President Barack Hussein Obama

[kimba]

It's posted on HuffPo under Comedy/ Funny Pictures. Next time I'll attach a "HAHA, Isn't this a funny picture" tag.

It is a screen grab from the online edition. In that corner of their front page, they have scrolling top stories with video/ pictures. It looks like someone has a slower computer where the caption might have changed before the picture and they caught a screen shot of it. It's a goof, a coincidence. It's just a funny picture.

[mimi]

May 14, 2010

Obama Urges Voters Not to Give Keys Back to GOP
At a fundraiser last night, President Obama said that Republicans "are like bad drivers, who once drove the car into a ditch and now want the keys back," ABC News reports.

Said Obama: "After they drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want to keys back. No! You can't drive. We don't want to have to go back into the ditch. We just got the car out."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... o_gop.html

[CA Dude]

May 14, 2010

Obama Urges Voters Not to Give Keys Back to GOP
At a fundraiser last night, President Obama said that Republicans "are like bad drivers, who once drove the car into a ditch and now want the keys back," ABC News reports.

Said Obama: "After they drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want to keys back. No! You can't drive. We don't want to have to go back into the ditch. We just got the car out."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... o_gop.html

The problem, as I said in another thread, is it was BOTH parties that failed us. Chris Dodd voted for the glass segal act and now it seems as if he was against it the entire time. The GOP is not the only party to blame here

[AuBricker]

The problem, as I said in another thread, is it was BOTH parties that failed us. Chris Dodd voted for the glass segal act and now it seems as if he was against it the entire time. The GOP is not the only party to blame here

How long has Dodd been a senator? The Glass-Steagall Act was passed in 1933. Do you mean to say that Dodd voted to repeal it in 1999?

[CA Dude]

Yes he was one who voted to appeal it

[ducktape]

The problem, as I said in another thread, is it was BOTH parties that failed us. Chris Dodd voted for the glass segal act and now it seems as if he was against it the entire time. The GOP is not the only party to blame here

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Glass segal??

Do you mean the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, aka the Banking Act of 1933? Or do you mean the the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 that repealed it? That was a party-line vote and only Ernest Hollings voted for it on the Democratic side.

Educate yourself, dude, if it's not too late: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105

No, the Republicans had the keys. Suck on it.

ducktape

[MaineSkeptic]

I would simply like to say that President Obama and the rest of the first family will be passing within two miles of my house en route to their Bar Harbor vacation tomorrow.

[verbalobe]

I would simply like to say that President Obama and the rest of the first family will be passing within two miles of my house en route to their Bar Harbor vacation tomorrow.

Uhh.... I've always been a staunch defender of Presidential vacations, but... Bar Harbor? Who in the White House approved the "optics" for that??

Bar Harbor, with its pristine inlets, lobster and deep-sea fishing trade, ocean-front tourism -- and about as far away as you can get from the Gulf Coast in the eastern US?

I predict bad things from this. The Gulf disaster is hardly in any way Obama's fault, but the administration still has not got a handle on the blend of concrete aid and PR spin needed to keep from getting sucked down into a tar pit of vicious public opinion.

I don't have the answer, but I don't think Bar Harbor is it.

Edit: Trying not to be a concern troll, really I'm not.

[TollandRCR]

The problem, as I said in another thread, is it was BOTH parties that failed us. Chris Dodd voted for the glass segal act and now it seems as if he was against it the entire time. The GOP is not the only party to blame here

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Glass segal??

Do you mean the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, aka the Banking Act of 1933? Or do you mean the the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 that repealed it? That was a party-line vote and only Ernest Hollings voted for it on the Democratic side.

Educate yourself, dude, if it's not too late: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105

No, the Republicans had the keys. Suck on it.

ducktape

That was true of the first round. However...

The House passed its version of the Financial Services Act of 1999 on 1 July 1999 by a bipartisan vote of 343-86 (Republicans 205–16; Democrats 138–69; Independent 0–1), two months after the Senate had already passed its version of the bill on May 6th by a much-narrower 54–44 vote along basically-partisan lines (53 Republicans and one Democrat in favor; 44 Democrats opposed).

When the two chambers could not agree on a joint version of the bill, the House voted on July 30th by a vote of 241-132 (R 58-131; D 182-1; Ind. 1–0) to instruct its negotiators to work for a law which ensured that consumers enjoyed medical and financial privacy as well as "robust competition and equal and non-discriminatory access to financial services and economic opportunities in their communities" (i.e., protection against exclusionary redlining).

The bill then moved to a joint conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. Democrats agreed to support the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns; the conference committee then finished its work by the beginning of November. On November 4th, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8, and by the House 362-57. This legislation was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

Bill Clinton signed it. There is no record that he ever urged the Senate or House Democrats not to go along, so he ended up being faced with a veto-proof bill. The evidence points in exactly the opposite direction. "Bill Clinton, Glass-Steagall and the Current Financial and Mortgage Crisis, Part Two of an InDepth Investigative Report" I don't think what was gained in compromise was worth what was lost, i.e., a regulated banking system. It's on my list of reasons to think the Clinton Administration did a great deal of harm and avoided doing a great deal of good that it could have done.

