memoirs.
Hillary got $8 million for hers.
That's $20 million for the memories from two people, who for eight years, repeatedly testified, under oath, that they couldn't remember anything.
IS THIS A GREAT BARNYARD OR WHAT?
Judging by some of the prior town meetings
1. Gimme a house.
2. Make my boss pay me more (than I'm worth).
3. Gimme.
4. Gimme.
5. Fix everything for me.
This is more the behavior of subjects toward a monarch than citizens toward a president. Thanks, think I'll just stay home and improve my own life.
In a prior post I made the following offer:
.....no amount of money would induce me to volunteer to be tortured (you know, beaten cut, burned - severe pain or harm). But cut me a check (certified only, please) with a number followed by a whole lot of zeros and I would be waterboarded (strictly in the interest of science). Our special forces are trained to withstand this and other 'harsh' interrigation techniques...... It's scary and unpleasant but way different from having your fingernails pulled out or a field generator and alligator clips used.
I had in mind more like $500,000, but yeah, for enough money I would certainly consider that an offer I couldn't refuse.
That ain't nothin' compared to
Bush's 2ND inaugural ball which cost 40 million dollars!! Guess you forgot about that one!
Oh gosh, that was nothing compared
to watching my husband listen to any Democrat, ever. He turns red and interrupts constantly. Eventually I shush him and he stomps out of the room, muttering under his breath all the while. Then he's mad at me.  At least Rush is civil.
Well, that is nothing compared to how Obama is
nm
Perspective. That is nothing compared to what we
nm
The prior poster was explaining the church ministries
those ministries were consistent with Obama's life experiences, his political career and his current campaign platform. Voters like a consistent candidate with a consistent message, a concept that seems to elude many McCain supporters and certainly goes right over the heads of his campaign managers.
The previous poster was implying that perhaps members of the congregation, both past and present, find value and purpose in those ministries and often choose to participate in the church ministries that service their immediate communities and benefit those who are in the most need wherein, according to Matthew's gospel, the Spirit of Jesus dwells. Some of us really like that about Obama and find it admirable that he embodies this decidedly Christian principle and understands that that we all will be judged by the measure of how we treat the least among us.
My best guess is that the previous poster does not necessarily believe that Christian evangelical pastors of any and all colors are exactly void of fanaticism, bigotry and hatred. Rev Wright certainly may have appeal to some members of that congregation whose core beliefs he reflects, just as John Hagee has a certain appeal to some of his congregation. Having said that, there is still no direct evidence that Hagee reflects McCain's core beliefs any more than there is evidence that Wright reflects Obama's...except in the minds of those who are in charge of the hate patrol.
Great post, great insight, great analysis, thanks!..nm
nm
I think Palin is being compared to Obama ... sm
More than Biden because McCain is 72 years old (and looking older and more confused and befuddled each day, IMO) and to be realistic, he could very well die not long after being elected, which would immediately make Palin our president. That would be a disaster.
Not even a month ago, few people outside of Alaska had even heard of her. The country is still in the process of getting to know her which isn't happening very quickly because she's not doing any hardhitting interviews - unheard of for a politician at that level (or at least unheard of for a politician who doesn't have anything to hide...)
Come on, she's a politician, she's tough. I'm certain she's up to the interviews, but I find it suspicious that the McCain campaign isn't letting her do those interviews. They are controlling that situation, for what? They don't want her to make a mistake and look bad? They all do that!
I think a lot of people were initially attracted to her with the excitement of a fresh new face, 1st woman VP the Repubs ever nominated, and she's pretty, perky, has a beautiful family, etc. It is exciting. But as more is learned about her past and her idealogy, people I know are going "Oh wait a second, she did what, wants to do what, believes WHAT?! Oh, I don't think so!" I think that's why her poll numbers went up so fast, and have now gone back down so fast. (Actually, I think that's why she isn't doing the interviews, they wanted to keep the excitement and novelty going as long as possible.)
Me personally, I don't hate her. Hate is strong word. I just don't want her anywhere near the White House, esp. as our president.
My biggest problem with her is her extreme religious views. I will freely admit that I am very biased towards people with extreme fundamental religious beliefs. I do not understand or relate to their thinking. I am much more comfortable with people who are "brainy" and scientific, who look at facts and evidence in making their decisions, and I am extremely uncomfortable with anyone who makes decisions based on magical thinking, because they think it's "God's will" or something of that nature. There is just no reasoning with someone like that. We've already had a pres. like that (Bush) and it's been a nightmare.
