This and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee in any decent restaurant. Maybe.

But how many people actually know about Obama’s plans? It’s not like the mainstream news is attacking Obama and even if they were, only 30% of the U.S. adult population read a newspaper and only 20% read it more than once a week.

About 6 in 10 under 30 get their news from the web. About 70% of adults get their news from TV. This opens up a strong case for selective hearing for those following the news.

Thank God I live in America and not in the South.

So, a dailykos poll shows support for Obama??? Imagine that.

But, just about every other poll on there had a negative majority (country STILL headed in wrong direction, D/R senators, etc…)

Answer this for me…. if McCain had been elected last November, what would the reaction be to him going on late night talk shows and picking NCAA brackets on ESPN in the midst of the biggest financial crisis to hit our country in a generation??

I’m just sayin…

My god, in what universe do you see the Daily Kos readers being an accurate cross-section of Americans? Of course, you didn’t cite the source as you usually do when you post such polling articles, relying on your readers to follow the link. Naturally, most readers don’t follow the link and take your words at face value. That’s deceptive and it’s propaganda.

In actuality (i.e. legitimate polling from Rasmussen and major network news polling) indicates that Obama approval rating has gone down just slightly, but his disapproval rating has risen rather dramatically over the past month. Do some real research if you want an accurate picture.

Dixieland not that into a black President? Who would have known?

Kim Jong Il approval ratings remain well above 99%, young, middle-age, old, North, West, South…
No wonder, a guy who launches satellites into the Pacific Ocean must be very popular.

That’s what I call Stratosphere.

A herd fenced or wild is always right. So they think.

Greg, I’m not sure what you want to happen that will ‘expose’ Obama’s plans any more than they already are. The guy is on TV and the Web, virtually, everyday. His plans are on plenty of websites, like recovery.org.

I hear plenty of complaints out there, unsupported by any substance. So, I ask again: What has he done WRONG? Where has he ’skrewed up’? Has he deregulated the commodities market? Has he made it harder to declare bankruptcy? Has he invaded a sovereign nation unilaterally? Has he privatized the search for bin laden? Has he unlawfully detained innocent ’suspected’ terrorists?

No, Greg, those questions weren’t directed at you, specifically. But, I’d like to see/hear a list of his ’skrewups’. Not just a list of things that ‘bother’ people…….

Coach wants to hear some screwups. Let me name several. The huge budget proposal is terrifyingly too large. He is taking over the private sector by ousting CEO’s as a condition to give them our money. He told Russia that he’d stop plans on the missile defense system if they’d help us with Iran. I’m sorry, but that’s a very bad idea and sends a message of weakness to our enemies. He proposes reducing our nuclear arsenal if everyone else plays nice and does so as well. I don’t think North Korea and Iran care too much about that idea. Look (as Obama would say) peace and friendliness between nations, non-corrupt businesses, and a world without wars is something every American supports, maybe the South just understands the fact that he’s proposed history changing after history changing policy every day of his presidency and we’ve not even gotten to 100 days! He’s “screwing” up with the way he’s going about it. The sad part…the results of his mistakes will only become apparent during the next Republican administration.

Alan, all you said was that you’re fearful. None of your concerns have come to fruition yet. In fact, they ALL could go positive, er, stay positive. The budget could work, diplomacy could work. Disarmament could work. The difference is that you’re fearful that none of these things WILL work. Time will tell, but if you ask me, I don’t see why we have to play the tough guy when we have more active nuclear warheads than anybody on the planet……..

Pretty simple MD, One nuclear bomb can ruin your whole day.

D&C, and who’s the only country to EVER use one? North Korea? Iran? Iraq? Russia? Japan? China? Cuba? Pakistan? Afghanistan? India? Egypt?

Nope. Only us

Coach:

What the Democrats did:
In 6 months, the Democrats have put in $12.5 trillion (over $40,000 per U.S. citizen), nine trillion which came under Obama’s watch, into the system. The whole GNP for 2008 was $14.2 trillion. The Democrats basically cloned the U.S. yet still over 4.4 million (2 million under Obama’s watch) were lost during that period. The Democrats want to spend even more money, yet the treasury just had to print $500 billion because the government ran out of bond holders. This printing of money will cause hyper inflation. It’s the worst misuse of money by any government. It would have been cheaper to give every U.S. citizen $40,000 each. None of this information was found in The L.A. Times (the paper I read), CNN, Yahoo news or MSN. This information was found in economic magazines.

What Obama did:

He campaigned for transparency, yet he and his minions give the press the run around where the money is going.

