Obama Closes Doors on Openness

By Michael Isikoff | NEWSWEEK
Published Jun 20, 2009
From the magazine issue dated Jun 29, 2009

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 07/13/2009 7:29:13 AM

    more OBAMA LIES coming to the lite of day

  • Posted By: beccamcurtis @ 07/13/2009 12:28:39 AM

    Is anyone really surprised by this? Just another one of the many things that Obama has decieved his supporters about. The guy may be able to sound educated but if you read back through many of his interviews he is really not saying anything concrete. What is next? He is already destroying our food resources in California with this water righhts battle and has taken down major parts in our economy, how much more are we going to let his administration do to us? I don't see him lasting the full term.

  • Posted By: kimhillstrom @ 07/12/2009 2:00:18 PM

    I didn't vote for Obama because I knew it would just be more of the same. He is no different than Bush except that he has better grammar. People that voted for him knew nothing about him except that he could talk a good talk. He has yet to walk the walk. He is a typical politician. He talks out of both sides of his mouth. Two of the four years he was in the senate he was campaigning. He did nothing. He still has done nothing and has not done what he promised. When will America wake up and stop falling for the guy that speaks well but doesn't do a damn thing he says he will do? We are going to have 4 more years of Bush. I'm sick of the "let's move forward" talk. Read between the lines. In other words he is going to do nothing about holding accountable the criminal activity of the previous despots. He is not listening to people on health care (the majority want single payer and he does not) I don't care how many experts he has to guide him, the decision is his alone. He has already broken numerous promises that he campaigned on. He will be a one term president and deservedly so. He has become quite arrogant and detached from the people that elected him. I was smart enough to not be one of them.

  • Posted By: Karenjcd @ 07/12/2009 1:40:13 PM

    Obama says one thing and does another. We are in BIG trouble unless things change. Obama, Congress, and the Senate are all inept. To pass bills without reading them in unacceptable and inadequate representation. It's time to clean house! It is unbelievable that a country has a man in charge of the IRS and finances that didn't pay his own taxes because by his own admission he couldn't figure it out?!?! Give me a break. And they said Palin wasn't experienced. She could run circles around these people and thats why they fear her.

  • Posted By: VotersOfNY @ 07/12/2009 9:24:09 AM

    We're in big trouble with Obama. Can you say Socialism?

  • Posted By: HuntTheWumpus @ 06/22/2009 1:54:32 PM

    I can't quite grasp the nature of some of these comments: You are belittling the man who is picking up after a previous administration of 8 years with no blame for said administration? Didn't Bush approve the first round of bailouts? Where was this outrage then?? I mean, either let the companies fail, or don't, but don't cheer Bush doling out $$ then boo when Obama does it....I am amazed that some of you can find your way onto the web, with moral compasses as screwed up as they seem.....

    • Posted By: deblea @ 07/08/2009 3:16:17 AM

      Oh, we were plenty outraged then too Hunt. Lots of people just need to go back about 2-3 years and read comments about how the Repubs were spending like mad men and how betrayed we felt then. When Obama was elected, I was fearful but like most upset with previous 4 years, I was ready to give him a chance. I knew the Bush bailouts would fail then Obama does same thing and adds trillions more of proposed spending on top of that all the while saying one thing and doing another, And what happened to citizens getting to read legislation before it was passed???

    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 1:58:20 PM

      Much of the GOP, sadly, has developed a priori opposition to Obama. Remember, the RNC booed McCain for congratulating his opponent's victory with the standard speech, post-election.

      There are GOP members out there too with rational disagreements to O and good points to make, but they're getting shouted out by the trolls. (Not an insult, I'm using it in the usual sense it's used on the internet - people whose main desire is to castigate and provoke.)

  • Posted By: LTD1 @ 06/21/2009 12:58:36 PM

    The question isn't who regrets who's vote . . . the question is, are we going to take Obama at his word?
    Three hundred million Americans are the most powerful lobby in the history of mankind. If a significant percentage of us stood up and spoke to the White House as Obama encouraged us to do in the campaign, what would happen to this policy of secrecy?
    Could President Obama ignore ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred million Americans speaking with one voice?
    Not hardly.

    Thanks for listening,

    l.t. Dravis

    • Posted By: whammy @ 07/03/2009 2:08:11 PM

      Very, Very insightful, appears we both read Newsweek. Take care and keep writing, see you soon enough back in California. Lots of people anxious for your appearance

  • Posted By: JoeAmerica1 @ 06/30/2009 9:22:45 AM

    REPUBLICAN RECESSION . NEVER FORGET

    Pro Life to the equals Pro War, and Pro assault weapons.

    they spent over thriteen trillion , not to mention all the hedge funds, bank deregulations, slush funding.
    contracts. and farming out american jobs and factories to china , japan , vietnam, laos , korea, etc;

    and they want to attack the President and not support the country and their president, and didnt complain when they bankrupted america and stole the tax monies to fund their agendas with kick backs and line their pockets with the properties of the working class?
    hmmmm? corp america and the glop flip flop party.

    they call Obama the Messiah, that would make them kooks the anti Christ party.

    FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP
    piss bitch and moan rethuglikkkan hypocrits...LOL

  • Posted By: JoeAmerica1 @ 06/30/2009 9:22:33 AM

    REPUBLICAN RECESSION . NEVER FORGET

    Pro Life to the equals Pro War, and Pro assault weapons.

    they spent over thriteen trillion , not to mention all the hedge funds, bank deregulations, slush funding.
    contracts. and farming out american jobs and factories to china , japan , vietnam, laos , korea, etc;

    and they want to attack the President and not support the country and their president, and didnt complain when they bankrupted america and stole the tax monies to fund their agendas with kick backs and line their pockets with the properties of the working class?
    hmmmm? corp america and the glop flip flop party.

    they call Obama the Messiah, that would make them kooks the anti Christ party.

    FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP
    piss bitch and moan rethuglikkkan hypocrits...LOL

  • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/20/2009 9:22:46 PM

    Trust the man..I can think of no reason he would do anything whatsoever other than what is in the best interest of the American people. He is not an oil baron, he has no track record of being self or friend serving. Political negation is hard work, it takes time and serious thought before any decisions are made. What he does not need, are a bunch of busybodies trying to get a heads up or looking for visitor patterns so they can fill their columns with speculation. Let the man do his job in peace, but foremost; trust the man. For he is trustworthy.

    • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/27/2009 2:00:31 AM

      Pogi, excellent comment. I def. trust Pres. Obama.

    • Posted By: Liberallunacy @ 06/20/2009 9:49:57 PM

      Pogi,
      You sound like you really know President Obama, Are you his brother who lives in absolute poverty in Kenya, or are you his Aunt who lives in a housing project in New Jersey waiting to be deported? I always trust people who put family first because I know if someone takes care of their family (like president Obama), they also will take care of others.

      • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/20/2009 10:46:47 PM

        I am a retired military NCO, a card carrying member of the NRA, married to an island beauty, living in a third world country, where everyday I see injustice created by the greed of corporate America imposed on these peace loving friendly people. I am probably more of a Redneck than you ever dreamed of being, can out-load you at my loading bench for accuracy, out drink you at the corner bar for fun, out distance you in my 55 Chevy and most assuredly make a wiser choice when I vote.

        • Posted By: tonymountain @ 06/20/2009 11:54:50 PM

          everybody's a tough guy on the internet.

          • Posted By: angreacum @ 06/21/2009 12:05:21 AM

            To that Pogi-IRNORAMUS!!! First of all- anyone can be abyone on the ainternet...butif you are a NRI member I am sure you know what a man whos' butt you are kissing nonstop is trying to confiscate all the guns .Now, if you hate the corporate America why do you love Obma- didnt\t he make 4 million dollars last year? Obviously usinf all the opportunuty the capitalism afforded him, as well as his gorilla look alike wife that had a position created for her making large sims of money...Guess contradiction isn't the word to desribe you- stupidity IS

            • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/21/2009 3:09:58 AM

              Name calling is usually the result of a weak argument. Be civil in your discourse if you want people to seriously consider your opinions, otherwise you might just as well not speak up because it hurts your argument to sink so low. The disagreements are big enough on their own merit to not require further escalation on the name calling front.

              • Posted By: Hugh_Jazz @ 06/22/2009 11:21:34 AM

                Actually name calling can be the result of emotion. It does not necessarily constitute a weak argument. To argue that an argument is weak, based solely on the fact that it contains a "name called" is in itself a weak argument. Would anything considered a derogatory term in a particular context, strengthen an argument in different context? Would it strengthen your argument if you praise your opponent in an debate? Probably not. One must separate and disregard the name called, then parse the argument itself. In this case "angreacum" is calling "Pogi" a name to express his/her disgust with them, it is a valid function and has its place.

                • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 1:56:26 PM

                  Really, it's not just the name calling, which i believe, dilutes the argument. Can you, honestly, read "angreacum's" post and take it seriously?

                  • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 10:37:31 PM

                    You'll have the room to talk, Chris, when you cease with your incessant ad hominem attacks.

                    • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 11:41:59 PM

                      Anyone who does not agree with you is guilty of "ad hominem" attacks. Correct? I couldn't help but notice that Vig and I both were accused of the same thing by you. Not to be too picky here but did you mean ad homonym? Also, isn't this an opinion forum? I didn't realize there is a prerequisite to join in. Mea Culpa! Give me the rules please. Although, I strongly suspect you would require a change in my political persuasion.

                      • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/23/2009 10:48:07 AM

                        "Anyone who does not agree with you is guilty of "ad hominem" attacks. Correct?"

                         

                        No, that would be incorrect. Re read, Chris. It was Pogi I tagged with that label, not Vig. I disagree with Vig on many things, but have not labeled him with ad hominemism, as he rarely, if ever, ad hominemizes anyone.

                         

                        Opinion forum, yes. However, ad hominem quips and insults are not opinion.

                         

                        Rules? What rules? ; )

                        • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/23/2009 9:50:14 PM

                          Hard to change my style. Unless I'm really ticked off, Then I'll rip your ears off. I'm more of a "quip" person. Don't suppose you could find it an endearing trait? My friends and family do. I'll try harder, no promises. Ad hominemizes? Wow!

                • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/22/2009 10:47:19 PM

                  I agree it has a very valid place..It allows the recipient the opportunity to evaluate whether or not they want to take the time to post a response.

                • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 11:53:06 AM

                  I do agree that anger does not always indicate a weak argument. It is worth noting, however, how many of the arguments ARE WEAKENED (mine included) by displays of anger. Anger puts other people on the defensive and takes time away from the facts of the discussion. I do agree with you, I don't think being angry necessarily invalidates the discussion, but condescension and contempt and name-calling almost never end up effectively proselytizing for one's opinions.

                  I'm more glad that people are choosing to blow off steam online instead of taking to the streets and threatening other people. Whether or not it produces effective bipartisanship is debatable, but I do hope that it presents people with a certain cartharsis instead of holding grudges against opponents they cannot communicate with.

                  • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/22/2009 10:15:37 PM

                    Listening to people that have to resort to name calling just reminds me of bullies on the playground that can only get their way by puffing out their chests and trying to hurt other people with loud ugly words, sure it expresses their anger, but when someone is being treated that way, the last thing they will be thinking is that they want to find common ground with this bully.