IMO, people with extreme fringe religious beliefs belong on the fringe, not ruling the free world in the highest office of our land.
Actually SS is in good shape compared to
Imagine if it had gone to Wall ST like bush wanted?
Yep, being compared to me is certainly a fate worse than death....
lol. But you might want to check the posts to see what I really said and not piglet's version of what I said. I have said over and over again that my opposition to abortion is on a moral level and I would be opposed to it on that level whether I knew God or not. Unless you are saying one must believe in God to have morals?? There are many in this country who oppose abortion on a strictly moral level. There are mainstream Democrats who oppose abortion on a moral level.
Are you morally opposed to murder? Are you morally opposed to stealing? To rape? To child molestation? Do you think you have to be "religious" to oppose those things? People who have never opened a Bible are morally opposed to most of those things. So please stop trying to say that anyone who opposes abortion is a conservative religious zealot. Because it is just not true. You do not have to be religious to have morals and be morally opposed to things that are just plain wrong.
And you all know that deep inside yourselves. Most would never admit it, of course....but you all know it.
$400,000 salary is dirt cheap compared to
Considering the daunting challenges he will in the aftermath of W's slash and burn regime, bringing together warring factions for the sake of cranking up a paralyzed legislative branch, jump starting a frozen economy on the brink of depression, reversing the handywork of the saber-rattling war machine, restoring America's tarnished global image and dodging assassin's bullets around every bend, I'd say he'll be earning every last penny of it.
Hitler was a choirboy compared to your average
Such as Red-Evelope-Woman, for example.
Oh, honey - compared to me, Maxine's an infant.
x
We're pussycats compared to some foreign leaders. sm
What's she going to do with them, and anyone else she can't just bully and fire?
RE: Your last line....Obama is absolutely nothing compared toTeddy R....nm
I think the only person I ever heard compared to Hitler was Bush
so I don't even get where that came from
It is weird when people accuse you of making the OP's point. Because, it is okay for THEM to say whatever they want, but if anyone opposes them you are everything they are not.
wow, hypocrites to the end
Ignore the posts. This board is pretty tame compared to others. sm
On Red State and Daily Kos the ad hom attacks are unbelievable.
The previous owner of this board banned everyone posting anti Bush comments, and there were constant neocon ad hom attacks. I am conservative but these are not my type of Republicans. There used to be a lot of good posters here.
If customary deference to a sitting president by president elect
for the rest of us who understand such concepts as respect and traditional protocol, it would qualify as a darned good reason.
Great, great post. Thank you, Marmann! nm
x
I would if he were president now...nm
x
Why does President need help with a way out?
That's really scary. I do think if we have any troops come home, it'll be before elections - and not a minute before necessary to have the greatest impact on election results. Wallace should wonder if the families of fallen soldiers would be offended at THAT kind of rank political maneuvering. I know I am.
And what happened to SPREADING DEMOCRACY (like margarine?) in Iraq? Chalabi just appointed the head Taliban judge to office in Iraq, the one who outlawed female education in Afghanistan and sponsored public executions for not wearing burkhas. Is that what we promised the Iraqi people? The whole thing is a huge mess. All the billions and billions Congress authorized for rebuilding Iraq went into Halliburton and other crony pockets and the job was never done. We can't train more Iraqi police units because as soon as we give them guns and tanks they use them on our soldiers. That's why Bush can't tell the truth about how that's going, but that doesn't stop him from continuing to fudge the numbers.
Sadly, Bush won't take any help even if it's offered - not in his game plan apparently.
We need this man as our next president
Someone who can speak so elequently without having to read word from word from notes or prompters.
Someone who knows what the different races are about, understands, and embraces heritages of all backgrounds.
Someone who can meet with our enemies to try and stop the violence and come to agreements.
Someone who is intelligent.
Someone who isn't married to "bad baggage" that will disgrace our white house.
Someone who isn't a war mongerer or voted for the war.
Someone who is truthful to the American people and not deceiptful (sp?) trying to hide things they have done.
Someone who doesn't think they should just be annointed to the white house but actually needs to "earn" the publics vote.
Someone who doesn't believe they should win just because they are from a certain race or gender.
Someone who is calm under fire, can think and act with a clear mind, and doesn't lash out, spew racial or ethnic slurs.
