Your opinion on the job that President Obama is doing so far (1 Viewer)

[TheFanatic]

Approve:

Torture,

Stem cells

Iraq

Afghanistan

Guantanamo

Disapprove:

Defecit

False sense of urgency re: stimulus package

Auto industry bailouts

AIG bonus outrage

Continued DOJ medical marijuana raids

Overall, I give him a C-, slightly disapprove.

Now that the stock market has rebounded somewhat I guess nobody remembers the urgency that was indeed not false. But hey, hindsight is great aint it?Otherwise I pretty much agree with the top list. As for the bottom. Agreed on the Bonus outrage is ridiculous. Same with DOJ medical marijuana. I don't do it but don't see the difference between the stuff and booze and there is a definite medical benefit.

The deficit? That's a tough one. Some sort of stimulus package was needed. Did it need to be this big? Probably not. No matter what the deficit was going to grow. Not happy with how much but that is a matter of debate. The growth was a given, just not the degree.

Auto Industry Bailouts. I think they were necessary. A big part of this economic mess is psychological. The media is all over it and doom and gloom is all over the place. Guys like me with a big phat tax return are sitting on it. People are afraid to spend. If one or more of the big three folded the doom and gloom factor from the media would be even higher. I see the auto bail out as a stimulus package for morale. And besides, it was just a small fraction of the overall bailout.

One thing I would've liked to have seen. The government is asking for accountability from the automakers. Demanding more out of them to earn the package. But the banking industry didn't see that much oversight. I'm not saying they need to run the automakers and didn't like the government asking for Wagoner to resign, but I like them making the the industry work harder to get the money. For too long that industry has sat around letting the Japanese kick our asses and been completely reactionary in their business practices....

The stimulus stimulated the stock market last week? You really think that?

Where did I say that? I'm saying with the stock market rebounding lately, all of the sudden the economy tanking the last few months seems to be just a minor speed bump. Companies worth hundreds of billions falling overnight, layoffs, closures, stock market dropping some 3K+ points. Yeah, there was no urgency there....Nobody was freaking out about their jobs, mortgages, 401K's etc. It was just a little downturn. No big deal....

 

[thatguythere]

Here is Obama's tax cut:

"We’ve already seen a jump in refinancings of mortgages as homeowners take advantage of lower rates. And every American should know that up to 40 percent of all mortgages are now eligible for refinancing. This is the equivalent of another tax cut, and we’re also beginning to see signs of increased sales and stabilizing home prices for the first time in a very long time."

Doesn't a tax cut mean your taxes go down?

 

[TheFanatic]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

 

[fsword]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Maybe the "haters" just don't want to mix it up with the agitators. You don't have to be a "conservative" to disapprove of Obama; even McCain wasn't a Conservative, he was just conservative relative to Obama.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Approve:

Torture,

Stem cells

Iraq

Afghanistan

Guantanamo

Disapprove:

Defecit

False sense of urgency re: stimulus package

Auto industry bailouts

AIG bonus outrage

Continued DOJ medical marijuana raids

Overall, I give him a C-, slightly disapprove.

Now that the stock market has rebounded somewhat I guess nobody remembers the urgency that was indeed not false. But hey, hindsight is great aint it?Otherwise I pretty much agree with the top list. As for the bottom. Agreed on the Bonus outrage is ridiculous. Same with DOJ medical marijuana. I don't do it but don't see the difference between the stuff and booze and there is a definite medical benefit.

The deficit? That's a tough one. Some sort of stimulus package was needed. Did it need to be this big? Probably not. No matter what the deficit was going to grow. Not happy with how much but that is a matter of debate. The growth was a given, just not the degree.

Auto Industry Bailouts. I think they were necessary. A big part of this economic mess is psychological. The media is all over it and doom and gloom is all over the place. Guys like me with a big phat tax return are sitting on it. People are afraid to spend. If one or more of the big three folded the doom and gloom factor from the media would be even higher. I see the auto bail out as a stimulus package for morale. And besides, it was just a small fraction of the overall bailout.

One thing I would've liked to have seen. The government is asking for accountability from the automakers. Demanding more out of them to earn the package. But the banking industry didn't see that much oversight. I'm not saying they need to run the automakers and didn't like the government asking for Wagoner to resign, but I like them making the the industry work harder to get the money. For too long that industry has sat around letting the Japanese kick our asses and been completely reactionary in their business practices....

The stimulus stimulated the stock market last week? You really think that?

Where did I say that? I'm saying with the stock market rebounding lately, all of the sudden the economy tanking the last few months seems to be just a minor speed bump. Companies worth hundreds of billions falling overnight, layoffs, closures, stock market dropping some 3K+ points. Yeah, there was no urgency there....Nobody was freaking out about their jobs, mortgages, 401K's etc. It was just a little downturn. No big deal....

Hmmm... While I agree with what you posted here, I still think there was a false sense of urgency put into place to have the bill signed before anyone had a chance to read it. Especially since he waited longer to sign the bill himself and made a special trip out west to have a signing ceremony. It seems to me that he could have waited a couple of weeks and just signed the damn thing on The Tonight Show, we'd most likely be in the same place.

 

[CBusAlex]

Where did I say that? I'm saying with the stock market rebounding lately, all of the sudden the economy tanking the last few months seems to be just a minor speed bump. Companies worth hundreds of billions falling overnight, layoffs, closures, stock market dropping some 3K+ points. Yeah, there was no urgency there....Nobody was freaking out about their jobs, mortgages, 401K's etc. It was just a little downturn. No big deal....