He and his staff have repeatedly violated the Hatch Act of 1939. While President Reagan was busted for trying to campaign for Bush Sr., Obama gets away with trying to raise money for Hillay’s debts. Also he and his staff have repeatedly bashed Steele and Rush Limbaugh which are also violations of the Hatch Act. Not only did Obama and staff not care about the Hatch act, the Democratic Party and the news didn’t care either. The penalty for violating the Hatch Act is a fine and or firing (Reagan was fined).

Claimed that anybody under $250K a year would not see any tax increase. Then he turns around and wants a cigerette tax, which would hit the poor the most.

He also says he would cut his own deficit in half which is based on a bunch of gimmicks Bush used and he criticized during his campaign. The biggest gimmick is using the 5 year projection instead of the 10 year projection which shows much larger deficits as the costs of his plans start taking effect.

He touted green energy expansion, which comes to $128 billion a year. Much of it isn’t really green technology by anybody’s definition (clean coal, nuclear energy and biomass).

Expects cap and trade to generate $2 trillion in taxes over 8 years. That would increase energy costs for the consumers. See his pledge about not increasing the taxes on those making less than $250K a year.

He tried to get the G20 to spend 2% of each nation’s GNP for a “global stimulus.” It was shot down. He did get the G20 to set up the Financial Stability Forum to be the Financial Stability Board. This updated board will be in charge of all financial regulation and oversee all financial firms and also businesses deemed to large to fail.
It’s mandate is, “We agree to a framework of internationally agreed upon high standards. We will set up a financial stability board with a strengthened mandate to extend regulation and oversight to all systemically important financial institutions, instruments and markets.” Want to pass a law in your state regarding hedge funds (let’s say a state tax)? Sorry, you can’t now. You have to beg this board for that regulation. You are the perfect CEO for a major corporation, but the board doesn’t like you. Poof, you’re fired by it.

What the news did to ralley for
Obama:

Over estimated the number of people that went to see his inauguration and while the press complained deeply of the cost of Bush Jr.’s inauguration cost, the press ignored Obama’s inauguration which was much more.

Claimed Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house. That quote came from Saturday Night Live.

Claimed Sarah Palin shot wolves from a helicopter. That’s a misquote from Gloria Stienam.

Claimed Sarah Palin said that the Gulf War was God’s Will. The paper actually misquoted Abe Lincoln who she was quoting.

Talked about Palin’s clothes yet failed to mention the expensive clothes of Hillary Clinton and the Obama’s. Two suits Obama wore (and he wore more than one) had a total cost more than Palin’s whole clothing budget. Then of course his wife’s clothes and kids’ clothes were expensive too.

Claimed that Palin went shopping for those clothes and also had a fight with her staff. She never went shopping for those clothes and she didn’t have a fight with her staff.

The press overstated the reason why people went to see Obama during his campaign. Obama was giving out money, even in Europe and had top musical acts as openers. So who actually stayed for the speeches? Who knows, but the press which never said.

Just today the press said Gates was cutting defense programs, he is just cutting the number of some programs, but he is expanding others.

The LA times had a political cartoon showing the Queen dancing to her new IPod which Obama gave her. The problem is the Ipod was preloaded to Obama’s speeches, so who dances to political speeches? Also of course he didn’t write those speeches, so what she is listening to his his voice and all those “uh uh uhs.”

They claimed that Obama was a big hit at the G20. A hit with the press, not actually with what he wanted. He didn’t get what he wanted from NATO and North Korea either, but you won’t hear that from the press either.

The press is also touting Obama’s diplomacy, except that it has failed every time he has used it. So much for “smart power.” Other interests have well other interests and Obama has gone nowhere trying to change this.

Mayday– Whats your point? We used nuclear weapons twice, over 60 years ago, before we knew their full destructive capabilities (back then, we just knew they blew up a ton of stuff real fast; radiation was an unknown)…disarmament COULD work. But I dont trust tin-pan dictators enough to follow up on their end of the bargain, so noble a cause it may be, I think its a dead end for the prez at the moment…

But Alan is touching upon a key part of Obama’s bumblings in the economy; he hasnt offered one explanation for how we (the US Taxpayers) are going to p.ay for all of this stuff he’s proposing. We’re barely afloat as it is; we’re simply creating bailout money, unbacked. If China suddenly loses the ability to b.uy our t-bonds, look out.