Someone who wants a better country for all people and not just themselves and their close friends and family.
Someone who is relatively "new" to Washington and not the same ol "stuff".
Someone who is working towards our future and not living or trying to live in the past.
Comment: Who cares that people Obama knows (but clearly doesn't share the same viewpoint of which he has had to say over and over and over and over) throws out biggoted or hateful things. You have them on all sides. Hillary's got her people (Ferraro and others) coming out with biggoted and hateful statements and you've got John McCain's people (Cunningham and others) coming out with their biggoted and hateful statements and they too have had to distance themselves. Unfortunately they die away quickly but Obama has to keep repeating himself on the same story. I have a good relationship with my minister, but it doesn't mean I agree with everything he says and if he said terrible things just because I have a good relationship with him doesn't mean I agree with him. - Just get tired of Obama having to repeat the same things over and over. Kind of reminds me of the line in a movie I heard once. "I don't know how many different ways I can tell you the same story." - and - "Have IQ's just dropped sharply since I've been away".
It's true we are not going to be able to change a true biggot. Some people will just not vote for him because he's part black, just like some other people will also not vote for Hillary because she's a woman. I just hope there are enough good Americans to overcome that and do the right thing (at least what I believe is the right thing). But it is getting tiring listening to the opponents stir up a bunch of hateful things trying to get the people to vote against him and time and time again I read this board and will read the same comments over and over "did you hear what Obama's minister said". It's like listening to a broken record and I always think - they're not actually bring this up again???
I believe our country needs a lot of healing. We've got a long way to go on the racial issues/hatred towards one race or another. We've got to try to make amends with the people who we fear and call our enemies, when in fact the people we should be fearing is our own government. We've put years and years into believing our government is going to be truthful with us, but when you have a VP who says "so" when he is told that 2/3 of Americans don't believe in the war and feel we should have not gone to war (DH and I sat with our mouths open), those are the people I consider terro**rists by putting fear in the American people's mind where there should be no fear.
So for that and all the reasons I listed above that is why I'm voting for Obama.
He is NOT my president ...
I didn't vote for him .. Another thing, I will NOT vote for McBush (errr ... McCain). I was a Hilary fan all the way until she couldn't get the nomination .. now I'll switch gears to Obama. Frankly, I think I would could do a better job than Bush .. at least I'd use my common sense!! 
This is who we want for President?
When you look at this video (link below), I promise you
> will NOT BELIEVE your eyes and ears. Take a look at the You
> Tube link below and pass it on. This is a view of John
> McCain that you probably won't see on the Network news.
> If it weren't serious, it would be hilarious.
>
> p;nb sp;
Probably for the best. Once someone becomes President,
it seems like even if they are an excellent choice, they have to use far too much of their time, skill and energy just defending themselves from the other side. No one ever really wins, least of all, US.
Either way, the next president is
only in for one term. McCain will simply be too old and by then health will be a major factor. Obama, on the other hand, simply will not be able to come through with all of his promises due to the current situation with our economy. I do believe if he is elected that many who voted for him will see him for what he truly is, an inexperienced leader who has no clue. His strings are pulled by the extreme left. Either way, we are in for a rough 4 years.
next president
The question is not what the next president HAS done, the question is what he WILL do.
That's if he becomes president. He can't
veto anything as a senator. That's the prez's job.
I did nto say he should not have run for president. I said...
that all the fuel skinheads need (which I am not one of--my hair is very long) is a black man running for president. My gosh--I knew somebody would read things incorrectly. I think skin heads are horrible people. As I said, his color is not an issue for me!
He is your president too
"To those whose respect I have yet to earn." Another question might be how far to the center he will take himself. If socialism means equality and opportunity for all Americans, if it means we can now begin to heal the division that have separated us in the past and of late, if it means that American is still the place where all things are possible, if it means we rise or fall as one nation and one people, if it means this is our chance to answer our call to progress, if it means it is our time to restore prosperity and promote the call to peace, if it means we have rediscovered the fundamental truth, that out of many we are one, and if it means we have told the world we are who we say we are, then I say bring it on.
We'll just be taking this thing one step at a time. Step number one. Try a little hope in place of the fear.