All those things didn't happen overnight; they had been going on for the previous 6-8 months. Considering that bulk of the stimulus bill won't go into effect for years, there's no reason to think it would have significantly damaged the economy to delay its passage for another week, or even another month.

 

[Rayderr]

Approve:

Torture,

Stem cells

Iraq

Afghanistan

Guantanamo

Disapprove:

Defecit

False sense of urgency re: stimulus package

Auto industry bailouts

AIG bonus outrage

Continued DOJ medical marijuana raids

Overall, I give him a C-, slightly disapprove.

Now that the stock market has rebounded somewhat I guess nobody remembers the urgency that was indeed not false. But hey, hindsight is great aint it?Otherwise I pretty much agree with the top list. As for the bottom. Agreed on the Bonus outrage is ridiculous. Same with DOJ medical marijuana. I don't do it but don't see the difference between the stuff and booze and there is a definite medical benefit.

The deficit? That's a tough one. Some sort of stimulus package was needed. Did it need to be this big? Probably not. No matter what the deficit was going to grow. Not happy with how much but that is a matter of debate. The growth was a given, just not the degree.

Auto Industry Bailouts. I think they were necessary. A big part of this economic mess is psychological. The media is all over it and doom and gloom is all over the place. Guys like me with a big phat tax return are sitting on it. People are afraid to spend. If one or more of the big three folded the doom and gloom factor from the media would be even higher. I see the auto bail out as a stimulus package for morale. And besides, it was just a small fraction of the overall bailout.

One thing I would've liked to have seen. The government is asking for accountability from the automakers. Demanding more out of them to earn the package. But the banking industry didn't see that much oversight. I'm not saying they need to run the automakers and didn't like the government asking for Wagoner to resign, but I like them making the the industry work harder to get the money. For too long that industry has sat around letting the Japanese kick our asses and been completely reactionary in their business practices....

Don't forget, 500,000,000 Americans were losing their jobs each month without that bill.

 

[jonessed]

Approve:

Torture,

Stem cells

Iraq

Afghanistan

Guantanamo

Disapprove:

Defecit

False sense of urgency re: stimulus package

Auto industry bailouts

AIG bonus outrage

Continued DOJ medical marijuana raids

Overall, I give him a C-, slightly disapprove.

Now that the stock market has rebounded somewhat I guess nobody remembers the urgency that was indeed not false. But hey, hindsight is great aint it?Otherwise I pretty much agree with the top list. As for the bottom. Agreed on the Bonus outrage is ridiculous. Same with DOJ medical marijuana. I don't do it but don't see the difference between the stuff and booze and there is a definite medical benefit.

The deficit? That's a tough one. Some sort of stimulus package was needed. Did it need to be this big? Probably not. No matter what the deficit was going to grow. Not happy with how much but that is a matter of debate. The growth was a given, just not the degree.

Auto Industry Bailouts. I think they were necessary. A big part of this economic mess is psychological. The media is all over it and doom and gloom is all over the place. Guys like me with a big phat tax return are sitting on it. People are afraid to spend. If one or more of the big three folded the doom and gloom factor from the media would be even higher. I see the auto bail out as a stimulus package for morale. And besides, it was just a small fraction of the overall bailout.

One thing I would've liked to have seen. The government is asking for accountability from the automakers. Demanding more out of them to earn the package. But the banking industry didn't see that much oversight. I'm not saying they need to run the automakers and didn't like the government asking for Wagoner to resign, but I like them making the the industry work harder to get the money. For too long that industry has sat around letting the Japanese kick our asses and been completely reactionary in their business practices....

The stimulus stimulated the stock market last week? You really think that?

Where did I say that? I'm saying with the stock market rebounding lately, all of the sudden the economy tanking the last few months seems to be just a minor speed bump. Companies worth hundreds of billions falling overnight, layoffs, closures, stock market dropping some 3K+ points. Yeah, there was no urgency there....Nobody was freaking out about their jobs, mortgages, 401K's etc. It was just a little downturn. No big deal....

The recent stock market rally hasn't changed the economy and really hasn't changed the opinions of anyone I know or any polls I've seen with regard to the economy. The stimulus wasn't passed to calm a panic. The panic was incited to pass the stimulus.

 

[honky kong]

I'd like to hear from the strongly approves

I voted "strongly approves", but that was more of a function of the poll sucking than actually strongly approving. I agree with what Obama has done on Guantanamo, stem cells, actually considering the use of diplomacy, Afghanistan, Iraq. I don't think he has handled the economy well but I also think that there is no road map on a crisis this size. Yes, he has screwed up at times and he will some more and it's going to cost money but I don't think anyone else out there would do any better with it. So because of the way the poll is set up, I had to decide between "slightly approving" and "strongly approving" when "approves" is closer to the truth. I think he has handled more things positively than negatively (PR hits notwithstanding) and by a good amount.

 

[jonessed]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Obama pulled from a lot of different areas. He's lost all Republican support and recent polls show he is in the process of losing Independents. He's solidified Democratic support, but that's not really all that surprising. Those are people that are going to give him the benefit of the doubt for some time. Bush largely got the same treatment with regard to the Iraq war. Historically, he's still in his honeymoon phase.I don't think a lot of middle expected him to throw caution to the wind and slam through his political agenda during a massive recession. That's not change, it's putting poltics ahead of responsibility. This idea that he can do everything isn't working. The Treasury is floundering. They are trying to implement massive spending/recovery programs and make power grabs when they haven't even staffed most of their senior level positions. We started to see Obama rally a little bit around Geithner a few weeks ago, but now that attention has to be spent getting Congress to pass this massive budget.He's got so much on his plate he has essentially given Congress a skeleton plan and a mandate to spend all they want on it. Congress was chomping at the bit when Bush left office. Taking the reigns off and simply allowing them to stampede their agenda was irresponsible.