So why did Clinton go along? His writings are silent on the subject. He seemingly held the trump card with the threat to veto any legislation that did not meet his approval. And why is it Sandy Weill who makes the phone call to Clinton? Woodward and Bernstein where are you when we need you?

At this point not enough evidence is available to finally connect the dots, but whatever it is, it cannot possibly benefit Bill Clinton. Were the fingers of the leaders of both parties not all over this bill, you would hope a contemporary version of Senator Pecora might investigate the entire matter, but that will probably never happen. For those who believe Wall Street now calls the tune in this country, the story of the repeal of Glass-Steagall certainly fuels their paranoia.

[tjh]

Obama losing confidence in Americans, new poll shows
http://trueslant.com/lewisgrossberger/2010/07/15/obama-losing-confidence-in-americans-new-poll-shows/

President Obama now lacks faith in American voters’ ability to make rational decisions about 60 percent of his waking hours, a new poll has shown.
...
The magazine said irrational opposition to Obama’s health care measure, the burgeoning Tea Party movement and the birther controversy had all worked to erode Obama’s confidence in the electorate.

In recent weeks, the public has lost more points by its total failure to pay any attention whatever to the financial reform bill and its confusion over whom to blame for the Gulf oil disaster.

“Obama used to think Americans were basically sane,” said Dr. Jordan Ramesh, director of the poll. “But now he is finally waking up to the frightening realization that the public is completely irrational.”
...

[bogus info]

Jason Linkins
jason@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting
Politico: Obama Loses By Winning?
First Posted: 07-15-10 03:04 PM | Updated: 07-15-10 06:08 PM

Today's big Politico piece, by John Harris and Jim VandeiHei, "Why Obama loses by Winning", has been rightly dubbed by Jay Rosen as "an instant classic in Church of the Savvy lit." It truly is a marvel!

It begins with a willful misread-slash-hyperbolic reduction of a "widely read" Eric Alterman column (the authors enable this misread by skillfully denying their readers a link to the Alterman piece, which actually describes the structural conditions that have prevented President Barack Obama from enacting a full-blooded progressive agenda), which in turn allows them to make this silly case that even though Obama has managed to get major pieces of legislation through Congress, his presidency is a failure because it makes bloggers sad.

Naturally, the whole thing is built upon a foundation of anonymous sources. We hear from all the old mainstays: the "top Obama advisor," the "top White House official," and another random adviser. Given the fact that Harris and VandeHei claim that the piece is underpinned by "interviews with officials in the administration and on Capitol Hill, and with Democratic operatives around town," the dearth of sources is pretty glaring.

more here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/1 ... 47749.html

[TollandRCR]

Politico is getting the respect that it deserves. From a link at Daily Kos:

[kate520]

Why is it anyone except the First Family's business where they vacation? Does anyone really expect Daddy O to take his family into harm's way by going to the Gulf, just for the optics? Maybe he was invited
To Bar Harbor by GHWB or a Kennedy.

Have you seen how Obama has aged in the last year and a half? He needs as much rest as he can scrounge, wherever he can scrounge it.

[verbalobe]

Why is it anyone except the First Family's business where they vacation? Does anyone really expect Daddy O to take his family into harm's way by going to the Gulf, just for the optics? Maybe he was invited to Bar Harbor by GHWB or a Kennedy.

I didn't say he should go to the Gulf. I do think there should be some awareness of the optics. But perhaps they'll ensure no footage. More likely, I'm just a worrywart. I was just struck by the parallel, after all the Gulf coverage. I pictured lobsters or clams, happy faces on happy boats. What would the RW Noise Machine do with that? But again, I'm just silly. I'm not making it my business. Faux News will just make stuff up anyway, so he should do whatever he pleases.

Have you seen how Obama has aged in the last year and a half? He needs as much rest as he can scrounge, wherever he can scrounge it.

I COMPLETELY agree, 110%.

[kate520]

Verbie, I have a funny mental image about Bar Harbor as pertains to Bushies. I picture Barbara
Bush as both a frigate and its masthead sailing into the harbor, salt spray in her face, glaring distainfully at all the other boats in the harbor as she sails arrogantly by.

[verbalobe]

Verbie, I have a funny mental image about Bar Harbor as pertains to Bushies. I picture Barbara
Bush as both a frigate and its masthead sailing into the harbor, salt spray in her face, glaring distainfully at all the other boats in the harbor as she sails arrogantly by.

That's so funny. She and Margaret Thatcher -- true 20th century "battleships" ...

(Have you read Robin Hobb??)

[MaineSkeptic]

I would simply like to say that President Obama and the rest of the first family will be passing within two miles of my house en route to their Bar Harbor vacation tomorrow.

Well, FWIW, we sat on a bench on Main St. yesterday for a couple of hours. Beautiful day, lovely crowd, but no sighting. From press reports, it appears that we missed them by a short time.