He's NOT president yet
And yet here he is giving another press conference. He has no business giving any press conferences as though he is president. He is NOT president yet. Yes, he will be on January 20th but that date hasn't arrived yet. I'm sick of him sticking his face in front of the camera giving everytime he turns around. He is commenting on issues he has no business commenting on. These are for the President to talk about. Yes, I know Bush is a bumbling baboon, but he is still the president until Obama is sworn in. This guy is just plain arrogant! If this is how the next four years are going to be I hope they do go by fast.
One President.........sm
Washington, D.C. — Over the course of the last two months President-elect Barack Obama and the Presidential Transition Team (PTT) have replaced their campaign maxim, "Change We Can Believe In," with a new mantra: "We Only Have One President at a Time."
It is a slogan that has already worn out.
Obama and the PTT have used this phrase repeatedly in response to reporters' questions on the economy, federal bailouts, foreign policy, national security, the military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, the future of "Gitmo" and the Russian decision to shut down the delivery of natural gas to Western Europe through Ukrainian pipelines.
During this week's Oval Office photo-op with President George W. Bush and former Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, and William Jefferson Blyth Clinton, Obama used the "one president at a time" dodge to avoid answering a reporter's hurled interrogatory about Israeli military operations in Gaza. The response from those in the lineup, and apparently most in the mainstream media, is to nod approvingly at Obama's sagacity every time they hear him say it.
The only trouble is — it simply isn't true.
While the current, former and future commanders-in-chief went off to snack and chat, Senator Joe Biden, the soon-to-be vice president of the United States, headed off to Andrews Air Force Base to commence a hastily convened, week-long "congressional fact finding mission" to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Absent from the secret itinerary divulged by Mr. Biden were other places with even more pressing problems: India — a U.S. ally still recovering from the brutal Mumbai terror attack and on the brink of attacking Pakistan. The Ukraine — a NATO applicant, threatened by interference from Moscow and this week's natural gas cutoff. And Israel — an American ally facing the threat of U.N. sanctions for acting in self defense to protect its citizens from Iranian-supplied rockets and mortars being fired from Gaza by Hamas, and which now faces attacks from Iranian-supported Hezbollah terror in Lebanon.
While the potentates of the press gush over the forthcoming "history-making inaugural," the Biden "Codel" — Washington-speak for "congressional delegation" — to select trouble-spots has made some little-noted history of its own. Unlike Obama, Biden did not surrender his Senate seat. This week, when Congress reconvened, Biden insisted on being sworn in as Delaware's senior senator and retaining his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Unlike Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, Dan Quayle and AL Gore — who all ascended to vice presidency of the Unites States from the Senate and did nothing to interfere in diplomatic issues between election and inaugural — Biden is now dabbling about in the affairs of state.
Biden defends his actions by pointing to the company he is keeping on this trip: fellow Senators John Kerry, D-Mass., Jack Reed, D-R.I., Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lindsay Graham, R-S.C. Earlier in the week, perhaps forgetting the post he will occupy on Jan. 20, Biden said, "I'm a still a Senate man." None of the media all-stars covering the PTT thought to ask Obama what he thought of this response. Notably, Hillary Rodham Clinton — soon to become the next secretary of state — was neither included in the CODEL nor available for comment about the propriety of such an unprecedented adventure.
None of this bodes well for the new administration or for America's interests in a very dangerous world. The situations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are certainly important. But so too are outcomes in Gaza and Lebanon, our relationship with India and the effects of an increasingly tense standoff between Russia and Ukraine. All of these places and problems matter to U.S. national security, and all are perhaps in more urgent need of attention.
Obama can't have it both ways. He cannot claim on the one hand that "we have only one president" and then dispatch his future vice president on a thinly-disguised CODEL to diddle in diplomacy without having world leaders take note of what the incoming administration considers to be important. In permitting the Biden CODEL to go forward and approving the itinerary, Obama has sent a signal — intentionally or not — to allies and adversaries alike.
From Moscow to Tehran, Caracas to Beijing, London to Delhi, in virtually every world capital, foreign leaders and their intelligence services are now making judgments about the next leader of the free world. They learned something about his wisdom, seriousness and maturity this week when he picked Leon Panetta, a man with "intelligence deficit disorder," to head the CIA. Perhaps they also had a little chuckle when he chose a TV celebrity doctor to become surgeon general to deal with bio-terrorism and possible pandemics. Hopefully the Biden CODEL trip to Southwest Asia did not lead them to conclude that Obama is not a man of his word.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,478606,00.html
Maybe because THIS president knows which
He isn't trying to clean up the mess daddy left behind when he left office.