 

[PatsWillWin]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

You're right. This is the only explanation.

 

[guderian]

The recent stock market rally hasn't changed the economy and really hasn't changed the opinions of anyone I know or any polls I've seen with regard to the economy. The stimulus wasn't passed to calm a panic. The panic was incited to pass the stimulus.

 

[TheFanatic]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Obama pulled from a lot of different areas. He's lost all Republican support and recent polls show he is in the process of losing Independents. He's solidified Democratic support, but that's not really all that surprising. Those are people that are going to give him the benefit of the doubt for some time. Bush largely got the same treatment with regard to the Iraq war.I don't think a lot of middle support expected him to throw caution to the wind and slam through his political agenda during a massive recession. That's not change, it's putting poltics ahead of responsibility. This idea that he can do everything isn't working. The Treasury is floundering. They are trying to implement massive spending/recovery programs and make power grabs when they haven't even staffed most of their senior level positions. The bank stress tests were the best part of the original plan and he doesn't have the resources to even start them yet. Geithner needs help and Obama is either not giving it to him or doesn't know how to give it to him. We started to see Obama rally a little bit around Geithner a few weeks ago, but now that attention has to be spent getting Congress to pass this massive budget.

This may be true but this poll is vastly different from the poll numbers that Obama gets nationally. Either there are 3 times the number of those that disapprove of Obama here on the board than there are nationally or some people are voting twice. Do you really think we are that far off from the national demographic of ideology than the rest of the country.Seriously, I figure Jim11 has been creating aliai since this tread was opened and won't stop for the next month. Haven't seen him post in a while have you? Too busy creating new email accounts and voting as Jim12, Jim 13, Jim14.......Jim87, Jim88!!!

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I still think there was a false sense of urgency put into place to have the bill signed before anyone had a chance to read it. Especially since he waited longer to sign the bill himself and made a special trip out west to have a signing ceremony. It seems to me that he could have waited a couple of weeks and just signed the damn thing on The Tonight Show, we'd most likely be in the same place.

Considering that bulk of the stimulus bill won't go into effect for years, there's no reason to think it would have significantly damaged the economy to delay its passage for another week, or even another month.

I agree.

 

[jonessed]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Obama pulled from a lot of different areas. He's lost all Republican support and recent polls show he is in the process of losing Independents. He's solidified Democratic support, but that's not really all that surprising. Those are people that are going to give him the benefit of the doubt for some time. Bush largely got the same treatment with regard to the Iraq war.I don't think a lot of middle support expected him to throw caution to the wind and slam through his political agenda during a massive recession. That's not change, it's putting poltics ahead of responsibility. This idea that he can do everything isn't working. The Treasury is floundering. They are trying to implement massive spending/recovery programs and make power grabs when they haven't even staffed most of their senior level positions. The bank stress tests were the best part of the original plan and he doesn't have the resources to even start them yet. Geithner needs help and Obama is either not giving it to him or doesn't know how to give it to him. We started to see Obama rally a little bit around Geithner a few weeks ago, but now that attention has to be spent getting Congress to pass this massive budget.

This may be true but this poll is vastly different from the poll numbers that Obama gets nationally. Either there are 3 times the number of those that disapprove of Obama here on the board than there are nationally or some people are voting twice. Do you really think we are that far off from the national demographic of ideology than the rest of the country.Seriously, I figure Jim11 has been creating aliai since this tread was opened and won't stop for the next month. Haven't seen him post in a while have you? Too busy creating new email accounts and voting as Jim12, Jim 13, Jim14.......Jim87, Jim88!!!

First, the idea that people are creating multiple aliases to vote in this poll is silly. Noone has 50 aliases and I really doubt there is a FBG poll conspiracy going on.Second, I imagine this site is much more independent than the public at large. When you have access to information you have the ability to make decisions based on more than just soundbites. The conversations that go on in here aren't always stellar by any means, but idle convesations that go on in public are downright scary. People are dumb and will follow blindly. It takes Bush-esque like screw-ups to really knock base support. Most people that voted for Obama aren't going to publicly turn short of him getting caught with his pants down. At least not this soon.

 

[tommyboy]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Obama pulled from a lot of different areas. He's lost all Republican support and recent polls show he is in the process of losing Independents. He's solidified Democratic support, but that's not really all that surprising. Those are people that are going to give him the benefit of the doubt for some time. Bush largely got the same treatment with regard to the Iraq war.I don't think a lot of middle support expected him to throw caution to the wind and slam through his political agenda during a massive recession. That's not change, it's putting poltics ahead of responsibility. This idea that he can do everything isn't working. The Treasury is floundering. They are trying to implement massive spending/recovery programs and make power grabs when they haven't even staffed most of their senior level positions. The bank stress tests were the best part of the original plan and he doesn't have the resources to even start them yet. Geithner needs help and Obama is either not giving it to him or doesn't know how to give it to him. We started to see Obama rally a little bit around Geithner a few weeks ago, but now that attention has to be spent getting Congress to pass this massive budget.

This may be true but this poll is vastly different from the poll numbers that Obama gets nationally. Either there are 3 times the number of those that disapprove of Obama here on the board than there are nationally or some people are voting twice. Do you really think we are that far off from the national demographic of ideology than the rest of the country.Seriously, I figure Jim11 has been creating aliai since this tread was opened and won't stop for the next month. Haven't seen him post in a while have you? Too busy creating new email accounts and voting as Jim12, Jim 13, Jim14.......Jim87, Jim88!!!

well you have Adonis, so that's even.