Also, Obama is on dubious ground replacing CEO’s and running companies instead of letting them go into Chap. 11 and restructuring, he’s going counter to sound business practice in every step he’s taken…he has no intention of saving Detroit, but every intention of saving the UAW…

As for him not bungling up in any foreign places, give him time…the siren’s call of imperialism strikes every president eventually…

The big question still is, when has spending more money in a liquidity crisis been a good idea? How are we going to pay for all of this?

Mayday just hates the fact that he was born free to run his mouth. He would be a lot better off without the right to make a fool of himself and sometimes his resentment is just too much for his little mind to bear.

Ole,

Don’t you think that was a little strident on your part? What MD said was true AND said by others. We did not HAVE to use the bomb, we CHOSE to and it was done more to show the USSR what we had than anything militarily, claims otherwise notwithstanding.

Merk,

Are you suggesting that the scientists who developed the bomb had no idea of the radiation generated? After Curie and others had died of radiation poisoning? They knew, and after the fall of Germany and the defeats upon Japan, they, for the most part, were against its use.

Bloodless: Way to stay on topic. Boy, you sure put me in my place, didn’t you? Boy, I sure have been corrected.

Stay pragmatic. Message, not messenger

Dennis- Most of the scientific knowledge about radiation’s lethal effects at large wouldnt become fully known until the mass testings in the late 40s-early 50s. Almost certainly scientists knew that radiation had harmful effects; but the scope of those effects, their breadth, and the totality of their damage was not known until after we dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

As for our reasons for doing it? Undoubtedly, to strike fear into the Soviet Union is on the list, but more than likely it was to bring a quick end to the war. Fighting in the Pacific had been so bloody and brutal, that taking the Japanese homeland would have expended many more lives. So, while we did regretably nuke those cities, we saved millions more from death due to convential warfare, and have never used said weapons in combat since

All in all, as I stated earlier, disarmament is a noble goal, just not necesarily a feasible one, and not one Obama should be pouring his energies into at the moment.

More issues to add to my list.
Obama refuses to take back TARP money from the financials? As long as the financials have the TARP money, Obama thinks he “owns” those financials. Obama has forgotten he works for the taxpapers that want that TARP money back.

Jeff Danziger, a political cartoonist has Sarah Palin shooting at Levi from a plane. That cartoon is based on a falsehood I mentioned earlier and it’s still going strong in the liberal press world. Also that cartoon would be labled as racist if that was Michelle or Barrack Obama pictured shooting at innocent people.

Merk, sorry but I don’t agree with this propoganda: “So, while we did regretably nuke those cities, we saved millions more from death due to convential warfare,”

Millions?

OK, Greg. We get it. You disagree with everything Obama. But, just because you disagree, that doesn’t prove that his policies have failed.

While you disagree with all the spending of Obama, one wonders where you were during the last administration’s spending spree. Or, during Big Bush’s spending spree to bail out the banks after Reagan’s deregulation circus.

At least this spending spree is ‘designed’ to create an increase in GDP. The last spending spree was designed to increase defense/oil services stock prices and profits.

Coach- Millions is an accurate statement (our troops, allied forces, Japanese soldiers, civilians, etc). If the Japanese were willing to give everything to the Emperor over pieces of barren rock and coral like Midway and the Solomons, imagine what trying to slog throught the Japanese homeland would have been like. The Japanese Homeland was very well guarded and militarily fortified. When dealing with people who normally fight to the death, on their home turf, you can imagine why one would be wary of invasion. So given the knowledge of nuclear power at the time, and the tactical hardships of actually invading, bombing, and subduing the home islands of Japan, then the bombings can be understood, but not condoned.

Remember, the worst bombing of the war wasnt at Hiroshima or Nagasaki, but at Dresden, using conventional weapons, which killed many, many more people. So, one’s view on nukes vs. ohter ways of killing people, i suppose, is relative…

Greg,

I think it’s pretty well accepted that Obama took over a country in which extraordinary measures were required to deal with the problem(s). And I think ‘extraordinary measures’ ARE, by definition, risky AND, for the most part, unpopular.

That said, if Formad had NOT made such a mess of this country (the world?) then I doubt Obama would have been elected. He was elected, if you didn’t notice, to undo the failed, DISASTROUS policies of Formad.

You can carp and grouse all you want but to do so at this juncture does not give your credibility much service. Do you honestly think anyone, amongst us, LIKES what’s happening? Is that your position? To make cheap political hay of someone actually trying to improve the world for someone other than the elite? If so, party on, you merely validate the insanity that got us INTO this mess.