BH.jpg

16 JULY 2010: BAR HARBOR WITHOUT THE OBAMAS

[Highlands]

Can Barack Obama Ever Be Enough to Satisfy Us?

From the time that Barack Obama campaigned for the Democratic Nomination for President to a year and a half into his Presidency, he has been hammered by the GOP, the media, big corporations, the Tea Party and even some Democrats for not being enough. Every day there is an attack on Obama for never being enough of something. Can we ever be satisfied?

This is how it goes. He didn’t have enough political experience. He didn’t have enough executive experience. He wasn’t Black enough. He wasn’t White enough. He wasn’t old enough. He wasn’t liberal enough. He wasn’t conservative enough. He wasn’t tough enough. He wasn’t angry enough. He wasn’t American enough. He wasn’t partisan enough. He wasn’t bipartisan enough. He wasn’t transparent enough. He wasn’t in the White House enough. He wasn’t out of the White House enough. He wasn’t patriotic enough. He wasn’t apologetic enough. He wasn’t pro Israel enough. He wasn’t anti Israel enough. He wasn’t pro Muslim enough. He wasn’t anti Muslim enough. He wasn’t enough of a peacemaker. He wasn’t enough of a war monger. He’s not concerned enough about education but he’s too educated. He doesn’t take his family on vacations to the right place enough or he doesn’t take vacations at the right time enough. It goes on and on. On one hand the Tea Party accused him of not being enough. On the other hand they accused him of being Hitler and taking over “their” country.

[Adelante]

Sometimes I feel very sad we ever elected him. I know he wanted the job, but seriously, there are days I feel so deeply that he and his family would have been so much better off out of it, that I feel guilty I voted for him. There doesn't seem to be anything he can do that somebody, somewhere isn't squawking, poor guy.

Can Barack Obama Ever Be Enough to Satisfy Us?

[kate520]

He and Michelle are too bright to have not expected something like what they are experiencing. The people I know who have gone into public service are all somewhat altruistic and truly believe their contributions are worth what it costs them, in the end.

[Foggy]

Sometimes I feel very sad we ever elected him. I know he wanted the job, but seriously, there are days I feel so deeply that he and his family would have been so much better off out of it, that I feel guilty I voted for him. There doesn't seem to be anything he can do that somebody, somewhere isn't squawking, poor guy.

That happened to lots of presidents. Lyndon Johnson said, "If I was to walk on water across the Potomac River tomorrow morning, the afternoon headlines would read: "PRESIDENT CAN'T SWIM".

Lincoln was called "The Original Gorilla". FSM knows I criticized every dang thing George Bush ever did. The only thing I ever heard he did good at was clearin' brush on his ranch, and we never did get to inspect a Certificate of Brush Clearing from any national societies or experts or anybody ... not even what Orly would call "an official certificate inspector to be named later". We pretty much had to accept it when the liberal MSM told us he was good at clearin' brush.

But other than that, he was the Reverse Midas: Everything he touched turned into shit.

I THINK I see the Republican Party splintered in two. And the Republican Party of the Insane is in absolute control over the Republican Party of the Sane. Don't you agree? The real leaders of the GOP are Bachmann and Palin and Beck and Limbaugh ... the Insane branch of Conservatism?



Brace yourselves for campaign season, that's my advice. This may be as wild as the last one.

[muldrake]

I THINK I see the Republican Party splintered in two. And the Republican Party of the Insane is in absolute control over the Republican Party of the Sane. Don't you agree? The real leaders of the GOP are Bachmann and Palin and Beck and Limbaugh ... the Insane branch of Conservatism?

I don't really consider these people "conservatives" at all. Conservatism, while it isn't my approach, is an approach to politics that has some internal consistency. (Sane) conservatives are important to balance out the more extreme elements of liberalism that might do silly things if allowed to do so. (Sane) conservatism attempts to preserve the ways of doing things that are actually working and don't need to be changed.

These people are not that, though. They're reactionary extremists who want to change things (that are working) back to old versions that didn't work or, worse, to versions of the past that never even existed. That's not conservatism. It's stupidity and craziness.

I miss having principled adversaries, as opposed to scum I can't even consider real Americans.

[bogus info]

Obama On GOP Deficit Talk: 'I'm Going To Call Them On Their Bluff'
| 07/31/10 03:03 PM | AP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has a warning for Republicans who denounce the federal deficit but reject proposals to cut it.

Obama tells CBS, "I'm going to call them on their bluff."

The president promises to have "a bunch of ideas" for deficit reduction, but he didn't specify them in the broadcast interview.

Many analysts say both spending cuts and tax increases are needed to tame the soaring deficit.

more here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/3 ... 66360.html

This interview will air on CBS's "Sunday Morning" and "The Early Show" on Monday.

[optimusprime]

I ALMOST FORGOT. HAPPY BIRTHDAY MR. PRESIDENT AND I WISH YOU MANY, MANY MORE.

[muldrake]

I ALMOST FORGOT. HAPPY BIRTHDAY MR. PRESIDENT AND I WISH YOU MANY, MANY MORE.

Me too. But please rediscover your balls sometime this year.