 

[TheFanatic]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Obama pulled from a lot of different areas. He's lost all Republican support and recent polls show he is in the process of losing Independents. He's solidified Democratic support, but that's not really all that surprising. Those are people that are going to give him the benefit of the doubt for some time. Bush largely got the same treatment with regard to the Iraq war.I don't think a lot of middle support expected him to throw caution to the wind and slam through his political agenda during a massive recession. That's not change, it's putting poltics ahead of responsibility. This idea that he can do everything isn't working. The Treasury is floundering. They are trying to implement massive spending/recovery programs and make power grabs when they haven't even staffed most of their senior level positions. The bank stress tests were the best part of the original plan and he doesn't have the resources to even start them yet. Geithner needs help and Obama is either not giving it to him or doesn't know how to give it to him. We started to see Obama rally a little bit around Geithner a few weeks ago, but now that attention has to be spent getting Congress to pass this massive budget.

This may be true but this poll is vastly different from the poll numbers that Obama gets nationally. Either there are 3 times the number of those that disapprove of Obama here on the board than there are nationally or some people are voting twice. Do you really think we are that far off from the national demographic of ideology than the rest of the country.Seriously, I figure Jim11 has been creating aliai since this tread was opened and won't stop for the next month. Haven't seen him post in a while have you? Too busy creating new email accounts and voting as Jim12, Jim 13, Jim14.......Jim87, Jim88!!!

well you have Adonis, so that's even.

You can't throw adonis in with Jim11. Adonis is pretty adamant in his views but Jim11 is downright embarrassing....And I thought the Jim87, Jim88 thing was pretty funny. He hasn't started a new thread in a while?!?!?!

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I voted mildly disapprove.

I dislike the way his administration has responded to the economic crisis, but I'm not really subtracting points for that. On that issue, I'm grading him on a curve, and I'm not at all convinced that McCain wouldn't have made a bigger mess of it than Obama has.

What I'm mainly disappointed in is that his administration has maintained Bush's legal positions in torture cases, turning over documents relating to illegal wiretapping, DNA access in post-conviction proceedings, missing emails, state secrets privilege, withholding records in FOIA cases, and jurisdiction over military prisons overseas (other than Guantanamo Bay). I wanted hope and change; not hope and more of the same.

He's also contradicted his own ethics rules by allowing former lobbyists to work in his administration on issues they'd previously lobbied on.

He's done some good stuff, too. I'm just listing what I'm most disappointed in.

 

[Mookie Blaylock]

Can I get a list of what he's actually done so far?

Leno and he got a nice NCAA bracket

A serious list.

Promises Kept: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promis...s/promise-kept/In the works: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promis...s/in-the-works/

compromise: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promis...ngs/compromise/

ormises broken: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promis...promise-broken/

I think this one is my favorite:No. 241: Require new hires to sign a form affirming their hiring was not due to political affiliation or contributions.

"Will issue an executive order asking all new hires at the agencies to sign a form affirming that no political appointee offered them the job solely on the basis of political affiliation or contribution."

Asking? Asking? You mean, "you want a job in politics you'll sign this form." What a D-Bag. I mean seriously, this couldn't wait?

 

[cstu]

Can I get a list of what he's actually done so far?

Leno and he got a nice NCAA bracket

A serious list.

Those 2 things above and flung our country in communism, Comrade KRS.Obama has been a total ###### for the country so far, and they can no longer blame a thing on Bush. So glad I am in Utah right now, where conservatism reigns supreme.

I never thought I'd live to see the day I saw that.

 

[Saints-Man]

...IraqAfghanistan...

Several people have expressed this sentiment, but my life has been a bit crazy lately and I am unaware what POTUS Obama has done on Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone care to give a brief synopsis?

 

[Saints-Man]

I voted mildly disapprove.

I dislike the way his administration has responded to the economic crisis, but I'm not really subtracting points for that. On that issue, I'm grading him on a curve, and I'm not at all convinced that McCain wouldn't have made a bigger mess of it than Obama has.

What I'm mainly disappointed in is that his administration has maintained Bush's legal positions in torture cases, turning over documents relating to illegal wiretapping, DNA access in post-conviction proceedings, missing emails, state secrets privilege, withholding records in FOIA cases, and jurisdiction over military prisons overseas (other than Guantanamo Bay). I wanted hope and change; not hope and more of the same.

He's also contradicted his own ethics rules by allowing former lobbyists to work in his administration on issues they'd previously lobbied on.

He's done some good stuff, too. I'm just listing what I'm most disappointed in.

Excellent posting, MT.

 

[StrikeS2k]

...IraqAfghanistan...

Several people have expressed this sentiment, but my life has been a bit crazy lately and I am unaware what POTUS Obama has done on Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone care to give a brief synopsis?

Many people quote Guantanamo too but the last time I checked it was still full of terrorists. I guess they take his lip service as action

 

[Moe Green]

I'd like to hear from the strongly approves fiscal conservatives who voted for Obama.

FIXED

 

[Moe Green]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Simmer down, nerd.

 

[Statorama]

Philadelphia paper claims NYT killed election "game changer" story

Just a small article about how the New York Times killed a story about Obama breaking federal election law (McCain-Feingold). Is this what the "grey lady" has come to? Making deliberate editorial decisions to only print stories that paint their candidate of choice in a positive light? I mean, they had noooooooo trouble running a story about an alleged affair that John McCain was having.