                    That being said, I would never want to encroach on a person's right to use ugly words, I merely want them to think before they speak because once the words leave you, you cannot take them back, and sometimes they can have unintended consequenses. I like this: "A kind answer turneth away wrath". If you really care enough about an idea or a subject to even log on to comment, why not say it in such a way that will actually be enlightening to someone?

        • Posted By: wiccanwolfess @ 06/21/2009 2:33:19 PM

          The 3rd world country Pogi inhabits is Bellevue, NE and the island wife came from Korea -- I know this guy and while he probably is a narcissist, he is definitely a sex addict. Pogi -- get a life and leave our President alone. If he really is what you say he is it will become evident to all before the next election.

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 3:04:40 PM

            You "know this guy"? In real life?

            Any truth to that, Pogi? Pardon me if I question your bona fides, ma'am.

            • Posted By: Uday Salizar @ 06/23/2009 2:37:19 PM

              Sound more like crazy wiccan lady is sniff the too much patchouli.

          • Posted By: Uday Salizar @ 06/23/2009 2:35:55 PM

            "I know this guy and while he probably is a narcissist, he is definitely a sex addict."

            Is say like is bad thing.

          • Posted By: Srdb @ 06/22/2009 9:15:15 AM

            As my aunt would say, you CHOSE to live in the Philippines. That must say something. Also, she wants to know how you are making a living. She thinks you are living on your retired pay check, and then taking some off the side from the small business there that cater to tourists. Although she is not into computers, she is talking to me about your posts and think they are crazy too. Also, she wants to know why you have to call your wife "an island beauty" and not a quality person.

            • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/22/2009 11:02:27 PM

              1. i refer to my wife as a beauty, because she is beautiful to me.
              2. We chose to live here because she has no desire to move to the states or to leave her family.
              3. My retirement is enough to cover or needs.
              4. For those of you that are assuming that I may be the stereotypical old guy married to a young Filipina old enough to be my daughter or grand daughter (which unfortunately I do see here on occasion), my wife is a few months older than me.
              5. For the poster above that surmised that I am definitely a sex addict, I asked my wife and she wholeheartedly agreed.

              I do hope this satisfies your curiosity..Have a nice day.

              • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 11:07:31 PM

                The rest of us could care less about your sex life, pogi. As for the fact that you're happy in the Philippines with your wife.. by all means, stay there.

                • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/22/2009 11:24:26 PM

                  Thanks for your response...We seem to be getting off topic though, I believe the topic was "Obama Closes Doors on Openness", what is your take on that claim Pallisor?

                  • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 11:38:38 PM

                    Ummm... Obama's doors on Openess are closed?

            • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 11:14:32 AM

              "As my aunt would say, you CHOSE to live in the Philippines. That must say something."

              Maybe it just says he loves his wife, or doesn't think America is sneering and above other countries.

              Who are you to criticize the details of someone else's life that have nothing at all to do with you? The level of haughtiness is off the meter, here.

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:26:01 PM

          Thanks for your service to our nation, sir.

        • Posted By: swissik @ 06/21/2009 1:52:05 AM

          Folks, pogi lives in the Philippines where wives are subservient, help is cheap and the white man is boss. Do you need to know any more about this guy? Perhaps he'll drown in the Kool Aid.

          • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 2:12:03 AM

            Wow..I guess that would be true most anywhere if you were the womanizing sort..I hope my wife does not read this or you will probably get a verbal lambasting that you would not soon forget...Of course it would be in Tagalog..:-)

        • Posted By: Joe Cruz @ 06/20/2009 11:19:36 PM

          Pogi, you are clearly a Filipino, not a 'redneck'. It is a sin to tell a lie. There is no way out of the final accounting. Get straight!

          • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 1:39:27 AM

            No, I am clearly who I said I was.

      • Posted By: Mainer1776 @ 06/20/2009 10:16:41 PM

        Trust him? WHY? He's corrupt to the core! Look... he just fired THREE of the people who are supposed to verify the proper use of taxpayer funds. His corrupt cronies misspent federal money, spent it fo personal use and otherwise fraudulently misused it. The IGs were fired for exposing the fraud of Obama's cronies. Obama will truly be regarded as one of the worst presidents in American history!

        • Posted By: dadjhb @ 06/21/2009 1:14:47 PM

          I too am tired of what Obama is doing. I do not trust him. He is stepping all over our Constitution. He is not eligible to be president as he is not proven himself to be a natural born citizen. He now has nationalized our banks, our car manufacturers and taken power to make law away from Congress. What I am doing is to continue to raise the question with my Representatives, Homeland Security, the Justice Department, my newspapers and anybody else who will listen...where is the birth certificate? Mr. Gibbs, the Obama???s press secretary think it is a laughing matter as he demonstrated at his news conference. As a Retired Officer in the U.S. Navy, is not my president until he has provided this proof.. Want more information? Check out Obama's 'birth certificate' not acceptable in Hawaii http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=100451

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 2:42:26 PM

            I'm so sick of hearing that myth. Obama's birth certificate is perfectly legitimate, it looks like every other Hawaiian birth certificate that had a copy requested for print this decade.

            Here, look:

            http://www.politifact.com/media/img/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg
            http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3084/2601778875_496cabb303_o.jpg
            http://media.photobucket.com/image/hawaii%20birth%20certificate/rexnaja/Naja-for-web-front.jpg?o=5

            • Posted By: Srdb @ 06/22/2009 9:07:05 AM

              Actually, the better ones are the ones directly from the hospital with the doctor's signature. I have one myself, and so does my daughter. I think that is the one people are asking for, Vigilence.

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 11:25:05 AM

                Then keep asking. Maybe you'll get it.

                Bear in mind that your theory requires that Columbia University, Harvard Law, the U.S. passport office as early as 1967, the Bar Association, the Ilinois state legislature certifying process, the United States Senatorial certifying process, the U.S Presidential qualifying process, and innumerable motor vehicle agencies in Chicago, New York, and maybe Los Angeles (Obama has lived in all three cities for significant periods of time) to have all looked the other way while Obama failed to produce valid U.S. identification. It seems farfetched at MINIMUM. Last I checked, the passport office at the very minimum was more or less adamant on needing a copy of a valid birth certificate, though it's been awhile so I can't remember exactly. You're asking a whole lot to ask us to assume that none of the various highy exclusive institutions or government offices Obama has been involved with over the years have ever asked for a valid birth certificate.

                • Posted By: 2xy4k9 @ 06/22/2009 12:48:31 PM

                  you are sick of the bammie birth certificate request. get used to it. we are all pretty damn sick of 'no wmd's,' 'katrina,' and 'abu graab.'

                  the birth ceritificate shown on various sites you mention is a phoney. It has been shown to be a phoney over and over.

                  bammie got into elite colleges with the help of questionable friends, such as terrorist, Khalid al Mansour. he got affirmative action grading from day one.

                  bammie will not present school grades or test scores. why? every other politician does. theory is, that beside showing him to be a teleprompter retard, his transcripts would also give bammie's nationality, i.e., Indonesian.

                  bammie never passed the bar exam-guess he could get his terrorist friends to fake that one for him.

                  bammie is a chicago hustler, a street thug, a mobster. he hates America and is only too happy to destroy it for his Islamafacist buddies.. And being a putin clone/soros' puppet, his whole objective is to pay back the mobs and unions that got him elected. Americans will see no benefit from the $878 billion, but bammie, soros, rham, UAW, ACORN, ABA, and teachers' union executives should do pretty well.

                  bammie will lie, lie, lie, and people like you will defend him forever.

                  And you are the biggest hypocrite of all. run to a third world country where you can exploit the poor with you big US government-supplied, tax-payer funded social security income. then spend your days on the web chastising real Americans who are here fighting the fight.

                  probably got yourself a 15-year-old hoochie mama or maybe a 12 year old boy...

                  do the US a favor, become a Filipino and quit screwing up America with your uneducated bammie mania vote.

                  • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 12:52:03 PM

                    GOT WILD ACCUSATIONS?

                    Show me the money. Make me believe, friend.

                    • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 1:47:10 PM

                      Vigilance: Good for you, taking the "high road" on that one. Or, maybe, you considered the source. That could make it easier. It is mindboggling, isn't it? Kinda hard for me, not to scream, or go all "caps". Guess that is just taking the bait.

                      • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 2:00:56 PM

                        It is, but it happens. A lot of people on these boards are very successful provocateurs. I wouldn't feel bad about it, you can easily see from other responses that I'm no saint. :P

                  • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 1:40:31 PM

                    You call the president "bammie" and do not know capitalization or punctuation. Then, make some pretty wild accusations, one could say "defamation of character". Yet, we are expected to take you seriously? SERIOUSLY?

        • Posted By: pizaro67 @ 06/21/2009 12:25:19 AM

          Your right Mainer. Until this year Jimmy Carter was considered to be by many to be our worstest president (IContrairy to what Olberdoof would say). Now I know why Jimmy was an early backer of Obama, he wanted to pass his title to the the least qualified chief executive in the last 50 years.

          • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 11:47:47 PM

            The same people who don't want to go backwards and mention Bush in any context of todays problems, seem comfortable mentioning Carter. Why is that? Either we can revisit history or not.

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:38:56 PM

            You have to be kidding, right? Carter as worse than Nixon, Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, Herbert Hoover? How far back were you taking that list?

            • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 3:07:13 PM

              now are defending carter - guess this is another way to protect the obama reign of terror

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 12:54:23 PM

                I'm not "defending" Carter, I just think that to say he was worse than Nixon (who illegally spied on enemies), Hoover (who did nothing while allowing the country to spiral into Depression), Andrew Johnson (who bungled Reconstruction and left the South in dire straits for years and caused a lot of animosity in the South that continues to this day), and James Buchanan (under whose able leadership the country actually split right in half) is a gross exaggeration and shows a lack of perspective.

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:34:41 PM

          It's a bit early for that. I don't even think Bush will be regarded as one of the worst Presidents, as unpopular as he is right now.

        • Posted By: pizaro67 @ 06/21/2009 12:27:40 AM

          Jimmy Carter has been redeemed. Now I know why Jummy was an early supporter of Obama.

      • Posted By: angreacum @ 06/21/2009 12:13:44 AM

        To RightHook- THANK YOU FOR YOUR POST< For your passion, for your love for OUR Country!!!!!

    • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/21/2009 2:14:16 AM

      Remember the old saying: trust but verify. How can you trust someone that refuses to allow verification?

      • Posted By: scola91660 @ 06/21/2009 2:22:54 AM

        I can think of no reason he would do anything whatsoever other than what is in the best interest of the American people" Do you think it really matters what you can or can't think of? He's not an "evil capitalist," so that makes him virtuous? Have you ever heard of meglomania and narcissism? Those are not the sole domain of people in the private sector. Are you really as naive as your comment would seem to indicate.

        • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/21/2009 2:36:56 AM

          It is sad but many people listen to Obama and hear what they want to hear and don't see what is actually going on. It is part of his sway over the masses--he knows how to use words so that many of his listeners are captivated by him and become "followers" to a dangerous degree...it is disheartening to watch it happening before my eyes. Just look back at history and remember the leaders that had that kind of sway over the masses--the outcomes were rarely good.