Obama is a MUCH BETTER president in 3 months than GW Bush ever was. Period.
The president SAID
WORDS WORDS WORDS that's all he used. Smooth talking, sweet, pretty words.
Don't be fooled. What government says and what government does are two very very different things.
Sorry...but he is not MY President. He is THE President....
that little distinction is important to me, I don't much care if not important to anyone else. Yes, it would have been better if he had just said ANYthing just a wee bit strong...hey Mahmoud...couldn't you just stop beating the crap out of protestors in front of the TV cameras? Bad form old boy. Makes you look bad.
Bomb Iran? Barack Obama? If they launched a nuclear strike and obliterated Israel (sorry, palestine, collateral damage), what do you think Barack Obama would do? That is a serious question now.
My alternative would be as I stated above...say something strong or just don't say anything at all. The more he positions himself as, to use the original poster's words, a wimp...only emboldens an already dyed in the wool nutcase. "Undermine" the protestors...you mean shooting them dead and beating them senseless? They are already doing that. They don't need a hand slapping from the US as a "reason" to do so. lol. Sigh.
Thank you Mr. President - well said
Seeing as no other station seems to be reporting on the current events happening as we speak, I have been watching Fox news. As usual both MSNBC and CNN are not reporting major news events happening. What is going on in Iran is super huge. It affects so many people.
Fox news has been doing an excellent job of reporting - Shepard Smith is an excellent anchor man. Anyway...they have been reporting statements from the President as it happens. Here is the president's statement - Thank you Mr. President. Very well said.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/20/republicans-pressure-obama-support-iranian-protesters/
Memo for the President
Memo for the President
By Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
t r u t h o u t | Statement
Wednesday 24 August 2005
Memorandum for: The President
From: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
Subject: Recommendation: Try a Circle of "Wise Women"
By way of re-introduction, we begin with a brief reminder of the analyses we provided you before the attack on Iraq. On the afternoon of February 5, 2003, following Colin Powell's speech before the UN Security Council that morning, we sent you our critique of his attempt to make the case for war. (You may recall that we gave him an "A" for assembling and listing the charges against Iraq and a "C-" for providing context and perspective.) Unlike Powell, we made no claim that our analysis was "irrefutable/undeniable." We did point out, though, that what he said fell far short of justification for war. We closed with these words: "We are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic."
To jog your memory further, the thrust of our next two pre-war memoranda can be gleaned from their titles: "Cooking Intelligence for War" (March 12) and "Forgery, Hyperbole, Half-Truth: A Problem" (March 18). When the war started, we reasoned at first that you might had been oblivious to our cautions. However, last spring's disclosures in the "Downing Street Memo" containing the official minutes of Tony Blair's briefing on July 23, 2002 - and the particularly the bald acknowledgement that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" of war on Iraq - show that the White House was well aware of how the intelligence was being cooked. We write you now in the hope that the sour results of the recipe - the current bedlam in Iraq - will incline you to seek and ponder wider opinion this time around.
A Still Narrower Circle
With the departure of Colin Powell, your circle of advisers has shrunk rather than widened. The amateur architects of the Iraq war, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, seem still to have your ear. At a similar stage of the Vietnam War, President Lyndon Johnson woke up to the fact that he had been poorly served by his principal advisers and quickly appointed an informal group of "wise men" to provide fresh insight and advice. It turned out to be one of the smartest things Johnson did. He was brought to realize that the US could not prevail in Vietnam; that he was finished politically; and that the US needed to move to negotiations with the Vietnamese "insurgents."
It is clear to those of us who witnessed at first hand the gross miscalculations on Vietnam that a similar juncture has now been reached on Iraq. We are astonished at the advice you have been getting - the vice president's recent assurance that the Iraqi resistance is "in its last throes," for example. (Shades of his assurances that US forces would be welcomed as "liberators" in Iraq.) And Secretary Rumsfeld's unreassuring reminders that "some things are unknowable" and the familiar bromide that "time will tell" are wearing thin. By now it is probably becoming clear to you that you need outside counsel.