'New York Times' Spiked Obama Donor Story

Congressional Testimony: ‘Game-Changer’ Article Would Have Connected Campaign With ACORN

By Michael P. Tremoglie, The Bulletin

Monday, March 30, 2009

A lawyer involved with legal action against Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) told a House Judiciary subcommittee on March 19 The New York Times had killed a story in October that would have shown a close link between ACORN, Project Vote and the Obama campaign because it would have been a “a game changer.”

Heather Heidelbaugh, who represented the Pennsylvania Republican State Committee in the lawsuit against the group, recounted for the ommittee what she had been told by a former ACORN worker who had worked in the group’s Washington, D.C. office. The former worker, Anita Moncrief, told Ms. Heidelbaugh last October, during the state committee’s litigation against ACORN, she had been a “confidential informant for several months to The New York Times reporter, Stephanie Strom.”

Ms. Moncrief had been providing Ms. Strom with information about ACORN’s election activities. Ms. Strom had written several stories based on information Ms. Moncrief had given her.

During her testimony, Ms. Heidelbaugh said Ms. Moncrief had told her The New York Times articles stopped when she revealed that the Obama presidential campaign had sent its maxed-out donor list to ACORN’s Washington, D.C. office.

Ms. Moncrief told Ms. Heidelbaugh the campaign had asked her and her boss to “reach out to the maxed-out donors and solicit donations from them for Get Out the Vote efforts to be run by ACORN.”

Ms. Heidelbaugh then told the congressional panel:

“Upon learning this information and receiving the list of donors from the Obama campaign, Ms. Strom reported to Ms. Moncrief that her editors at The New York Times wanted her to kill the story because, and I quote, “it was a game changer.”’

Ms. Moncrief made her first overture to Ms. Heidelbaugh after The New York Times allegedly spiked the story — on Oct. 21, 2008. Last fall, she testified under oath about what she had learned about ACORN from her years in its Washington, D.C. office. Although she was present at the congressional hearing, she did not testify.

U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc., the ranking Republican on the committee, said the interactions between the Obama campaign and ACORN, as described by Ms. Moncrief, and attested to before the committee by Ms. Heidelbaugh, could possibly violate federal election law, and “ACORN has a pattern of getting in trouble for violating federal election laws.”

He also voiced criticism of The New York Times.

“If true, The New York Times is showing once again that it is a not an impartial observer of the political scene,” he said. “If they want to be a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party, they should put Barack Obama approves of this in their newspaper.”

Academicians and journalism experts expressed similar criticism of the Times.

“The New York Times keeps going over the line in every single campaign and last year was the worst, easily,” said Mal Kline of the American Journalism Center. “They would ignore real questions worth examining about Obama, the questions about Bill Ayers or about how he got his house. Then on the other side they would try to manufacture scandals.”

Mr. Kline mentioned Gov. Sarah Palin was cleared by investigators of improperly firing an Alaska State Trooper, but went unnoticed by The Times.

“How many stories about this were in The New York Times,” he asked.

“If this is true, it would not surprise me at all. The New York Times is a liberal newspaper. It is dedicated to furthering the Democratic Party,” said Dr. Paul Kengor, professor of Political Science at Grove City College. “People think The New York Times is an objective news source and it is not. It would not surprise me that if they had a news story that would have swayed the election into McCain’s favor they would not have used it.”

ACORN has issued statements claiming that Ms. Moncrief is merely a disgruntled former worker.

“None of this wild and varied list of charges has any credibility and we’re not going to spend our time on it,” said Kevin Whelan, ACORN deputy political director in a statement issued last week.

Stephanie Strom was contacted for a comment, and The New York Times’ Senior Vice President for Corporate Communications Catherine Mathis replied with an e-mail in her place.

Ms. Mathis wrote, “In response to your questions to our reporter, Stephanie Strom, we do not discuss our newsgathering and won’t comment except to say that political considerations played no role in our decisions about how to cover this story or any other story about President Obama.”

edit to add other quote box

 

[TheAristocrat]

Here is Obama's tax cut:

"We’ve already seen a jump in refinancings of mortgages as homeowners take advantage of lower rates. And every American should know that up to 40 percent of all mortgages are now eligible for refinancing. This is the equivalent of another tax cut, and we’re also beginning to see signs of increased sales and stabilizing home prices for the first time in a very long time."

Doesn't a tax cut mean your taxes go down?

In Obama's America, tax cuts you

 

[RBM]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Simmer down, nerd.

He just cant believe so many would disapprove of the messiah

 

[Chadstroma]

i'm still so mad about that House vote on the punitive retroactive tax that I hope all 370 of the "yay" voters get removed from office.

Yea, if the question is how has Congress done.... I need a description that is much stronger and negative than 'strongly disapprove'.

 

[Death Bytes]

I voted mildly disapprove.

I dislike the way his administration has responded to the economic crisis, but I'm not really subtracting points for that. On that issue, I'm grading him on a curve, and I'm not at all convinced that McCain wouldn't have made a bigger mess of it than Obama has.

What I'm mainly disappointed in is that his administration has maintained Bush's legal positions in torture cases, turning over documents relating to illegal wiretapping, DNA access in post-conviction proceedings, missing emails, state secrets privilege, withholding records in FOIA cases, and jurisdiction over military prisons overseas (other than Guantanamo Bay). I wanted hope and change; not hope and more of the same.

He's also contradicted his own ethics rules by allowing former lobbyists to work in his administration on issues they'd previously lobbied on.