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:24:10 PM

            Right. All popular leaders were really demagogues, pied pipers and ne'er-do-wells exploiting the people - like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Mohandas Gandhi, Winston Churchill. All popular with many people across their nations, and bitterly detested by their foes, who no doubt formed the noble and virtuous opposition.

            Right? No charismatic leader was ever actually remembered well by their citizenry in the end, right?

            • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 2:52:16 PM

              vigilant - wonder if you are learning about jimmy carter in your muslim school??

              if so, wonder how you have voted, when even his sycophant democrat followers wised up and deserted him for a Real American?

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 2:55:56 PM

                I'm about as Muslim as you are, "Jack". That's not going to wash.

                • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 3:10:48 PM

                  you and your prez have a long ways to go to defeat that preception

                  get cracking

                  • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 11:33:20 AM

                    Well, it would be nice of you to realize that a Muslim who does not put on the headcover and pray, bending over five times a day on a mat facing the direction of Mecca is considered apostate and would be rejected by other Muslims everywhere. Obama has, as far as has been noted, also never undertaken the hijra to Mecca himself, which he would have probably been expected to do by his age.

                    I don't know why anyone WOULD think he was a Muslim, except for the middle name that his runaway, deadbeat dad chose to bestow on him before disappearing more or less completely. Your assertion seems more like "suspicous, angry and convinced of guilt until proven innocent". It's at odds with principles of our legal system - not that being Muslim is a crime - considering Obama has never publicly displayed any of the identifying features of Islam.

                    • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 2:15:29 PM

                      Am I correct in stating that, even if he were a Muslim , it is no more illegal than being a Morman?

                      • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:28:03 PM

                        I think that would be an accurate statement. But it's worth proving the point that he is not, because plenty of people in America don't care if it's legal - they just see Islam as anti-American and treasonous across the board.

                        Obama is not a Muslim. Never has been, never will be. I'm sure he met many in Indonesia, and more black Muslims in the U.S. as a community organizer. That's it.

                        • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/23/2009 5:04:17 PM

                          You have a point. It is used as a weapon. I just like diversity. It makes us more interesting.

            • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/21/2009 3:24:05 PM

              What I meant was that there have been many instances in the past when people followed dictators down the yellow brick road only to discover the ending of that road to be a horrid, horrid place that took world wars to extricate themselves from. Blindly following someone because of thier flowery language is a Rx for dictatorship and to that end if the media, which was granted special protections under our constitution, fails to uphold their obligation to be a watchdog, then intelligent decisions can never be truly made and inevitibly dictatorship will eventually ensue.

          • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 2:09:53 PM

            If I remember correctly, Ronald Reagan used charm and humor a great deal, in order to win over the people. I'd imagine you might, still, belive him to be one the greatest.

            • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/22/2009 9:52:29 PM

              The problem with granting leaders too much power is that power has a tendency to corupt and if a leader isn't strongly rooted in freedom's principles or they have mislead their followers about their true objectives, they tend to grab all the power they can such as when Bush pushed the Patriot act with what I believe were noble goals, but it is a program that is too easily corrupted by a power hungry person in charge. I don't know, maybe I am just overreacting, I just know that I have a gut feeling about where Obama wants to take this country

              • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/23/2009 5:02:11 PM

                NAflutist, I said Homeland Security when I meant Patriot act. I think they overlap. If I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will correct me. That's okay. I'm here to learn.

              • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/23/2009 4:58:20 PM

                NAflutist, I absolutely agree with you, that too much power corrupts. Hopefully, that is where our checks and balances come in. That is something I am trying to have faith in. While our president has the final decision, we and the congress should, absolutely, question everything. Perhaps that is part of what this forum is about. We also agree that Homeland Security went a little over the top. Also, it is inconsistent. While some airports are very strict, there are two, at which I have , inadvertantly, gotten away with murder. That is, I forgot I had "contraband" in my luggage. Don't even think about leaving the country or renew your passport. I'm still waiting.

          • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 2:11:40 PM

            I meant to type "believe". Hate it when I forget to use spellcheck.

        • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 2:35:47 AM

          Virtuous? I believe I said trustworthy...Megalomania and narcissism best describes... Freud...I see no comparison between the two; so I really don't get your point. Or, maybe the fog level of my posts is beyond your comprehension.

          • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 6:54:03 AM

            pogi - how much do you make on the obama payroll?

            • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:25:45 PM

              You can't actually bring yourself to believe that Obama has legitimate supporters who actually believe in his ability, can you?

              • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 2:50:09 PM

                not Real Americans - just drones and the paid

                pogi/vigilant - which are you?

                • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 3:01:52 PM

                  I'm as American as immigration and hard work, my friend.

                  • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 3:13:14 PM

                    illegal - ehh?

                    we see why you defend the radical prez

                    on the welfare teat and wanting more and more and more

                    bet you really are craving the so called healthcare reforn of liberals

                    • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 12:54:32 AM

                      Someone mentions immigration and you immediately go to illegal. Why is that? Mr. Kennedy [if that is truly your last name] your ancestors probably Immigrated from Ireland. Mine from Germany. Others from Italy, Sweden, Spain etc. You get it now? We are speaking of people coming legally, perhaps through Ellis Island. However you had a kneejerk reaction to just the word immigrant. But, no, you had to make him an illegal. You certainly paint with a mighty broad brush.

      • Posted By: mrsharfer @ 06/21/2009 3:48:30 PM

        Hahahahahhahahahahahahah, Hard to believe you people are so dumb. Another reason there sould be an I.Q. test in order to vote!

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 11:34:08 AM

          Who's going to make it? You? Show me support in our Constitution or legal system for instituting an intelligence-quotient-based voting test.

        • Posted By: jlm556 @ 06/21/2009 3:54:29 PM

      • Posted By: fuque @ 06/21/2009 6:57:24 AM

        lol

    • Posted By: RightHook @ 06/20/2009 11:42:34 PM

      Pogi, not trying to be excessively nasty, but assuming you are not just pretending to be an Obama-drone -- assuming you are in fact the beguiled thrall you are making yourself out to be (and we all know there are PLENTY of you around), then just let me scream at you: IT'S MORONS LIKE YOU WHO, MUCH AS I HATE TO SAY IT, PROVIDE A SOUND ARGUMENT FOR VOTER IQ TESTS. iDIOTS LIKE YOU HAVE *NO IDEA HOW TO PRESERVE A REPUBLIC* AND YOU HAVE NO CONCEPT OF HISTORY AND THE UNENDING THREAT OF EVIL AND THE DANGER TO HUMAN LIBERTY AND PROSPERITY. THE USA WAS A HAVEN IN A NEVER-ENDING STORM. NEXT TIME, RATHER THAN EXERCISE YOUR FRANCHISE, PLEASE, STAY HOME -- YOU AND ALL OTHER IGNORAMUSES WHO HAVE NO CLUE WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT COMES WITH CASTING A VOTE.

      Sorry to shout. My "caps lock" button sticks sometimes. You know how it is.

      • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:11:25 PM

        No, you just like screaming at people, and have a serious anger problem...as long as the theme of the discussion is "calling things the way one sees them."

        *** you. How are you going to try to tell anyone else not to exercise their democratic rights? Here's something that will piss you off - not only did I vote for Obama, but I HELPED SOMEONE ELSE GET THEIR VOTE IN TOO by taking their absentee ballot to a maillbox that might not otherwise have gotten there. Alert the police now to my terrible irresponsibility in making sure other Americans get to exercise their voting rights.

        Get some help with your anger problem. Really, what's more irresponsible and immature - choosing to put one's trust in a politician of one's choosing, or screaming anyonymous hatred over the internet at another person and trying to claim they shouldn't exercise their democratic right to vote?

        • Posted By: welovetheUSA @ 06/21/2009 12:32:44 PM

          Seems your the one with Anger...We are not angery, we are scared and we are deeply concerned watching a president destroy this countries Constitution and the American process through which all policies are decided. Watching George Soros and the CEO of General Electric hand over ABC,NBC,CNN and MSNBC to Obama , so Obama can spresd his lies and have no one question this man who see himself as God. No, whoever guides this president does not understand Americans, this America is not about One Man. We will simply turn off our TV sets and get the news where its always been, talk radio and the internet. I stopped my cable news and all magazines that Obama owns, He thinks he needs to show his face and tell his lies 24 hours a day...we are sick of it now , and will be ready for Change in the next election.

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:48:44 PM

            Oh, I lost it there and I'll admit it. I'm furious with the tone that conservative posters on these boards are setting - disrespectful, condescending, superior, nasty. I definitely have an anger problem at times with what I see, which is why I feel safe in calling someone else out on it too.

            As long as you keep it to the election, that's fine. You can believe what you want, you can be as concerned as you want. You can be as anti-government as you want - even if I still fail to understand why Republicans think that regulating the private sector is tantamount to treason, even with the Commerce Clause of the Constitution pretty clear in its wording. You can be as scared as you want. That's the right of all of us, and I found plenty to be afraid of during Bush's Presidency.

            But the tone has to change. Respect has to come back, and that ought to apply to all of us, me included - but it's very, very hard when one is provoked day after day with mocking, jeering taunts that treat us as less than human.

            • Posted By: mrsharfer @ 06/21/2009 4:21:42 PM

              Respect? The same kind of respect you diseased libs gave Geoege W. Bush?

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 12:39:29 PM

                I gave Bush a decent amount of respect and was entirely willing to give him the benefit of my doubts when he was elected. He didn't start losing it until Kyoto - and then, variously, the tepid response to Abu Ghraib, the neglect of Hurricane Katrina, the wars that he failed to make progress on, the bank failures, the collapses, it all added up.

                I think most conservatives have, by contrast, determined to hate Obama a priori - not completely the case, since his stimulus alienated many people who were on the fence before - but there are certainly people who came out of the woodwork with bitter, angry grudges against liberalism in general and O in particular, out of the gate and before the election. Both sides have their partisan rancor and plenty of liberals were demeaning McCain (I personally did not), but I think the bitter anger is worse on the conservative side of the fence. It just seems like almost everyone comes out with some kind of really, really angry, personally attacking,

                I don't understand why conservatives never seem happy. I understand not being happy right now - after losing an election and Congress - but conservativism on the whole didn't seem happy back under Bush either, even the "boom" years while that bubble was percolating and everyone was flush with cash. It was just more anger at liberals, "why do you hate America", "traitors", etc etc. It's one of the reasons I can't bring myself to reach across the fence much - what's the point of living or governing if anger and unhappiness is the end result, year after year, even for the constituency in power? Conservatives in general (not all of them, but many) enjoy some of the highest levels of wealth, prestige, and power in the world - and it doesn't seem that they're happy about any of it.

                • Posted By: Katie McCombs @ 06/22/2009 8:48:14 PM

                  Good evening Vigilance. I was reading through and felt I could possibly give this one a bit of an explanation. The reason many conservatives were "unhappy" during the Bush administration is we saw fiscal irresponsibility from a party that supposedly was going to be more responsible. As a person I liked President Bush, but I found many of his attempts to make 'everybody happy' to be a disservice to those who voted for him. As a counselor, I must say that I wondered if this was not a reflection of his recovery. While his past personal issues are his business, he did remind me of a person in recovery who is trying to make peace with everyone, but instead makes everyone agitated. Add that to the congress and senate who just kept saying "cha-ching" and you'll see why conservatives weren't happy. The saddest part is those who might really do a great job will probably never get a chance because they don't have name recognition or big donors to support them. In that respect, I'm afraid both parties are stuck. Truly sad.