The good news is that some help is on its way. Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey has taken the initiative to schedule a hearing on September 15, where knowledgeable specialists on various aspects of the situation in Iraq will present their views. Unfortunately, it appears that this opportunity to learn will fall short of the extremely informative bipartisan hearings led by Sen. William Fullbright on Vietnam. The refusal thus far of the House Republican leadership to make a suitable conference room available suggests that the Woolsey hearing, like the one led by Congressman John Conyers on June 16, will lack the kind of bipartisan support so necessary if one is to deal sensibly with the Iraq problem.
Meanwhile, we respectfully suggest that you could profit from the insights of the informal group of "wise women" right there in Crawford. You could hardly do better than to ride your bike down to Camp Casey. There you will find Gold Star mothers, Iraq (and Vietnam) war veterans, and others eager to share reality-based perspectives of the kind you are unlikely to hear from your small circle of yes-men and the yes-woman in Washington, none of whom have had direct experience of war. As you know, Cindy Sheehan has been waiting to get on your calendar. She is now back in Crawford and has resumed her Lazarus-at-the-Gate vigil in front of your ranch. We strongly suggest that you take time out from your vacation to meet with her and the other Gold Star mothers when you get back to Crawford later this week. This would be a useful way for you to acquire insight into the many shades of gray between the blacks and whites of Iraq, and to become more sensitized to the indignities that so often confound and infuriate the mothers, fathers, wives, and other relatives of soldiers killed and wounded there.
Names and Faces
Here are the names, ages, and hometowns of the eight soldiers, including Casey Sheehan, killed in the ambush in Sadr City, Baghdad on April 4, 2004:
Specialist Robert R. Arsiaga, 25, San Antonio, Texas
Specialist Ahmed A. Cason, 24, McCalla, Alabama
Sergeant Yihjyh L. Chen, 31, Saipan, Marianas
Specialist Israel Garza, 25, Lubbock, Texas
Specialist Stephen D. Hiller, 25, Opelika, Alabama
Corporal Forest J. Jostes, 22, Albion, Illinois
Sergeant Michael W. Mitchell, 25, Porterville, California
Specialist Casey A. Sheehan, 24, Vacaville, California
Mike Mitchell's father, Bill, has been camped out for two weeks with Cindy Sheehan and others a short bike ride from your place. They have a lot of questions - big and small. You are aware of the big ones: In what sense were the deaths of Casey, Mike Mitchell and the others "worth it?" In what sense is the continued occupation of Iraq a "noble cause?" No doubt you have been given talking points on those. But the time has passed for sound bites and rhetoric. We are suggesting something much more real - and private.
Questions
There are less ambitious - one might call them more tactical - questions that are also accompanied by a lot of pain and frustration. Those eight fine soldiers were killed by forces loyal to the fiercely anti-American Muqtada al-Sadr, the young Shia cleric with a militant following, particularly in Baghdad's impoverished suburbs. The ambush was part of a violent uprising resulting from US Ambassador Paul Bremer's decision to close down Al Hawza, al-Sadr's newspaper, on March 28, 2004.
And not only that. A senior aide of al-Sadr was arrested by US forces on April 3. The following day al-Sadr ordered his followers to "terrorize" occupation forces and this sparked the deadly street battles, including the ambush. Also on April 4, Bremer branded al-Sadr an "outlaw" and coalition spokesman Dan Senior said coalition forces planned to arrest him as well. In sum, before one can begin to understand the grief of Cindy, Bill, and the relatives of the other six soldiers killed, you need to know - as they do - what else was going on April 4, 2004.
You may wish to come prepared to answer specific questions like the following:
1. Closing down newspapers and arresting key opposition figures seem a strange way to foster democracy. Please explain. And how could Ambassador Bremer possibly have thought that al-Sadr would simply acquiesce?
2. Muqtada al-Sadr seems to have landed on his feet. At this point, he and other Shiite clerics appear on the verge of imposing an Islamic state with Shariah law and a very close relationship with Iran. With this kind of prospect, can you feel the frustration of Gold Star mothers when the extremist ultimately responsible for their sons' deaths assumes a leadership role in the new Iraq? Can you understand their strong wish to prevent the sacrifice of still more of our children for such dubious purpose?
Perhaps you will have good answers to these and other such questions. Good answers or no, we believe a quiet, respectful session with the wise women and perhaps others at your doorstep would give you valuable new insights into the ironic conundrums and human dimensions of the war in Iraq.