He's done some good stuff, too. I'm just listing what I'm most disappointed in.

So you voted twice!

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

What I'm mainly disappointed in is that his administration has maintained Bush's legal positions in torture cases, turning over documents relating to illegal wiretapping, DNA access in post-conviction proceedings, missing emails, state secrets privilege, withholding records in FOIA cases, and jurisdiction over military prisons overseas (other than Guantanamo Bay). I wanted hope and change; not hope and more of the same.

I previously missed this article in the Washington Post but need to add it. It's a doozy.
Civil liberties advocates are accusing the Obama administration of forsaking campaign rhetoric and adopting the same expansive arguments that his predecessor used to cloak some of the most sensitive intelligence-gathering programs of the Bush White House.

The first signs have come just weeks into the new administration, in a case filed by an Oregon charity suspected of funding terrorism. President Obama's Justice Department not only sought to dismiss the lawsuit by arguing that it implicated "state secrets," but also escalated the standoff -- proposing that government lawyers might take classified documents from the court's custody to keep the charity's representatives from reviewing them...

In the al-Haramain case, Obama has not only maintained the Bush administration approach, but the dispute has intensified, with the Justice Department warning that if the judge does not change his mind, authorities could spirit away the top-secret documents.

"Any way you look at it, it's pretty remarkable," said Jon B. Eisenberg, an attorney for al-Haramain. "This is an executive branch threat to exercise control over a judicial branch function."

Wow.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

It gets worse. From a story a couple days ago:

The Justice Department also holds that the lawsuit can't proceed because of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They assert that the US government has "sovereign immunity" against statutory claims that it illegally wiretapped or accessed communications data.

Seriously? FISA explicitly allows penalties against government officials for its violation. That goes beyond the silliest arguments made by Bush's DOJ.

 

[TheFanatic]

BTW, gotta love all the aliai coming in here and voting. No way is the FFA the bastion of Conservative thinking that is portrayed by that vote so far. Me thinks the haters have voted more than once....

Simmer down, nerd.

Seriously, Moe? I expect better from you than this. Particularly since it seems you should follow your own advice there....Just seems a little fishy to me that there board is all of the sudden so decidedly conservative....Either fishy or knee jerk. And of course there was that couple week hiatus that Jim11 took from posting that could've accounted for a good 80 votes here....

 

[fsword]

Just seems a little fishy to me that there board is all of the sudden so decidedly conservative....Either fishy or knee jerk.

It could just be the "conservatives" on the board are too busy working to pay their mortgage and off their taxes, and don't have the desire to engage in bulletin board "debate" with the unconstitutional ObamaNation.

 

[bostonfred]

What I'm mainly disappointed in is that his administration has maintained Bush's legal positions in torture cases, turning over documents relating to illegal wiretapping, DNA access in post-conviction proceedings, missing emails, state secrets privilege, withholding records in FOIA cases, and jurisdiction over military prisons overseas (other than Guantanamo Bay). I wanted hope and change; not hope and more of the same.

I previously missed this article in the Washington Post but need to add it. It's a doozy.
Civil liberties advocates are accusing the Obama administration of forsaking campaign rhetoric and adopting the same expansive arguments that his predecessor used to cloak some of the most sensitive intelligence-gathering programs of the Bush White House.

The first signs have come just weeks into the new administration, in a case filed by an Oregon charity suspected of funding terrorism. President Obama's Justice Department not only sought to dismiss the lawsuit by arguing that it implicated "state secrets," but also escalated the standoff -- proposing that government lawyers might take classified documents from the court's custody to keep the charity's representatives from reviewing them...

In the al-Haramain case, Obama has not only maintained the Bush administration approach, but the dispute has intensified, with the Justice Department warning that if the judge does not change his mind, authorities could spirit away the top-secret documents.

"Any way you look at it, it's pretty remarkable," said Jon B. Eisenberg, an attorney for al-Haramain. "This is an executive branch threat to exercise control over a judicial branch function."

Wow.

How much do you know about this case, Maurile? I don't know how I feel about "a charity suspected of funding terrorism" suing for access to "sensitive" information.

 

[TheFanatic]

Just seems a little fishy to me that there board is all of the sudden so decidedly conservative....Either fishy or knee jerk.

It could just be the "conservatives" on the board are too busy working to pay their mortgage and off their taxes, and don't have the desire to engage in bulletin board "debate" with the unconstitutional ObamaNation.

Liberals don't work, pay their mortgages or taxes? Hmmm...How ironic a Conservative making a blanket statement about a group of people simply based on their membership in that group....Wow....Talk about perpetuating a stereotype....

 

[Balance]

He single handedly intimidated pirates half way around the world and forced a surrender.

Awesome.

 

[Statorama]

Obama supplies terrorists with confidential CIA materials

President Obama made what a spokesman called a "weighty" decision last week. He released a Bush administration memo that lists and precisely describes the harsh interrogation techniques the CIA was allowed to use when questioning al-Qaida suspects. What could he possibly have been thinking?

Although the President signed an executive order halting the use of these methods soon after he took office, he and his CIA director both acknowledged that the administration reserved the right to use them in the future should they be needed. Now, they cannot be used even if this or any future administration finds them necessary.

As former CIA Director Michael Hayden and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Friday, Obama's release of detailed descriptions of these interrogation methods "assures that terrorists are now aware of the absolute limit of what the U.S. government could do to extract information from them, and can supplement their training accordingly and thus diminish the effectiveness of these techniques as they have the ones in the Army Field Manual."