                  • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/23/2009 2:37:20 PM

                    I definitely think Americans lack a good set of fiscal conservatives to vote for anymore. I support Obama, but if I had a choice I'd definitely rather see a version of him that was less inclined to spend large sums of money.

            • Posted By: Carolynr @ 06/21/2009 1:29:54 PM

              Well, the respect ought to start with the President being respectful to the people he works for...i.e., We the People. Now...isn't that unique.

              You need to read up on economics a little. By the time Obama gets done with private industry, the tax base will have shrunk to the point that the government will be out of money, even for welfare reciptients. You see, private industry is the engine that drives America and it's money. Without it, we are broke. Has the government EVER run anything efficiently? Have they run it with a surplus? Hint: NO. Yet, people like yourself, will vote for a healthcare plan that will put most Americans in jeopardy for their health and probably bankrupt the nation. I bet you don't even know all the taxes being added to this...NOT TO MENTION THE COST OF $600 billion declared ...and that is probably low.

              Yes, you voted for Obama and thanks to you, no more USA ... it will be a banana republic...and you will be the first for a handout...except the $$$ will all be gone. No more corrupt companies...not more income to the government.

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 2:29:23 PM

                Here's something for you to think about, Carolyn. Obviously, no business likes having its hands tied. Regulation is a pain in the ass and a real economic drag on productivity. But if the deregulated private sector had not abused the privilege of deregulation and minimal government intervention, it would STILL HAVE the privilege of deregulation.

                Instead, it took deregulation and got drunk on profit-taking and lost a lot of people's money very badly. So, now there is going to be a call for regulation. That's how it goes.

                • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 11:27:20 AM

                  I note that I have no responses to the idea that the private sector blew it while operating under a relatively deregulated philosophy. Was there someone else you wanted to point the finger at regarding last year's massive corporate failures and narrowly avoided bankruptcies?

                  • Posted By: checko @ 06/22/2009 2:39:06 PM

                    I will respond...the government blew it with their experiment in central planning of the economy. You see, the politicians were enamored with home ownership and extending this to the economy as a whole, regardless if people were able to afford it. It was good for their re-election campaigns. They used the private sector to meet this goal. The private sector does what the private sector does - makes money. The government intervened by giving incentives to lower lending standards through the CRA. Just like any government intervention in the economy, there were unintended consequences stemming from this. Banks went crazy lending to subprimes, and repackaged these bad loans with good loans to sell to investors. Had the government stayed the hell out of the housing market, the subprime market would never have been created, and the crises would never have reared its ugly head. Unfortunately, people like you either don't understand this, or refuse to acknowledge what you do in fact know.

                    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:00:42 PM

                      A great theory, except that the CRA passed in 1977 and the subprime mortgage crisis hit in 2006.

                      What particularly stopped the mortgage industry from imploding those long twenty-nine years?

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 1:51:39 PM

                Ma'am, I just don't have the time to respond to this. You can go to hell. American conservatives have become the bitterest, nastiest people on Earth.

                • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 3:09:36 PM

                  oh look, LIBERAL VITRIOL AND HATE in defense of the radical president

                  a continuation of the 8 years of LIBERAL VITRIOL AND HATE

                  the radical is prez and the liberals are still angry and hatefull - wonder why?

                  • Posted By: Revo6455 @ 06/21/2009 3:58:10 PM

                    You'd think they'd be happy with the president AND both houses, but NOOOO, there' always plenty of hate on the part of the left if you dare to disagree! It's so hypocritical it makes me want to be sick.

                    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 12:47:30 PM

                      It's the tone, my friend. Back in 2000 I had almost no rancor for conservatives - I disagreed with them, but if you'd asked, I would have said "Yeah, they're decent people, there's no ill will there". But something happened and the tone changed.

                      Now EVERYONE goes on the attack. Olbermann, Maddow, O' Reilly, Hannity and the other pundits are all bitterly partisan and condescend to their opponents. And to me, much of that shift in tone started with Fox News. Everyone else responded by getting angry too, but I do believe the country at large had been provoked.

                      It's not necessarily conservative opinions that are out of line. It's the way they are expressed. "Tax cuts can help employers spur job growth" - that's wonderful, as a debate point. Tremendous amount of truth to it.

                      But "YOU IDIOT!!!!! Obama is going to cripple industry! How can you libs be so STUPID as to not realize that! Congratulations on destroying the entire country, you mentally diseased IDIOT!" - yeah. That is *** out of line. Not acceptable by any means. I lose it too - I'm far from perfect - but when you COME OUT OF THE GATE chronically angry like that, yeah, that's unacceptable.

                  • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/21/2009 4:25:37 PM

                    If it's hate you want, please, reread your own post. While I am uncomfortable with this whole, not revealing visitors to the White House thing, remember, the PREZ [as you so respectfully refer to him,] was indeed elected. Not nominated, by a majority of the American people. Seems that the former Prez was given eight years to correct things. That is a very generous amount of time. How about giving this one, about half of that , before you start blasting away? Even two years, instead of making up your mind in a brief 5 months. Or was your mind made up, even before November? Just guessing here, but I imagine you would have worked with McCain, if he was doing the exact same thing. Do you really believe that anyone wanted Bush to fail? If he would have succeeded, wouldn't we all be in a better situation?

                    Unclench your fists and stop listening to Rush. He is, certainly, pouring gasoline on this fire and you are helping him. That is not being productive!

                    • Posted By: martin luther bling @ 06/21/2009 4:28:47 PM

                      seems like you got that pole in your hole as well!

                      • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 12:44:22 AM

                        Speaking of unproductivity and there you are!

                    • Posted By: martin luther bling @ 06/21/2009 4:27:50 PM

                • Posted By: carl6352 @ 06/21/2009 6:40:06 PM

                  did you actually read what this women wrote which is the truth or do you have no ideal how the economy works. every thing she wrote is right on. this president in less than 6 months spent 2trillion dollars and he is going to spend more. but even people in his own party see what he is doing is wrong. before you comment actually read the truth this women wrote or are you just a brain dead drone.

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 2:04:29 PM

                Here, I'll put it like this:

                "Private industry" has made a real horse's ass of itself over the last few years - if we're going to degenerate into using language like that - and caused a global economic crisis. Neither I nor Obama nor anyone else wants to destroy industry or commerce or competition in the U.S., but the sad truth is that the private sector is made up of people too, and over the last few years much of it more or less bankrupted itself in a show of greed. If it weren't for the government, a lot of these businesses would just simply cease to exist. How is that going to drive the economy?

                Obama doesn't want the government taking control of GM or AIG or any of these other companies that are in TEMPORARY receivership right now. Nobody in their right MIND would want a part of these companies - grossly overleveraged, mismanaged, dealing with crippling unions and poor business decisions and awful product lines and frustrated consumer bases. But the alternative is what Hoover did during the Depression - i.e., nothing, for four years, while the economy truly and genuinely collapsed, and that is what the GOP is proposing right now - "leave the wounded to die". "Let them all fail." "Survival of the fittest."

                Well, it didn't work in 1929, and I don't suspect it will work now.

                Let's explain something about AIG, for instance, a huge part of the "private sector" - or it used to be - it owns a number of subsidiaries. Those subsidiaries are broke because they owe EACH OTHER too much money. That happened because of a bunch of "mergers" that really weren't, which more or less left the company a confused and mismanaged tangle while the executives walked off with millions. And all of this was GREATLY aided by deregulation and lots of people looking the other way. A huge amount of this could have been prevented with regulation and oversight. Where was the SEC while Madoff was vaporizing billions?

                I have concerns about Obama's spending, but the alternative - the Hooverish "let them all die" alternative - would have been, in my opinion, far worse. I have doubts about Obama's healthcare plan - but I also saw healthcare costs mushroom to a nightmare while Bush did nothing about it.

                So I will continue to put my faith in Obama for the present, and not the woman who thinks it's my fault and the fault of my vote that she's not getting her way.

                • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 2:14:58 PM

                  When "private industry" and the private sector in general absolutely blow it badly through greed and hurt a lot of people, there is going to be a call for government intervention. And just like Joe Scarborough says, for the GOP to being working its way back to power, the GOP has to take some responsibility for allowing nightmares like Enron, AIG, Bear Sterns, Lehman, Citigroup, and the others to flourish in a deregulatory fool's paradise.

                  You keep talking about what is GOING to happen. I'm talking about what has happened. You're making predictions, and I'm trying to examine what has already occurred and what we can actually state the facts about. You can't state "facts" about the future, because it hasn't happened yet. But deregulation happened - Lehman happened, Citi happened, Bear Stearns happened - and in the wake of that, we need to explore regulatory avenues to see that investors and shareholders aren't burned badly again.

          • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/21/2009 5:18:03 PM

            That might be because Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh want you scared. You see, it works to their advantage to keep you that way. Were you scared a four years ago?

            • Posted By: Revo6455 @ 06/21/2009 5:32:03 PM

              Been listening to BHO on the stump lately trying to sell his proposed health care plan to the public? Fear mongering at it's finest!

              • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/22/2009 2:43:09 PM

                I disagree. Doesn't even compare to gotta start a war before they come and get you over here. Paraphrasing Cheney.

        • Posted By: Ltpar @ 06/21/2009 12:26:25 PM

      • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 12:37:51 AM

        I used to be just like you FightHook...Intolerant, ignorant and unrelenting. President Obama deserves the lot of us to give him half a chance. But what I see here by these posts is nothing but ignorance, intolerance, prejudice and down right hate. I am an expat retired to the Philippines and yes, I see injustice daily brought about by the greedy money managers in our country imposed upon these fine people, who work for peanuts a day so our Walmarts can stay full of cheap keep the economy rolling goods. Most are thankful for their 2-5 dollar a day jobs. You really can not understand how the rest of the world sees us until you live in their shoes. .President Obama has. Once you have and if you possess a shred of decency about you, you won't change..You will grow. I trust President Obama because it will take our trust for him to get the job done. I trust President Obama because he truly understands what it is to be poor. I trust President Obama because he has done nothing "significant" to break my trust...You really should get that keyboard fixed....:-)

        • Posted By: Katie McCombs @ 06/21/2009 1:01:18 PM

          Pogi @12:37:51 AM
          I also know what it is like to be poor and I know that it took working my way out of poverty to get me where I am today - a middle class wife, mother and professional. I see the debt that this president has bestowed upon my children and my children's chidlren in just the first few months of his administration - I do not see intelligence in this behavior, I see poor ideas with less than well thought out consequences (i.e. "we know that there will be waste..." -Biden). I see more and more Czars being created - who pays for these 'new positions?' How is having more government oversight and higher taxes going to help this country? Not to mention the fact that the taxes aren't actually on the "wealthy" when you consider that even poor people buy soda (10 cents a can tax promoted), drive cars (increased fuel taxes at the pump - promoted; increased taxes on the companies that make fuel - who do you think that cost is going to be covered by? - you, me and anyone else who drives a car), tin can cars being pushed on car makers and the public (that works if you live in a city, but not when you live in rural areas and have to battle wind, ice, snow, etc. out in the open). No, I'm not impressed. I am saddened and can only hope that in 2010, whatever the congressman/senator's party, the people elected start putting some brakes on this crazy train and require the administration to go through checks and balances (such as not allowing the White House to ignore the Congressional Budget Office when their numbers on the health care program show that it is extremely weak in its programming and extremely expensive. If congressmen and congresswomen wouldn't sign up for this coverage, why should the American people?)
          By the way, I could care less about what color the president is. I wish that people would recognize disagreement with ideas as BEING disagreements with IDEAS rather than assuming that it has to be about race. MLK wanted us to judge each other on the content of our character rather than the color of our skin. Too bad we aren't being allowed to do that.

          • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 4:58:00 PM

            Mrs. McCombs...I understand your situation, I too grew up in small town mid-America snow drifts and all. President Obama did not create this crisis, rather Wall Street fat cats did. We as a nation have a responsibility to pay our debts even those resulting from abuse within our own system from the few. Since entering office he is doing his best to get legislation passed and oversight in place to make sure that these Wall Street fat cats can not do this to our country again. No, it is not going to be easy. Yes, you should be angry. Hit the flea markets Mrs. McCombs, I know you know where there at....:-)

            • Posted By: carl6352 @ 06/21/2009 6:22:15 PM

              pogi wrong again buddy! this whole mess started in 1994 it was called the community reinvestment act. look it up and see the damage that one democtratic sponsored bill caused. the republicans signed on as well. what it did was open the door for mortage financing thru the fannies and the banks which tried to stop but congress wrote a law that made them. do it. what happened the foreclosures went up almost 80% in the first years and kept going up each year as the people mortgaed to high. clinton saw it in 98 tried to stop it. republicans got it to the senate chris dodd stopped (fillbustering), bush tried to stop twice because of the arms both times republicans sent to senate chriss dodd stopped it. wel the dems rode to power on a problem they started and for 2 years did nothing hence the bank bailouts which democrats had the gall to add 200billion to the bill in garbage and only 500billion to the banks. ob comes in and spends almost 2 trillion of fake money to take over the banks and cars. forgetting our kids future for power nothing else. thats what democrats have done. we can thank barney fife frank and chris pinhead dodd. the sooner america actually does some studying before commenting the sooner the truth will come out. the media is in the tank for democrats they are so stoned they dont even see it. what a shame a country destroyed in less than 50yrs. do some history check from johnson era too today you will see what i mean

              • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 6:44:53 PM

                Carl I am afraid that you are mistaken..The Community Reinvestment Act was enacted in 1977..32 years ago and has no relevance to today's financial situation/debacle.

                • Posted By: rhetoricaldoc @ 06/21/2009 7:21:08 PM

                  Pogi, that act was put into pace by Jimmy Carter and while President Bush tried to put a stop to the Freddie and Fannie mess, the Dems in congress would not allow him to move forward. Know what you are talking about or you continue to show your ignorance.

                  • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 1:22:39 PM

                    The CRA had lower default rates than the mortgage industry as a whole and had twenty-two years to have previously wrecked the economy if it was going to. That doesn't hold water. What this comes out of is Rush Limbaugh repeating lies like "five million illegals hold bad mortgages in America". It's garbage, and HUD debunked it in days, but Rush didn't really have the decency to print a retraction.

                    I'm sorry, but these executives more or less soiled themselves in their haste to take profits and make bad loans, and that had more to do with the crisis than the CRA ever did. There were millions of non-CRA mortgages that got themselves in serious trouble without needing CRA approval - and really, if I make a bad loan to somebody and they can't pay me back, whose fault is that? I actually did that once when I was younger - loaned some money to friends to start a business. They couldn't pay it back, I lost the money, and the friendships as well. Nobody on Earth would have suggested that it was anything other than my responsibility for making a bad loan. I'd have been laughed down if I tried to suggest it.

                    In the same way, these executives are responsible for the lack of credit standards and bad loans they made in order to take profits. There isn't a single other industry in the world where you can blame business failures on the customers. It's irresponsible of the mortgage industry to try.

                    • Posted By: checko @ 06/22/2009 2:33:16 PM

                      the CRA had little impact until it was given teeth by the Clinton Administration in the 90's. Had it never been implemented in the first place, the banking sector would continued to lend based on sound historical lending standards. Instead, the CRA banks were given incentives to lend to subprime lendees. In order to compete with the CRA banks, other non-CRA banks has to lower their own lending standards. This is called market competition. It is a normal function of markets, and healthy at that. It becomes unhealthy when the government comes in and intervenes, allowing certain entities to make certain loans - it gives an unfair advantage to those entities. So yes, the CRA banks had a lower foreclosure ratio than other banks, however the subprime market as a whole was created by this misguided piece of legislation.

                      • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:10:23 PM

                        I didn't approve of the CRA, and still don't. Bush could have pushed for its repeal...but he didn't. And the CRA had nothing to do with the leveraging at thirty-to-one that brought down the banks. I do not support the idea that this crisis would never have come about without it. It was not the right way to combat redlining, but you will have to provide details on how Clinton "gave the CRA teeth" in the 1990s if you want me to take a look at that.

                        This article seems to lack support for that idea - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act#Regulatory_changes_1995

                        The biggest thing to "give the act teeth" seems to have been Gramm-Leach-Bliley - which Clinton signed, but which was drafted by three GOP legislators.

                        In the end, you still have to face up to the fact that Bush and a GOP Congress let the mess percolate and Presided over its collapse.

                        • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 4:43:11 PM

                          Vig, It wasn't just the CRA that wreaked havoc. The Affordable Housing Mission, which the government charged Fan/Fred in fulfilling, was responsible as well. Beginning in 2003, Bush took legislation to congress a dozen times to curb those asinine, dangerous lending practices. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd spearheaded the effort to shoot it down each time. The dems voted party line, and with the help of moderate republicans that went them, the legislation failed each time. McCain took the same legislation to congress in 2006 with the same results.

                          There's no way we could have avoided the disaster that happened: Lending institutions could be penalized for not making certain risky loans, and people with no business buying homes (bad credit, no down, shaky work history, not enough income) were lured into buying one simply because a lender was saying "yes." We can easily see where all of that has led.

                          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:48:47 PM

                            You know, I really respect the tone you presented that with. If you can provide some links to the legislation Bush and McCain tried to introduce, I will take a harder look at it.

                            • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 5:28:49 PM

                              Vig, I actually learned of this here at NW from other posters... here's a few links with a time line of when and what Bush took to congress. Also a couple of links to the Affordable Mission thing, which I think is actually called the Federal Home Loan Bank Mission. It essentially says: "All housing GSEs (Fan/Fred) should be required to meet affordable housing goals." The "required" part is where the penalties came in if they didn't.

                              I will add that I don't see this as solely a democrat thing. The reps were right in there, as everyone was in the glory days of home value appreciation that had no end in sight. It wasn't until cracks in the armor started to appear in 2003 that Bush started introducing his legislation to congress.

                              http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/gse_financial_timeline/2008/09/22/133234.html

                              http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/bush-called-for-reform-of-fannie-mae.html

                              http://sweetness-light.com/archive/bush-mccain-tried-to-reform-housing-finance

                              http://www.nationalhousingendowment.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=9016

                              https://www2398.ssldomain.com/nlihc/detail/article.cfm?article_id=5158

                              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 6:45:54 PM

                                I'll take a look, thanks. There are people that bear the responsibility for this on both sides. Phil Gramm, in my opinion, is one of the most damaging - so is Barney Frank.

                                • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 7:37:08 PM

                                  Too bad Graham couldn't have been somehow censored after his idiotic remark stating that America had "sort of become a nation of whiners."

                                  In my book, he had just ranked himself right up there with Frank and Dodd.

                              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 6:50:39 PM

                                Hm, that's interesting. I will be looking into this.

                                Did Bush's unpopularity prevent people from hearing these things when he first said them? It does seem there's more blame to go around than I might have imagined...

                                • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 7:24:55 PM

                                  Vig, I'll have to look it up, but I know both party members were getting major bucks from Fannie and Freddie. McCain, Obama, all of them. Obama didn't get the most, but he did get the most money relative to his short time in the Senate. Home values were skyrocketing, constituencies were getting what they wanted, people who could never afford a home could have one, and both sides of congress were getting their pockets lined. Bush was the Skunk at the picnic when he came along and wanted to stop it.

                                  Sometimes it takes a huge bucket of ice water in our faces to get our attention. We've just now begun to dry off.

                          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:57:59 PM

                            I'm having trouble finding links on the Affordable Housing Mission...

                            • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 5:38:37 PM

                              One other point, obviously the borrowers have responsibility here too, but in the end, if a parent (lender) offers too much candy to a child (borrower), the child will most likely get big eyes and eat it. I'm being facetious, but you see my point. It's the Golden Rule thing: The man that has the gold makes the rules!

                          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:51:03 PM

                            By the way, I have no more love for Frank and Dodd than I do for, say, Phil Gramm. You have no argument from me that Barney Frank in particular bears as much responsibility for all of this as anyone else does. I would prefer to see all of them out of power. Frank has become something of a standard-bearer for the gay rights movement in Congress, which is really kind of a shame because whether or not he's gay, straight, metrosexual, or purple-people-eating, he's a really lousy Senator.

                  • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 7:47:41 PM

                    Read it and weep. http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html

                • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 2:16:07 PM

                  No relevance? Laughable. Your Business Week link is a simple op piece minus facts and numbers. The CRA was most certainly a contributor to the financial mess we're in. FYI, the Community Reinvestment act is a United States federal law that was designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods.

                  To assert that this act had no relevance to the housing crisis is in a word, ludicrous. The CRA, along with the Affordable Housing "Mission" that government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were charged with fulfilling, were massive contributors in putting us where we are today. Here's the facts along with the numbers:

                  http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan

                  • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/22/2009 5:00:29 PM

                    I would trust in the integrity, knowledge and bearing of any investigative reporter at Business Week, Newsweek or any other mainstream news organization first and foremost, before ever considering the words of a trolling arm chair commando.

                    • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 7:00:42 PM

                      Pogi, I didn't ask you to trust me, idiot. I posted a link with facts and stats. Take your puny, ad hominem attack and shove it up your ass.

                  • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:26:15 PM

                    My friend, I can look at the front-page headlines for that site and see things like "The One is a Zero In Iran" and talk about climate-change "alarmists" and and note that this is not going to be an unbiased look at the situation. Here's another sampler from a column called "Among the Intellectualoids"- "Shut Up, Cowboy: It's not easy engaging the left in Missoula high country." But I'll take a crack anyway.

                    The CRA is a bad law. It's a good article. The facts are well-presented. But I don't agree with it, and that is my right. It glosses over an entire section of the discussion about the private sector's role and concludes that everyone involved was really just led there by government policy. I personally do not believe that government policy's effect on everyone is that pervasive, influential as it may be in many ways.

                    Back in 2002, Bush's "ownership society" was being promoted along with homeownership, the idea (a decently good one, but horridly executed) being that people who built equity in homes would be in better financial shape down the road. Great - unless you get it from an ARM from a shady lender who breaks it up into tranches and sells it to China where the homeowner can't get it serviced. What part of the CRA mandated breaking up loans into pieces and selling each to a different foreign investor? Why was the "ownership society" a great idea in 2002 but now that the *** has hit the fan, it's time to point fingers?