Merk,

You’re a pretty hard case. I find that surprising for a Libertine. I would have thought your distrust for government would have led you to be disgusted with this country’s actions with Japan. Just another example of government’s seemingly disquieting belief that humans are merely cannon fodder (A-Bomb fodder?). And if a government, even ours, ‘said’ that certain individuals were ‘bad’ then, voila, they must be bad. Lord knows, the government NEVER has an agenda and NEVER makes a mistake.

Just for the record, the scientists were opposed to using the bomb, the U.S. never tried to use the threat of the bomb to negotiate a truce AND they didn’t need to drop TWO bombs. You can fuss and fidget about my first two points, but I sincerely hope you don’t support two bombs, within three days.

Dennis- Notice I said I understood why the govt chose bombing over full scale invasion, not that I condoned the actions…obviously dropping nukes on anyone is not a humanitarian thing to do…but I can understand how the govt would have thought it more cost effective…I should have been a bit clearer, but the point I was trying to extrapolate is the fact that its a moot point whether we used the bomb or not, as no one has, and hopefully will not, use them in the future. But, short of a time machine, I dont see any feasible plan for disarmament, espescially in the information age…the cat is out of the bag, and it isnt going back in

My distrust for the government is rightly placed and rightly assumed, but it does one disservice not to know the workings and thought processes of why it does things…disgusted? Very much so, but I dont think my position would have been changed as much if we decided to Dresden all of their cities in a rush to subjugate their population, as opposed to just two. It was a gamble, a regrettable one, but one that in hindsight worked. But I pray that it is a gamble that is not used ever again. I dont know what the alternative would have been, other than slogging ones way through Japan’s defenses…since the matter has been settled by history, its hard to look back and claim that doing it another way would have been more/less humane

Merk,

Well said. However, it’s EASY to look back and decide what should have been done, or not. I, for one, would not have liked to have had to be the one to make the call. I’m sure there’s a LOT we don’t know about what went into the final decision.

As you’ve said, the cat’s out of the bag. Damnedable thing.

Merk, can you explain why we’re still allowed to keep ANY of our nukes? Being that we’re the only country to use them, why is it we have more and continue to make more than anybody else?

The point is this: If Iran uses their ONLY nuke, they’ll get bombed. Yet, we used two of them, and are allowed to have ten thousand actives…….

It seems a bit pompous for us to vilify other countries trying to get nukes, when we’re the only ones to ever use them, and we didn’t reap any repercussions of using said nukes. Meanwhile, anybody else that uses one, or is even accused of wanting to use one, well, you know the picture…..

In other words: We’re hypocrites to the extent that we won’t let anyone else have nukes without our permission, even though nobody gave US permission…….

Coach- Our nukes still have a useful purpose in simply being there, which reduces our likelyhood of being attacked. North Korea or Iran gain nukes doesnt bother me as much knowing we can easily respond should something happen (god forbid it ever does).

At the same time, the US also doesnt go around flagrantly launching missles into the Sea of Japan or claiming that Israel has to be wiped off the face of the earth…you might be totally comfortable with nukes in the hands of tin-pan madmen, but, suffice to say, it gives me pause.

Disarmament is useless anyway; all the talks and treaties did nothing to stop the various countries that have gone nuclear over the years…the only one that was deterred, South Africa, did so over cost, not because they had some great aversion to the bomb. And with all the information on nuclear assembly available on the web, anyone , anywhere with the time, money, and inclination can build a nuclear device.

So, us without nuclear weapons is a world I’d rather not turn ourselves over to…I dont like putting my safety in the hands of some nutjob in Tehran or Pyongyang and hoping that they dont push the button…

Where exactly did the US use “Nukes” Coach? We used ATOMIC weapons on Japan when they refused to surrender, but can’t recall where we used nukes

Dennis, I wonder how many people whose relatives died on the Arizona are proud of your constant “I Hate Amerca” stance(s)? This is a free country you can leave anytime and renounce your US citizenship.

Soot,

Small minds see small things.

I hate some things America does and wish that the people who support those things would leave. I’ll buy your ticket.

SS: Typical use of the ‘You Hate America’ bumper sticker slogan. Come up with something else, or maybe YOU outta think about leaving.

Acknowledging transgressions does not equate to hatred.

Merk: I think you’re missing my point, which is this: It’s ironic that the only country to use atomic/nuclear weapons is the country calling other non-nuclear countries’ leaders ‘nutjobs’.