For example, one of the techniques, called "walling," is to slam a detainee's shoulder blades against a fake wall designed to make a loud bang "that will make the impact seem far worse than it is and that will be far worse than any injury that will result from the action."

Al-Qaida now knows the wall is fake and that the technique won't harm a prisoner.

The President has rendered useless techniques that, although seldom used, could have come in extremely handy in the future. Sometimes simply threatening to use a particular method can get a prisoner to talk. The President has not only made these methods useless, he has made the threat to use them useless as well.

The President has handed our enemy extremely valuable information that will almost certainly make it harder to extract intelligence from reluctant prisoners in the future. He has, in short, made America less safe.

 

[Statorama]

...and in regards to my bank stocks....

Note to Obama and Geithner: STOP HELPING

 

[adonis]

Obama's approval rating, according to Gallup Daily: 63% approve, 28% disapprove.

 

[StrikeS2k]

I'm just glad he instructed his cabinet to save 100 million dollars. That'll get us on the right fiscal track pronto!!!!!

 

[Statorama]

Obama's approval rating, according to Gallup Daily: 63% approve, 28% disapprove.

Tea Party rallies are growing in number Methinks the next presidential election in 2012 is going to be one hell of a slugfest. Given the job that Obama's done already, the list of atrocities he'll be responsible for by that time will be more than enough ammunition to get him booted from office and hopefully deported.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Obama's approval rating, according to Gallup Daily: 63% approve, 28% disapprove.

Tea Party rallies are growing in number Methinks the next presidential election in 2012 is going to be one hell of a slugfest. Given the job that Obama's done already, the list of atrocities he'll be responsible for by that time will be more than enough ammunition to get him booted from office and hopefully deported.

:(

 

[Statorama]

Short Obama teleprompter story

Obama + Teleprompter always good for a chuckle

President Obama’s speech at the National Academy of Sciences Monday morning hit a brief snag when Obama got ahead of his script.

Laying his plan for a President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Obama began to name the members of PCAST listed in his prepared remarks – before realizing he’d already introduced them, earlier in his speech.

“In addition to John – sorry, the – I just noticed I jumped the gun here,” Obama said, pausing for several seconds as he looked at the prompter. “Go ahead. Move it up. I had already introduced all you guys.”

The audience, which gave the president a warm reception, responded with a quiet laugh.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

latest poll

 

[TheFanatic]

Obama's approval rating, according to Gallup Daily: 63% approve, 28% disapprove.

But in here it is skewed the opposite and then some....Yeah, no alia voting in here...

 

[djcolts]

My grades of the key people in first 100 days:

Obama: B-. Does well when he tones down the anti-business talk. Had a rough start - but improved as he got more comfortable. Needs to be careful on not trying to do too much too soon to further spook the markets.

House of Reps: D-. The 90% tax idea was absolutely scary and horrid. It is like holding your breath, waiting for the next horrible idea to come out of the House, or waiting for the next hearing on something. Whatever improvement the economy is showing is definitely in spite of the House.

Senate: C. This is because of the nature of the Senate - it is meant to be more deliberate, and thank goodness.

Geithner: C-. I know his job is impossible right now - but is it asking too much to have a guy that doesn't look like he's so overwhelmed by it all?

Bernanke: B+. I think the economy would be in much worse shape right now without him taking the actions he has.

 

[adonis]

Obama's approval rating, according to Gallup Daily: 63% approve, 28% disapprove.

But in here it is skewed the opposite and then some....Yeah, no alia voting in here...

Gallup poll, most recent, has him up to 65% approve, 29% disapprove.Not bad so far.

 

[Statorama]

Obama tax plan declares war on Small Businesses

Small Businesses Brace for Tax Battle

Under Obama Plan, Some Entrepreneurs' Bills Would Soar

By Lori Montgomery and V. Dion Haynes

Washington Post Staff Writers

Monday, April 27, 2009

Gail Johnson doesn't think of herself as wealthy. The former pediatric nurse has spent 20 years building a chain of preschools and after-school programs that accommodate sick children so working parents can keep their jobs.

But, like most small-business owners, Johnson reports her profit on her personal tax return. In a typical year, she and her husband make more than $500,000, according to her accountant, a figure that throws them squarely into the ranks of the richest Americans -- and makes them a prime target for the Obama administration's tax policy.

Since last year's campaign, President Obama has vowed repeatedly not to increase taxes for families making less than $250,000 a year. That pledge, while politically popular, has left him with just two primary sources of funding for his ambitious social agenda: about 3 million high-earning families and the nation's businesses.

Johnson, with her company, falls into both categories. If Obama's tax plans are enacted, her accountant estimates that her federal tax bill -- typically, around $120,000 a year -- would rise by at least $23,000, a 19 percent increase.

"You hear 'tax the rich,' and you think, 'I don't make that much money,' " said Johnson, whose Rainbow Station programs are headquartered near Richmond. "But then you realize: 'Oh, if I put my business income with my wages, then, suddenly, I'm there.' "

Across the nation, many business owners are watching anxiously as the president undertakes expensive initiatives to overhaul health care and expand educational opportunities, while also reining in runaway budget deficits. Already, Obama has proposed an extra $1.3 trillion in taxes for business and high earners over the next decade. They include new limits on the ability of corporations to automatically defer U.S. taxes on income earned overseas, repeal of a form of inventory accounting that tends to reduce business taxes, and a mandate that investment partnerships pay the regular income tax rate instead of the lower capital gains rate.

'A Permanent Target'

Business groups say they're bracing for even more battles with the administration.