                    Here's a less biased look that represents both sides:

                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act#Relation_to_2008_financial_crisis

                    It's worth noting that an official of no less rank than Sheila Bair, current FDIC chairwoman, has said that she does not believe the CRA was a prime contributor to the crisis.

                    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:42:13 PM

                      What is also HEAVILY worth noting about the CRA and the mortgage industry in general is that it didn't become a truly serious problem until gas hit $3.50 a gallon, healthcare costs went through the roof with many Americans uninsured - that caused a lot of bankruptcies - the banks started to fail and credit froze up and jobs got lost all over. It's hard to pay your mortgage when you're out of work.

                      There were plenty of overoptimistic, foolish, and irresponsible mortgageholders. There were also a lot of people who got slammed by healthcare costs or gas or job losses from outsourcing or a host of other recent economic troubles. The economy is complex and driven by thousands of factors of which the CRA is only one. Blaming it for everything is a gross oversimplification.

                      Did the CRA contribute to subprime lending? Probably. It wasn't responsible for the entire crisis. It sure wasn't responsible for insane leveraging and corporate bonuses when it looked like things were rosy and wonderful. It didn't have a damn thing at all to do with the credit default swaps (unregulated loan insurance between lenders) that blew up like time bombs once the crisis hit.

            • Posted By: Katie McCombs @ 06/21/2009 8:43:47 PM

              Pogi: I have no problem paying my debts; what I have a problem with is paying debts for campaign promises including the "new fat-cats" a.k.a. those who are utilizing tax dollars for such fine "investment/stimulus projects" as: $1.2 billion in grants to states for youth summer jobs programs and other activities [nice, but still a short-term solution to the employment issues and generally a good way to make the numbers regarding joblessness appear to be improving when they only improve for the summer - for 14-21 year olds] ;$100 million for Social Security research programs[???I have no idea what that means]; $300 million for Amtrak capital needs [Amtrak hasn't been self-sustaining in,well, I pretty much think - ever];$5.5 billion in targeted education grants [targeting what...oh, yeah, pregnancy prevention; that ought to stimulate the economy] [info found at http://wsbradio.com/blogs/jamie_dupree/2009/01/just-some-of-the-economic-stim.html] If you look through the list posted, you will see an awful lot of money going to other things such as "$300 million for "construction, rehabilitation and acquisition of Job Corps Centers"". These programs are short-term assistance programs for young people who have difficulty obtaining work - often due to behavioral issues [at least that is where my Mental Health clients often send their unruly children], but not always. My point is, many of the things that are listed tend to be programs that could be considered "pet projects" of the administration and do little if anything to actually stimulate the economy. They appear more to be a way of, shall we say "giving back" to the date that brought them to the dance - i.e. creating the new fat-cats. I'm not totally against everything that the president has done, I'm just not willing to "sign off" on everything either.
              Yes, I know where the flea markets are and I occasionally shop there. I also work at and donate to our community food pantry. I've been on the other side of the pantry door before [actually, I've eaten things most other people only see as road kill], I just don't have any intention of going quietly back to that.

              • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 9:36:18 PM

                Let me give you my perspective Mrs. McCombs...When I first retired to the Philippines, the first thing I noticed when I began to compare the differences between the USA and my new home was the mass transit system here. Being a small country with a very large population there is mass transit everywhere and used by all. Frankly only the very wealthy in the country can even afford an automobile. In America however a car is a must..America is such a huge country with a relativity small population compared to its land mass, that it creates a problem for we Americans. It forces us into a situation where we become greater energy hogs to keep our economy vibrant.. Mass transit in America is very long way off, simply because of the cost to tie a country the size of ours together with an effective system. So basically we are stuck...The infrastructure we have in place now did not take into consideration this when we began building our towns years ago. Simply put: The vast land mass of the United States combined with the wants and needs of a modern society such as ours, creates a serious drain on our economy and tax base. So, what is a government to do? They keep Amtrak alive knowing that someday we will reach the point where mass transit will be an important factor in our economy and they look for alternative sources for stimulation. There are countless towns across America I'm sure you know, that were built around the rail system from east to west that basically died in the 40's. The size of our country and the wants and needs of our modern society is the culprit.

                • Posted By: Katie McCombs @ 06/21/2009 11:14:30 PM

                  Pogi:
                  So, if I understand what you have written, you moved to the Philippines and are comparing the transit situation there to the transit situation in the US. You are correct that the land mass is quite different as is the concentration of population. However, I do find your premise that the government (i.e. the taxes paid by you, me and everyone else) must keep a failed system afloat because ???someday??? we will need it. Amtrak is currently used in the most populated areas of the country, yet it still can???t maintain itself. I don???t know what your experience is in owning a car, but I can tell you that at some point it is no longer a viable option to keep pouring money into fixing it ??? i.e. when you have put enough money into it that you now have more new parts than old and it still needs work, it???s time to look at something different. If mass transit is going to be built in the US, it won???t be on old-style Amtrak equipment.
                  Irregardless of whether one believes that the US is an ???energy hog??? or not, the truth of the matter is that much of the consumption of energy could be addressed through new nuclear plants [like France and other European nations] which would decrease substantially the need for fossil fuels. As it is, if we do go to more battery operated automobiles, the energy to charge those batteries has to come from somewhere. I am right in the middle of an area that is hip-deep in the decision to build windmills. I have no problem with that ??? but Mother Nature apparently has decreased wind speeds (save for a few nasty wind storms) thus the probability of these structures making as much of a contribution to the energy needs as was previously hoped is also on the decrease. And before someone says anything about how negative nuclear power is on nature, remember those batteries in the cars eventually have to be sent to a landfill. There is only so much recycling that can be done.
                  So, what made you decide to retire to the Philippines? Just curious.

                  • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 11:43:41 PM

                    For the same reason that bullfighting will not be allowed to die in Spain, railroads will be kept alive even subsidized here. There are certain things in each country that makes that country unique; things that contributed so greatly to its history that they will not be allowed to die even if antiquated. Fortunately though, our rail system has a good chance for modernization. The physical size of our country and the relatively small population in the rural areas serviced, does not make this feasible at this time in history.

                    To answer your question..I fell in love...:-)

                    • Posted By: Katie McCombs @ 06/22/2009 12:10:21 AM

                      Love is the best reason i can think of. Thanks for the exhilarating discussion. :-)

                      • Posted By: Srdb @ 06/22/2009 8:59:48 AM

                        My aunt is from the Philippines, and she says that she will never go back. I just called her and asked her why, and she said it is because she there weren't any choices there - nothing like in America for a young girl trying to "make her way." She said it was very discriminatory there against women. Just an FYI. Oh, also, she really, really does not like Mr. Obama and wants America to stay more conservative. She says it is the best of both worlds here in America. Hard work pays off here in America which is the way it should be.

                        Pogi, I'm assuming you are an older male from the way you write and think. I could be wrong. Can you see this situation in another viewpoint?

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 2:53:03 PM

            See, while I don't agree with everything you said, I wish more of Obama's critics could frame things in terms like this.

            Thank you, ma'am. That was eminently respectful.

            • Posted By: Katie McCombs @ 06/22/2009 12:17:29 AM

              Vigilance:

              Thank you for your compliment. I do try to make my points respectfully. I agree that many who post (unfortunately from both sides) tend to forget that the idea of having an honest debate requires courtesy. No one listens when they are being yelled at, and when everyone is yelling, then no one is listening.
              Have a good evening. :-)

          • Posted By: Srdb @ 06/22/2009 8:53:22 AM

            I agree. It isn't that Obama is "investing" in our children's future. He is usurping it. We must stop him and go a more practical route.

        • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 7:02:45 PM

          "I used to be just like you FightHook...Intolerant, ignorant and unrelenting."

          So now you're just ignorant. Not exactly a quantum leap, Pogi.

        • Posted By: coraltown @ 06/21/2009 1:08:58 PM

          "PROVIDE A SOUND ARGUMENT FOR VOTER IQ TESTS" << Thereby permanently removing you from the voter registration list.

          • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 7:25:22 PM

            I believe you "Arm Chair Commando's" posting here are missing the point that I am trying to make. When given a responsibility by your boss at your job, do you enjoy him or her looking over your shoulder and critiquing every single thing that you do and how you do it? Or do you function at your peak and finest when you are "allowed" to handle the responsibility yourself. We have granted President Obama the highest office in our nation because we felt that he was the most qualified to do the job. The end result of that responsibility given is what we the employers should judge. To do other does not make us a good employer or worthy of a good employee.

            • Posted By: mjt4164 @ 06/21/2009 7:52:23 PM

              Obama has lied about everything and you kool aid drinkers are still making excuses

              • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 10:44:18 PM

                I'm part of the "older crowd", I really don't get the Kool Aide thing, could you elaborate?

                • Posted By: Frenebulox @ 06/21/2009 11:19:53 PM

                  If you're part of an "Older Crowd" then you should remember Jim Jones and the People's Temple in Guyana where the 909 inhabitants of Jonestown died by drinking cyanide-laced Kool Ade. It happened in 1978.

                  • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/22/2009 4:17:20 AM

                    So basically your contention is, that anyone that trusts that President Obama will do a good job and to the best of his ability for the American public, will eventually end up drinking cyanide-laced Kool Aide..Maybe I could recommend a good psychiatrist? In all seriousness, where in the world is all these phobic and paranoid people coming from?

                    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 4:45:43 PM

                      The silent majority has always been there. Nixon really was the forerunner and template for a lot of this. The angry hostility has been around - but now that the *** has hit the fan, a very liberal Democrat is in power, the Republicans are looking to regroup and Fox News has been advocating paranoia for almost a decade (it finally struck me when I realized that most Fox News anchor desks are set up somewhat like command bunkers), they're just coming out in droves.

          • Posted By: carl6352 @ 06/21/2009 6:33:11 PM

            cant have that democrats rely on the under 100iq people who cant read write or follow instructions. without them they would never win one election. hence the acorn gang. get the dead and dumb out to vote. we need a true election where to vote you have to have a id card with a picture. republicans have no trouble following directions to vote legal while it seems most democratic votes are people who cant see or color in a circle or punch a hole.

            • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/22/2009 4:03:07 AM

              One of the things I love about this melting pot we call America, is its diversity. Unfortunately, there are those that totally miss the gift that diversity brings.

        • Posted By: mjt4164 @ 06/21/2009 7:55:40 PM

          you are an idiot

          • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 8:39:18 PM

            In some circles I would tend to agree...:-)

        • Posted By: scha3201 @ 06/21/2009 5:16:25 PM

          Pogi, your outlook truly saddens me. Mr. Obama never lived "poor." He went to private schools and exclusive universities. These are advantages I never enjoyed as a "privileged" white boy.

          By all accounts, his grandmother took pretty good care of him - yet he threw her under the bus as a "typical white person." That statement in and of itself gives me reason to distrust him. I find it telling that he has so much "compassion" for the poor and disadvantaged, but disparages his own grandmother who loved and cared for him as a child and who gave him every advantage she was able to give.

          What is the "typical WHITE person" anyway? What is the "typical BLACK person?" This type of thought process is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE to be used by ANY president of this great country. It displays bigotry that rivals ANY I've ever seen in my 47 years living in the so-called "racist South."