Coach- I think you missed the part where we havent used nuclear weapons in over 60 years, and do not express an active desire to do so ever again. When the US and Mexico get into a disagreement, the US doesnt respond by lobbing missiles into the Gulf…which is North Korea’s response to, well, just about everything. We may vehemently disagree with Chavez, but you never heard Bush, or will hear Obama, calling for the state of Venezuela to be vaporized, ala Iran and whomever is on the mullahs current hit list.

Surely you can tell the difference, right?

Merk,

Your disagreement with Coach is pretty clear, but your position is not. Unless, of course, you’re equating a threat to an actual, unnecessary, decimation of two cities.

Threats are a diplomatic ruse with the intention to intimidate your ‘enemy’ and/or placate your citizenry. In the old axiom, “talk is cheap.” Any ’state’ that uses nuclear weapons in this day and age jeopardizes its existence.

And while the U.S. may have only used the ‘nuclear option’ once, that contingency has been on each and every ‘table’ during the cold war and if the military had been able to make the call, would have been SOP in battle tactics.

What I get out of Coach’s position is that if there is a list of which countries with Nukes are most likely to use them, then the U.S. should be on top. Followed by Israel.

We have shown that we will use them and have repeatedly shown that we don’t give a crap about any other nation’s sovereignty nor their population. If we can ‘manufacture’ cause to invade and destabilize Iraq, how far away can the use of nuclear weapons be?

Dennis- My list for countries most likely to use nukes would not have the US or Israel at the top because both countries have stable governments, civil societies, and other barriers to using nuclear weapons. The ones at the top of my list would be Pakistan and India.

Pakistan, were it not for the Pakistani Army, would be a failed state composed of various tribal factions warring against one another–in short, chaos. Chaos with a large stockpile of nukes. And I worry about India, b/c if the Pakistani state collapses and radicals gain control of nuclear devices, India, and specifically Kashmir or Punjab state, will be the first targets. A shooting war on the subcontinent is one of the few things that the west almost never gets wind of, and one of the topics I wish would get covered more

The US has to be held accountable for its past actions, but to put it ahead of rogue states with nuclear intentions and lack of safeguards, seems, to me at least, to be a folly, and detracts from the action of disarmament.

More Obama issues for the left to ponder:
Gitmo will stay open according to the DOJ. The problem is the DOJ can’t find anybody to take the prisoners and the DOJ isn’t going to release the prisoners in the U.S.

There is a reason why Obama is not going to go after Bush and Cheney on warentless wire tapping. Obama has gone even further in the belief that the federal government has a right to warrentless wire tapping according to FISA, The U.S. Patriot Act, the Wiretap Act and and the Stored Communications Act. The Cybersecurity Act of 2009, if passed, would strengthen the support for warrentless wiretapping on websites.

Merk,

I am guilty of emotional rhetoric. In a real world, yes, a rogue state is more frightening as it has less to lose.

Of course, that doesn’t mitigate the U.S.’s actions in the past nor its role in creating the atmosphere that presently exists.

The issue does pose a vexing question. Should, say, Iran or rogue elements of Pakistan, use a nuclear device anywhere, but particularly Israel or some U.S. facility, should the U.S. respond in kind?

Methinks not, but I feel there would be MANY that would opt for an eye for an eye, totally disregarding the morality of the issue OR the toxic results. I’m sure it’s a topic addressed from time to time in the DOD. Wonder what the leaning is.

Greg,

Simple, return them from whence they were snatched, with apologies to the offended country. One has to wonder if those ‘detained’ will be compensated for their lost earnings, etc.

Since, ostensibly, Cuba will be assuming responsibility/oversight of the facility, we could dump a lot of money in that country’s lap and ask them to ‘oversee’ relocation.

As for wiretaping, the operative word is illegal. THAT was the issue with Formad.

Your choice of the word warrantless is interesting. Does that mean without judicial sanction or with justification?

Dirty Dennis, the problem sending the people back where we got them is that Obama has a clause stating they won’t go back to places that will torture them. That rules out Afghanistan and Pakistan where most of these guys were taken.

Illegal wiretaps is what the Democrats called Bush and Chenney’s wiretapping scheme. “Bush admits he ordered illegal warantless wiretapping…” –from Democrats.com. Now that Obama is stating that he wants to use the same scheme and even expand it, it’s all hush hush from the Democrats and the major news outlets.

Greg,

I’m sure that if we return ‘bad guys’ to Al Queda (sic) they won’t be tortured. If they are, then that’s THEIR problem.

I’m equally sure that if YOU know about Obama’s ‘illegal’ wire-tapping, so do a whole HAIL of a lot of other people. But it’s not illegal if they go to Congress for approval. Are they?