"They're desperate for revenue. And therein lies the concern of the broader business community," said R. Bruce Josten, chief lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"We're going to be a permanent target, and we understand that," added Catherine Schultz, vice president for tax policy at the National Foreign Trade Council. "The way they see it, corporations don't vote."

Obama has proposed some business tax breaks, but those proposals have been dwarfed by the tax increases under consideration, particularly his plan to let tax cuts enacted by former president George W. Bush expire for high earners.

Administration officials say they would simply restore rates in effect during the Clinton administration for every dollar of income over $250,000 ($200,000 for individuals). The plan is intended to counter years of rising inequality in which wealth has been concentrated at the top of the income scale.

From 1979 to 2006, after-tax incomes rose by $863,000 -- more than 250 percent -- for the top 1 percent of households, compared with $9,200 -- or 21 percent -- for middle-income households, according to a recent analysis of IRS data by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. By allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire next year for upper-income taxpayers -- but keeping the cuts that benefit middle-income families -- Obama has said he hopes to "restore some balance to the tax code."

A Big Issue for Small Firms

Republicans and business groups argue that Obama's plan to tax the rich would strike some of the nation's most productive businesses. Though certain very large companies must organize as separate entities that are taxed twice -- on profits and shareholder dividends -- most smaller businesses opt to be taxed only once by reporting their profits on the personal tax returns of their shareholders.

Most of these businesses make much less than $200,000 a year, though the precise figure is in dispute. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner has said the tax increase would affect about 2 percent of taxpayers with small-business income. An analysis by the Bush Treasury Department found that 7 percent of filers with business profit were in the top brackets in 2006. More recently, the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, which evaluates tax policy for Congress, projected that 3 percent of filers with business profits -- about 750,000 taxpayers -- were likely to face higher taxes in 2011 under Obama's proposal.

Whatever the figure, Republicans argue that those who fall into the upper brackets tend to be firms with the greatest capacity for job creation. In a 2007 survey, the National Federation of Independent Business found that about 15 percent of small-business owners -- and half of those with at least 20 employees -- said they expected their household income to exceed $200,000. In the Washington region, Census figures show one in seven families earn more than $200,000 a year.

"For the vast majority of people who earn less than $200,000, raising taxes on higher earners might not sound so bad. Yet a lot of small businesses are in that category," Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a recent radio address. "Tell these business owners their taxes will go up; odds are, they'll cut spending . . . stop hiring and lay people off."

That's what worries Johnson. She conceived her business in 1989 while teaching at Virginia Commonwealth University. Through her nursing students' clinical practices, she saw firsthand the problems that a sick child can pose for working mothers, causing them to miss work and putting their jobs at risk. "I started out thinking I could provide a service for kids with acute medical needs," she said.

The idea eventually spawned nine, full-service campuses that serve sick and well children from infancy through age 14. New schools opened last year in Austin, Charlotte and Gainesville, Va., each with about 75 employees.

Johnson declined to say whether she voted for Obama. But she said she ignored his tax plans until her husband, who handles real estate and construction for the schools, mentioned it one day. "I've since talked to my accountant," she said. "And, oh, my gosh!"

The accountant, Carroll Hurst, said Johnson is unlikely to owe any federal taxes this year due to accounting changes that confer a one-time tax benefit. But in a typical year, he said, Johnson and her husband earn about $515,000 from various entities related to the schools. They claim around $90,000 in deductions -- much of it contributions to charity -- reducing their taxable income to around $425,000. Johnson said the sum they take home in wages is "substantially less."

In a typical year, Johnson's federal tax bill would be about $120,000. But starting in 2011, the higher marginal rates would add about $13,000 a year, Hurst said. Capping the value of itemized deductions at 28 percent would add another $10,000, for a total increase of $23,000.

And Johnson's tax bill stands to grow dramatically if Obama were to revive a plan to apply Social Security tax to income over $250,000 instead of capping it at the current $106,800. Because Johnson is an employee and an employer, she would have to pay both portions of the tax, Hurst said, tacking another $30,000 onto her bill.

Johnson said such an increase would force her to consider scaling back operations.

"You can try to pass it on to consumers. But if you raise tuition, you put pressure on family budgets," she said. "For us, we're caught between the devil and the deep blue sea."

Other business owners are also nervous. Jim Murphy, president of EST Analytical in Fairfield, Ohio, which sells analytical instruments to environmental testing labs and pharmaceuticals, said his company is struggling in the sluggish economy. But if profit returns to pre-recession levels -- about $455,000 -- Murphy said his accountant estimates that Obama's proposals could add $60,000 to his $120,000 tax bill.

"The misconception is that guys like me take [our profits] and put it into our pockets," said Murphy, who employs 47 people. "But the money the company earns in a given year is used to buy additional inventory so we can grow and hire." A 50 percent tax increase, he said, would be "really painful."

Not all business owners are complaining. Marc Friedman, who earns about $350,000 a year operating Ace Hardware stores in the District and Baltimore, said he wouldn't mind the extra $35,000 to $50,000 he stands to lose to the IRS.

"The small-business community feels there's a disproportionate amount of tax placed on us, and it's true," Friedman said.

But government services "can't be paid for equally by everyone," he said. "It's a big burden, but we're fortunate to be successful."

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Obama tax plan declares war on Small Businesses

But in a typical year, he said, Johnson and her husband earn about $515,000 from various entities related to the schools. They claim around $90,000 in deductions -- much of it contributions to charity -- reducing their taxable income to around $425,000. Johnson said the sum they take home in wages is "substantially less."

I don't really understand this part. When it says that they "earn" $515,000, what does that mean exactly?