          Additionally, if he really DID know what it means to be poor - SO WHAT? It's not the responsibility of the president to "feel our pain." We don't need a MAMA in chief. We need someone responsible enough to fulfill his CONSTITUTIONAL duties without spending us into oblivion, so that there is still an America for the NEXT president to govern.

          It's not the job of the president to decide how monetary resources are "spread around." I don't trust ANYONE who keeps reaching for my wallet in an attempt to give someone else what I've worked for. It's just WRONG - and in any other setting would be called THEFT. Oh, wait - it STILL IS!

          • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 6:00:12 PM

            I would put more faith in the leadership qualities and abilities of an individual that started out life playing barefoot in the streets of Indonesia and then working his way to the top scholastically, over one that was born with a silver spoon shoved in his mouth, any day of the week.

            Being born with a silver spoon shoved in your mouth only qualifies you to pass the "financial" requirements to further your education. That silver spoon however, has absolutely no effect on brain cell development. Frankly, it could be a curse to a nation, as the size of ones purse sometimes has a detrimental effect on the quality of ones character.

      • Posted By: Uday Salizar @ 06/22/2009 2:53:54 PM

        "IT'S MORONS LIKE YOU WHO, MUCH AS I HATE TO SAY IT, PROVIDE A SOUND ARGUMENT FOR VOTER IQ TESTS. "

        So, is lose election, is next put Jim Crow laws back, so is easier to win next election?

      • Posted By: Rosemary A. @ 06/21/2009 12:24:07 AM

        To RightHook - Amen, Amen!!

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:31:13 PM

          You know, what is with some of these conservative women who approve of all the hate and vituperation that's going on? I have never seen a less nurturing bunch of women in my life - and a great many of you are wives and mothers to boot.

          What's up here? I expect this from some of the angrier men out there, but to see the level of hatred from women (who I usually have known to be warm and compassionate, most women I know) is just disconcerting to me. Maybe that makes me a sexist, but it's difficult for me to understand how you can raise families to be loving and kind when you make such a practice of condoning insults and nastiness.

          • Posted By: Carolynr @ 06/21/2009 1:35:58 PM

            Oh, heck...you just like playing the victim role and want a mommy to take care of you. Don't be afraid...that is the dog and pony show Obama is selling you. Too bad when you find out the truth.

            • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 1:50:32 PM

              Ma'am, I wouldn't want someone like Ann Coulter "mothering" me if she were the last person on Earth available to do it. No, I don't want a "mommy", you want a target for someone to mock and put down. I'm not playing the victim role a damn bit - you all haven't done a thing to me except for the verbal nastiness, and really, it's an idle thought, not a perpetual concern of mine - I just don't understand it.

              • Posted By: Jack Kennedy @ 06/21/2009 3:18:48 PM

                SARAH PALIN

                • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/21/2009 5:12:54 PM

                  That's your role model? Or is she really your gun tottin' fantasy chick?

          • Posted By: mrsharfer @ 06/21/2009 4:36:53 PM

            Funny you think conservative women are not nurturing. The diseased libs eat their young......no wait...they abort them and if they survive, then they have their heads stepped on.

      • Posted By: mrsharfer @ 06/21/2009 4:40:50 PM

        RightHook...right on!!! Well put, well said. They also need an I.Q. test to have children and drive! (Familiar with a caps button with a mind of it's own.!)

      • Posted By: scola91660 @ 06/21/2009 4:16:47 PM

        He is not an oil baron, he has no track record of being self or friend serving"

        Pogi.... have you been paying attention to the people that have been receiving ambassadorships? I doubt it you imbecile.

      • Posted By: Starman2 @ 06/21/2009 12:02:22 PM

        Redhook: If you read the election results you would see that the majority of the educated people voted for Obama,. What have you got next up.

        • Posted By: Revo6455 @ 06/21/2009 4:12:53 PM

          Au contraire, uninformed one. The sad fact is, is that the larger majority of American voters are "un-educated" on basic issues and politics in general. That's why Obama won, "change", style, looks good, mainstream media love affairs, teleprompted speeches, etc. Even with the Bush legacy hanging around his neck (and quite frankly a poor campaign), McCain only lost by 7%.

        • Posted By: welovetheUSA @ 06/21/2009 12:17:00 PM

          And Boy do they regreat it now....!

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:20:42 PM

            I don't regret a thing, so far. I agree with Obama in some places, disagree in others, but that's to be expected. I certainly have no sense that I made the wrong decision.

            • Posted By: welovetheUSA @ 06/21/2009 12:36:13 PM

              Jim Jones fellow...thats okay. 80 million of us and its climbing regreat their vote.

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 12:40:37 PM

                You regret my vote, you mean? Regret that I chose to exercise my right to vote for whom I felt was the best candidate?

                I don't regret your vote.

    • Posted By: cdesign @ 06/22/2009 11:22:28 PM

      ABSOLUTELY DO NOT TRUST THIS OBOZZO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He is a flat out narcissist. His only job experience was as a Community Organizer when he was 22 yrs old -- BEFORE he ever went to law school. He NEVER practiced law!!! Does anyone care about that?? As soon as Obozzo left law school he started working on his 'memoires'. What the !@#$%^&*(k does a 30 yr old kid with no children have to REMEMBER????? Everything obozzo does is about glorifying himself. Using his half-black skin as a crutch to woo sypathetic voters. He is absolutely a fraud with no track record whatsoever. And the fact that he still refuses to show the world his birth certificate and his education records from Occidental (where he was most likely listed as a foreign aid student from Kenya!!) is unconscionable. This bozzo deserves ABSOLUTELY NO RESPENCT WHATSOEVER!!!!

      • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/22/2009 11:39:20 PM

        Hmmm let me see, yes, I do see how him being a former community organizer would give him the caring and understanding of the needs of everyday working people in our society. So basically you are saying that having that characteristic is really a bad thing for the leader of the free world to have? I would have to disagree with you on that point. Never practiced law? What do you think Senators do?

    • Posted By: Pallisor @ 06/22/2009 2:41:00 PM

      "Trust the man, for he is trustworthy?" lol. Based on what? Certainly not what you've read in this article.

      Do you not know that trust is an earned commodity? Actions define a person, not words, and to blindly trust any leader because you think "he means well for our country", is pure lunacy.

    • Posted By: Mothius @ 06/22/2009 12:48:36 PM

      Pogi....you can't be serious???? I cannot believe someone would actually be this completely blind. Obama doesn't even try to spin his lies. He contradicts himself in speeches he gives. He is either completely dependent on the ignorance of those running your reality, or he really truely is a comflicted man with no sense of how to be President. Either way, it should be enough to scare any "thinking" person.

    • Posted By: IslandAnne @ 06/21/2009 7:27:49 PM

      What the heck is this Pogi smoking? Yikes; he's scary! It's voters like him that got us in this mess. Right; just trust him as we all sing kumbaya and watch our world slip away. He works for us and I don't trust him - for a second! he has an agenda and it's not in our best interest. What a simple mind!

      • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 11:35:29 AM

        What a lousy argument. No facts, no analysis, no suggestions on what to do differently, just condescension.

        No wonder the Republicans can't get anywhere - they're already convinced that they're superior to other people. Why develop oneself or adapt to changing conditions in the modern world if you're already full of yourself and convinced you're smarter than everyone around you?

    • Posted By: EveA @ 06/21/2009 8:05:53 PM

      "Trust the man for he is trustworthy".....didn't they say the same thing about Jim Jones in Jonestown ? To blindly trust someone is dangerous and it is how dictators are made. They love your type.

      • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 8:31:39 PM

        Eve..I did not say anything about "blindly" trusting him..I agree with you that that would be very dangerous indeed. However, If we are to have any hope that we can have significant change in our country that will benefit us all, we need to give those that we have elected to serve us the ability to do their jobs as unhindered as possible. The end result is what we employers should judge. This great country has numerous watchdogs, checks and balances in place that will sound the alarm if our trust is abused.

    • Posted By: mjt4164 @ 06/21/2009 7:53:42 PM

      are you serious

    • Posted By: rhetoricaldoc @ 06/21/2009 7:17:31 PM

      Pogi, Iwill shout at you as Righthook felt compelled to do, but I concur with his/her sentiments: how can you not see that Obama is a thug from Chicago who hides behind beautiful words. His association with ACORN is enough to scare me to death. If you want a socialistic government, I would suggest that you move to move, my Cuba, but I personally do not want one. I prefer my freedom, to make my own money, to spend it, to pay for my own needs, to not be responsible for others who choose not work. Choices have consequences. I was born into poverty yet I worked my way through college eventually earning a PhD. I know people from my neighborhood who waited for the government to support them, that is to wait for people like me, to take some of my hard earned money, money I earned from long hours and sacrifice while they sat home watching TV in air conditioning. Do I have sympathy that they do not have health insurance? None! I know the truth for I lived it. I am now 65 years old and for the first time in my long life I fear for my country. I fear this man, BH Obama for I see him for what he is, a socialist who wants to destroy this nation and rebuild it in his image, all the while the media the media reports love stories about him as though he is the true Messiah. We need only look at Germany to see how Hitler came into power to see the danger of that kind of slobbering uncritical adoration. Open your mind and study the past and see the present for what it is.

    • Posted By: carl6352 @ 06/21/2009 6:07:35 PM

      you have been hosed dude. by the soak the rich democrat garbage. the so called rich are people like me who supply people lie you a job and beneifits. a democrat is a person who frowns on success and wants you on goverment subsidy so all power is generated in one place washington. thay can control you. they have conned america into believing that people who prosper owe people who just lay around and dont try to reach therir full potential as a rite. when in fact its a drug that saps the will to strive out of you. welfare was started in the 60"s less than 1% have gotten off it. its a perpetual life style that numbs you into subserviance to washington. also that 1% that got off a greater percentage shunned the democrats! they woke up. this guy is a puppet he reads what ever is written for him hence the 57 staes mess up and gives wrong names to his staff. that is the sign of a man who cant think for himself.

    • Posted By: mrsharfer @ 06/21/2009 4:43:04 PM

      OK, Pogi...I get it. You are related the obamanation.

    • Posted By: scola91660 @ 06/21/2009 4:23:30 PM

      Pogi, you imbecil, were you saying the same things when George Bush was president. Stop writing your blather, because if you didn't have a consistent point of view then, you have got absolutely no creditability.

    • Posted By: yarply @ 06/21/2009 3:21:52 PM

      He was raised on Chicago politics and rose quickly to the top...Now whether he is the cream or the crud each will have to decide, but in one of the most corrupt political systems that Chicago has, it would be hard to believe he could rise so quickly without being the cream of the crud.

    • Posted By: Annibell721 @ 06/21/2009 1:04:38 PM

      oh Please.... open your eyes... we are loosing loosing freedom daily... and being taken over by a non-Natural Born Citizen. Our country has been taken over.... and ACORN is GREAT PROOF of his SELF-SERVING Behavior.... in addition... the Czars are in place to RULE .... the USA ...just like his wife said after he won election...

    • Posted By: scola91660 @ 06/21/2009 12:24:33 PM

      Pogi, do some research on how the up front, anti-fraud protection was removed from the donor page on his campaign website. You might have missed this because idiots, like the ones who run Newsweek (a piece of biased trash) were too busy reporting on important issues like the cost of Sarah Palin's wardrobe.