A member of our Steering Committee, Ann Wright, has been on site at Camp Casey from the outset and would be happy to facilitate such a session. A veteran Army colonel (and also a senior Foreign Service officer until she resigned in protest over the attack on Iraq), Ann has been keeping Camps Casey I and II running in a good-neighborly, orderly way. She is well known to your Secret Service agents, who can lead you to her. We strongly urge you not to miss this opportunity.
/s/
Gene Betit, Arlington, Virginia
Sibel Edmonds, Alexandria, Virginia
Larry Johnson, Bethesda, Maryland
David MacMichael, Linden, Virginia
Ray McGovern, Arlington, Virginia
Coleen Rowley, Apple Valley, Minnesota
Ann Wright, Honolulu, Hawaii
Steering Group Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
All the President's Friends
September 12, 2005
All the President's Friends
By PAUL KRUGMAN
The lethally inept response to Hurricane Katrina revealed to everyone that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which earned universal praise during the Clinton years, is a shell of its former self. The hapless Michael Brown - who is no longer overseeing relief efforts but still heads the agency - has become a symbol of cronyism.
But what we really should be asking is whether FEMA's decline and fall is unique, or part of a larger pattern. What other government functions have been crippled by politicization, cronyism and/or the departure of experienced professionals? How many FEMA's are there?
Unfortunately, it's easy to find other agencies suffering from some version of the FEMA syndrome.
The first example won't surprise you: the Environmental Protection Agency, which has a key role to play in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, but which has seen a major exodus of experienced officials over the past few years. In particular, senior officials have left in protest over what they say is the Bush administration's unwillingness to enforce environmental law.
Yesterday The Independent, the British newspaper, published an interview about the environmental aftermath of Katrina with Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst in the agency's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, whom one suspects is planning to join the exodus. The budget has been cut, he said, and inept political hacks have been put in key positions. That sounds familiar, and given what we've learned over the last two weeks there's no reason to doubt that characterization - or to disregard his warning of an environmental cover-up in progress.
What about the Food and Drug Administration? Serious questions have been raised about the agency's coziness with drug companies, and the agency's top official in charge of women's health issues resigned over the delay in approving Plan B, the morning-after pill, accusing the agency's head of overruling the professional staff on political grounds.
Then there's the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, whose Republican chairman hired a consultant to identify liberal bias in its programs. The consultant apparently considered any criticism of the administration a sign of liberalism, even if it came from conservatives.
You could say that these are all cases in which the Bush administration hasn't worried about degrading the quality of a government agency because it doesn't really believe in the agency's mission. But you can't say that about my other two examples.
Even a conservative government needs an effective Treasury Department. Yet Treasury, which had high prestige and morale during the Clinton years, has fallen from grace.
The public symbol of that fall is the fact that John Snow, who was obviously picked for his loyalty rather than his qualifications, is still Treasury secretary. Less obvious to the public is the hollowing out of the department's expertise. Many experienced staff members have left since 2000, and a number of key positions are either empty or filled only on an acting basis. There is no policy, an economist who was leaving the department after 22 years told The Washington Post, back in 2002. If there are no pipes, why do you need a plumber? So the best and brightest have been leaving.
And finally, what about the department of Homeland Security itself? FEMA was neglected, some people say, because it was folded into a large agency that was focused on terrorist threats, not natural disasters. But what, exactly, is the department doing to protect us from terrorists?
In 2004 Reuters reported a steady exodus of counterterrorism officials, who believed that the war in Iraq had taken precedence over the real terrorist threat. Why, then, should we believe that Homeland Security is being well run?
Let's not forget that the administration's first choice to head the department was Bernard Kerik, a crony of Rudy Giuliani. And Mr. Kerik's nomination would have gone through if enterprising reporters hadn't turned up problems in his background that the F.B.I. somehow missed, just as it somehow didn't turn up the little problems in Michael Brown's résumé. How many lesser Keriks made it into other positions?
The point is that Katrina should serve as a wakeup call, not just about FEMA, but about the executive branch as a whole. Everything I know suggests that it's in a sorry state - that an administration which doesn't treat governing seriously has created two, three, many FEMA's.
Impeach the President!
Who cares about the troops at risk! Off with his head!
President Bush
Surely you don't mean that. I think in years to come we will be sorry we thought such thoughts. Time will tell, maybe long after he is president. Will we apologize for attacking him or will we try and justify why we thought the way we did. He is a good president. Like the rest of us, he is not perfect. He is faithful to his family, and that should speak volumes.
|