    • Posted By: bobojake @ 06/20/2009 9:39:35 PM

      obama whole track record is one of incompetence and a corss between billy ayers the terrorist, franie the communist and rev. wright the I hare amercian radical . Pogi obama is the most self centered inconsiderate incompetent marxist LIAR the United States has ever had as a President. We will throw obamja maxist thugs out in 2010 and obama out in 2012 if he hasn't already been impeached.

  • Posted By: RattStone @ 06/22/2009 5:24:01 PM

    Hey Vigilance ?

    Do you actually have a job ? You have been posting out here for almost 2 days none stop ? You must be getting paid, nobody would argue that long on a mute point without payment of some kind.

    Besides, you arguments against the Evil Wall Street are pure strawman. The Institutions that went down or got Bailed Out all belonged to, or had stakes in Mortgages. Chevy and Chrysler were a 20 year train wreck in the making.

    It's not correct to say that Wall Street is Evil , we don't see Allstate, or State Farm, or Budwieser, or Seagrams', or Wal-Mart, or Freds, or Wendy's. or McDonald's, or HyTech Steel, or Lubes-R-Us going Banckrupt, their stocks are still going well.

    Besides, you said you got dis-couraged with Bush because of Kyoto, Graib, Katrina ? Hmmm, well,. Kyoto, or AGW, or Global Warming is a Ponzi Scheme designed to Redistribute the Wealth, Abu Graib ? What can you say about a few Muslim Prisoners with panties on their head, if they catch us they cut off our heads, and Katrina, ahhh, Katrina, do you not think Louisiana Gov. Blanco, or Naw Leans Mayor Nagin deserves the credit for that disaster ?

    And, if you are as old as you say you are, you should definately remember Kool-Aid , we all drank it.

    The thing we don't like about Obama is it's Affirmitive Action gone wild . He is throwing so much crap at the fan it reminds us of the Cloward-Piven Strategy. The CPS is well documented, it's strategy is to over-whelm the Government to the point it collapses. We are close, No ?

    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/23/2009 2:59:27 PM

      To answer your question, yes, I have a job. But I work from home most days, and sometimes work is light right now. My employer is waiting on the economy in terms of expanding the business, so it happens I have had a lot of free time, especially for the last few days. .

      I never said Wall Street is "evil", I said they blew it. I never once mentioned the companies you bring up and I certainly don't hate capitalism or the private sector a bit. But I disagree strongly with the notion that it is not capable of doing some highly damaging things if completely deregulated. People are human.

      As for the rest of your post, I've answered all of that *** so many times on these boards that I just don't have the time anymore. No, I don' t think Nagin is to blame for Katrina, I have a friend whose father was personally there at a press conference where he was turning purple over how badly the Federal Gov't. left him out to dry. (Yes, I do think Blanco deserves a lot of the blame.) No, I don't think nipple clamps and black KKK hoods are okay, no matter how many beheadings there are. No, with my state in the middle of perpetual droughts, I don't think global warming legislation is wealth redistribution. No, I don't think Obama's election is affirmative action. And with that, good day.

  • Posted By: Rupert Pupkin @ 06/23/2009 1:12:08 AM

    Considering that GW Bush was submitted to a scorched earth background check by the MSM before and after he was elected (including one network anchorman's attempts to use forged documents in the process), why is it that the MSM have always blithely accepted, practically without question, Mr. Obama's ghost-written accounts of his life story? That is to say, why have they not pressed for release of college records, medical records, etc. which might actually reveal something about Obama, if that is his real name?

    If the news is really the first draft of history, why have they shown so little interest in the historical record? The only explanations that come to mind are that these so-called reporters are either very afraid of what will happen to them or that they are employed in a larger conspiracy to hide such facts. Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers are just the tip of the iceberg, put out there to distract from the larger, awful, and unpalatable truth about this man. Transparency, that's a good one.

  • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/21/2009 3:45:49 AM

    Transparency=Where is the Birth Certificate? That is where transparency begins.

    • Posted By: Pogi @ 06/21/2009 4:00:39 AM

      http://www.politifact.com/media/img/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg

      • Posted By: ViskovX51 @ 06/21/2009 6:04:31 AM

        Thats a "Certificate of Live Birth" not a Birth Certificate Pogi, surely your reading comprehension is above a 2nd grade reading level. There IS a difference.

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 11:25:27 AM

          Here's another Hawaiian birth certificate:

          http://media.photobucket.com/image/hawaii%20birth%20certificate/rexnaja/Naja-for-web-front.jpg?o=5

          Do you see what it says at the top? "Certificate of Live Birth". Do you notice that it looks a lot like Obama's?

          I'm surprised you didn't note the "REV 11/01 LASER" at the bottom on both certificates - meaning they was printed after 2001, on laser printers, which certainly weren't around in the 1960s - and try to claim that makes Barack Obama's certificate a forgery too. But it doesn't. You can see from the other certificate that I linked - THAT IS WHAT MODERN COPIES OF A HAWAIIAN BIRTH CERTIFICATE LOOK LIKE.

          I'm from California. As far as I know, my birth certificate says "Certificate of Live Birth" too, though it's been awhile since I looked. Does that mean I'm actually a secret Marxist Kenyan socialist Muslim dictator too? :P

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 11:53:52 AM

            I mean, let's pretend for just a second that Obama really is a secret Kenyan Marxist Muslim - unlikely, since, as far as I know, Communism as an ideal isn't exactly burgeoning with support in Kenya or anywhere in the Muslim world. Most Muslims I know are not the type to stand around discussing Karl Marx and the proletariat revolution...I think some of the conspiracy theorists have gotten their wires crossed or are just so used to railing against Communism that they're keeping it up long past when most Communist ideologies have presented an existential threat.

            But, as I said, let's dip fancifully into imagination for a second. If Obama were really a secret Kenyan Marxist Muslim dictator, doesn't anyone think he would have picked a less egregious name for his "fake" birth certificate than Barack HUSSEIN Obama? I'm still astounded that the man won, saddled with that handicap.

            • Posted By: NAflutist @ 06/22/2009 10:59:14 PM

              I respectfully ask you, Vigilance to make the request for a look see at this elusive birth certificate. I do hope he truly qualifies for the office that he occupies because if he doesn't and word does get out, I can only imagine the consequences we will face. But I know that only the guilty run. Why is he running away from this problem instead of facing it? Why not just show the whole world?? Why is he not proud of it? Why has he spent so much money on lawyers to fight it in court? There are just so many questions. For me it is simply a constitutional matter, that is all. It goes to Obama's respect for the constitution and how strongly he feels about the interests of our country, after all he spent a lot of his childhood not living in the USA. The framers did not make the eligibility requirements very difficult, but the ones they did include, age and place of birth, must have been very important to them and for very good reasons.
              Maybe if you would ask for it, or someone that is an unabashed supporter would ask, maybe he would come through with it just to prove it to you. Maybe he refuses to show it to his detractors just because he is "above" them and doesn't feel obligated to show them, but his supporters--he wants to keep them happy.
              It should be every American's duty to ensure the constitution is followed--no matter what your ideology, if you are an American, you are an American!! One and all, we are Americans, if he is truly President Obama, please have him show us his birth certificate or passport or school records, something, anything that can without a doubt put all these doubts to rest, I am tired of shouting into the wind and having him just turning a deaf ear--he absolutely refuses to let us know who he is. Don't you even wonder just a little bit why...
              I am a conservative but that doesn't mean that I don't listen to opposing viewpoints, I used to be a liberal--that is the way I was raised, but as I grew up I realised that progressive liberalism wasn't for me. It is simply a matter of personal freedom and responsibility as opposed to having the government do everything for me and make all of my decisions for me. The more the government does for you the less resposible you become

      • Posted By: spaceman99 @ 06/21/2009 10:18:06 AM

        Actually, this is a certification of live birth, showing that Obama is alive not necessarily born in Hawaii. Also, in 1961 the father's race would be Negro not African. Did anyone notice that there is no notary stamp on this paper as is required? The certificate number is blacked out suggesting that it is out of sequence for the date on it, why else censure the number?

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 11:49:11 AM

          As far as "Negro" goes - as I said below, it's a copy that was printed after 2001. Look at the bottom - "REV 11/01 LASER". Obviously, Hawaii's recordskeeping department (like most organizations) has dropped the word "Nego" from use, thank God.

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/21/2009 11:29:41 AM

          A "Certificate of Live Birth" IS a birth certificate. That's how many birth certificates are worded. Last I checked, that was the title at the top of mine. I'm a Californian.

          As for censuring the number, it is nearly always partially censored so that someone's identity can't be stolen. Look:

          http://media.photobucket.com/image/hawaii%20birth%20certificate/rexnaja/Naja-for-web-front.jpg?o=5

        • Posted By: arton @ 06/21/2009 11:16:38 AM

  • Posted By: mshays15 @ 06/21/2009 8:13:13 AM

    Millions of Americans should have done their homework...The writing was on the wall...For the first time in my life I'm FRIGHTENED for my country...Just wait until all our taxes increase, I wonder who Obama will blame that on??? This mess has only just begun.

  • Posted By: techresmgt @ 06/22/2009 10:17:44 PM

    The only transparency in this Administration is my ability to 'see right through him'.

  • Posted By: patriotdjh @ 06/22/2009 8:57:25 PM

    Without any criticism after firing 3 Inspector Generals who were investigating mass corruption, this dictator Obama has shown he controls this state run media. Just like Hugo Chavez, When the people realize what has happenned, it will be too late.

  • Posted By: patriotdjh @ 06/22/2009 8:51:17 PM

    Obama has fired 3 Inspector Generals who were investigating mass corruption. Still no criticism from the state run media.

  • Posted By: raym39 @ 06/22/2009 7:08:45 PM

    Powerful Newsweek people need to be re-educated to make sure that they are not careless about giving the opposition any ammunition that can be twisted to discredit Obama and the administration. Newsweek people cannot be so blind that they missed the propensity of people on the Obama team to whitewash the concept of transparency long ago. As part of the Obama/Reed/Pelosi team, tenured Newsweek staff have the obligation to be careful how this type of information is titled and disseminated, otherwise Newsweek will end up being used as a source by Rush Limbaugh. Perhaps Newsweek should use this information to "humanize" team Obama when referring to this minor slip-up.

  • Posted By: jilliangood @ 06/22/2009 6:04:26 PM

    According to a quick check, Pogi and Vigilance have not had any sleep for at least 48 hours. They have been posting here and neglecting the huffington pi-ssed and the daillly cussed. Time to return, guys.

    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 06/22/2009 6:42:23 PM

      I haven' t visited HuffPo more than a half dozen times in my life. I find it partisan, poorly edited, and hard to trust. And my time is my own to spend, ma'am.

  • Posted By: Binthere222 @ 06/22/2009 6:38:36 PM

    David Sobel is disappointed because he sees that obama is recycling old bush policies ???

    Well david, get a clue. We are way beyond that. Bush did not give 5 billion to jack booted thugs to work the streets for him. Bush did not arbitrarily move the census into his own secret offices to re-design the vote. Bush did not create and fund with taxpayer money, a staff of persons responsible for political handling of media and entertainment. Bush did not manipulate the WH press corps and produce his own "NEWS".

    You need to think twice. This president is not acting like an american president and this whole thing is looking more and more like something out of 1930s Germany/Italy.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse