Do you think President Barack Obama is doing a good job?

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 11:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Doing a good job as ?????

A. socialist - yes
B. an American idol - yes
C. a bowler - no
D. as a tax and spend liberal - yes
E. as Commander and Chief - no
F. as a puppet of Goerge S - yes
G. as a media darling - yes
H. as an economist - no
I. as a CEO of GM, AIG, or Citi Group - no

This is just a few. As you can see he can be anything you want or need just don't look behind the curtain. :)

Posted by canarybird (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Give me a tax and spend liberal any day over a BORROW and spend conservative.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Of course you would canarybird because there is no accountability when you tax because it’s not your money they are spending.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 12:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have two words for you Weimar Republic. What Obama has done is created the next Weimar Republic. Hyperinflation is coming. Filled your car up lately? Notice that as the market has gotten stronger your gas has gone up. It is called an early indicator. We will pay dearly for Obama’s mistakes. We are all playing our fiddles as Roman (America) burns.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 2:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Funny I did notice today that Obama is taking credit for the increase in the market yet when it was doing bad it was all Bush's fault. So which is it? Obama has only been on the job 3 month and it is not his fault or He is the meshia and saved us all? I just don't get it.

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 4:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

With all of the education NoDFL claimed in a resent e-mail you would think he would be able to spell messiah, if that is the word he intended to use!

This was in the 2:48 p. m. post

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 5:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

lallen,

Ever heard of the American With Disablity Act? You should be careful about questioning people's disablities. It is illegal.

Posted by metisman (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 5:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Enron & Haliburton. Greed instead of growth. Anything goes banking. Cheating, lying & stealing. Now it's pay-back time.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dodd and AIG, Frank and Freddie and Fannie, Rangle and taxes, Nanny P and the field mouse..... yep we are paying for it big time. Big government and big spending by the fools in Washington are the real cause.

Posted by controlledhyperness (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 6:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I know!! Obama is good at sparking lively debates!!! I think we could ALL agree on that one :)

lallen...could it be that NoDFL misspelled something to show a difference between what many people call Obama "messiah" and the TRUE Messiah?? I have seen MANY people misspell messiah when in reference to Obama due to that fact....

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 6:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To NoDFL, & controlledhyperness,
I wasn't aware it was a disability to misspell a word. To make a mistake yes, disability NO! I thought you might threaten one who points out your mistakes. Maybe your response is really a joke?
controlledhyperness, I doubt "MANY" people misspell messiah, truth is I have seen only one person do that and it is still incorrect!

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The disablity is called Dyslexia and is covered by the ADA. Most people with dyslexia have trouble with spelling and sentence structure. I try to use my word check as much as I can but sometimes I miss some. However if you would like to make fun of someone with a disablity than you will fit in with our current President.

Posted by metisman (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

maybe your spell check was disabled

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 8:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I did not, and would not "make fun" of you. I pointed out a mistake not knowing you may suffer from Dyslexia. My apology is given. The President also apologized for his misstatement. I'm sure you have made mistakes in the past and will again in the future. We all do!

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 10:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you for the apology. When you question my education and tied it to spelling I thought you were making fun. I know I misspell words my student remind me all the time. :)

Posted by wakemaker (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 11:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

As one of the responses said...when the ecomomy is tanking we hear "we inherited a mess"...when the market goes up "it's the policies we put in place". As a die hard republican I'm not suggesting my party wouldn't do the same but let's be honest, Obama has an inexperienced staff that has made plenty of mistakes in his first few months. I wonder why the liberal media doesn't pounce on him like they did on Bush? I don't want him to fail but I do hope some of his policies fail in getting approval.

Posted by newyankee (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 7:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I am thoroughly convinced that the actions taken by congress and the “current occupant” of the White House have nothing to do with fixing the economy. To accept that government can fix the economy I would have to believe that the government runs or is the primary reason the economy creates such vast wealth. Japan could not spend its way out of recession in the 80’s and the high tax European nations have not been immune from the current recession. At home in the US where are the examples of high tax states riding out the economic downturn? Liberals want more power and will stop at nothing to get it. It is basic human nature. And yes, the “former occupant” and his administration in my opinion share some blame in this as well. Can anyone think of one failed policy or government bureaucracy that went away in this era of “change”?

Posted by Wildbill (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Barack Obama may not be the answer, but I don't see American businessman bailing themselves out. The auto industry is crying for help from Washington. The banking industry even had the ratings people doing crooked activity. When Washington wouldn't help out Lehman Brothers, they all cryed foul on Wallstreet. Agriculture has for decades received government subsidies. Every week, the FDIC takes control of a failing privately owned federally insured bank. Ironically, the worlds largest capitalist country(USA) is in major debt to the world's largest communist country(China).

Posted by alhs1975 (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Obama's just cleaning up the mess that Bush 43 left, just as Clinton had to after Bush 41.

If Republican Presidents would pay attention instead spending their time scheming up ways to invade countries (Somalia, Iraq) that are no threat to us or letting big businesses get their hand in the cookie jar all of the time while the rest of us pay the freight, they might be seen as competent for a change.

But I doubt it.

Posted by controlledhyperness (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I would have to disagree about Iraq. In my honest opinon, if we had NOT invaded, Hussien would still be ruler, and who knows how many more attacks of various natures would have been put upon the US. Afgahnistan was part of the problem, but so was Iraq...and now they are somewhat a Demorcatic state...something of which many of the people over there are happy about! Were pretenses of going into Iraq wrong, perhaps...but that is not necessarily for me and me alone to judge. Clinton also made some errors while being in the role of President...this to say that no President is immune to mistakes.

lallen...I was trying to point out that there are those who misspell certain words out of respect for who the name truely belongs to. I also did not know that NoDFL was dyslexic, but have known him (or her) to misspell words to make a point rather then a mistake. I personally always find it fun to see what new words can be created out of accidentally misspelling something...then again, at times my computer's keyboard aides in those new words....

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

alhs1975,

Somalia was Bill Clinton. A dem if my facts are correct.

Posted by alhs1975 (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NODFL:

Once again you have your facts wrong. Going into Somalia was on Bush 43's watch. Getting us out was on Clinton's. Clinton's gig was Kosovo.

Controlledhyperness: I cannot believe that you still don't understand that there was NO CONNECTION BETWEEN SADDAM HUSSEIN AND AL QUAEDA!!!!!!!!!! The Bushies have admitted it, the CIA has confirmed it and the entire intelligence community has proclaimed it.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 12:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

controlled,

No biggy I don't usual share that I am dyslexic but I took it as a slam that I was uneducated or that I should not be teaching. We cleared it up. My newest beef is that all Republicans are always to blame and the sun rises and sets in all Dem's butts. They are all to blame. We are no longer a government for the people by the people. If they want to talk lets talk AIG and how much they gave to Obama. Yea nothing illegal there. Or how about every tax cheat in his Cabinet. His ideas to redistribute the wealth is socialist at best and facsist at worse.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 12:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

alhs1975,

Again you are wrong. The UN requested that the US send troops to Somalia in Dec 1992. Here is a time line for you.

Following are some key dates in Washington's relations with Somalia in the past 15 years.

December 1992 - The United States is asked to sends 28,000 troops to Somalia at head of "Operation Restore Hope", a U.N. military effort to quell Somalia's wartime famine.

October 1993 - 18 U.S. Army Rangers are killed when Somali militias shoot down two military helicopters. The United States later suspects the Somalis were trained by al Qaeda, and the event is dramatised in the movie "Black Hawk Down".

March 1994 - The United States ends its mission in Somalia.

August 1998 - Truck bombs claimed by al Qaeda kill 224 people at the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Suspects include Somali citizens and the United States receives reports that al Qaeda members are in Somalia.

December 2002 - The United States sends 1,300 military personnel to establish a counterterrorism unit near Somalia. Based in Djibouti, the task force is designed to hunt for militant groups in six Horn of Africa countries, including Somalia. Commanders discuss sharing security technology with regional forces and training them in counterterrorism techniques.

Early 2006 - Somali warlords form an "Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counterterrorism" in Mogadishu. Experts on Somalia say the CIA is funding the group, whose members have been battling Islamic militias for control of the country.

June 2006 - Galvanising popular support with anti-U.S. rallying cries, Islamic militants take over Mogadishu and rout warlords.

Dec. 2006 - Islamists flee Mogadishu as a joint Ethiopian and Somali government force captures the capital. Diplomats say Washington gave tacit support -- plus surveillance and intelligence help -- to its ally Ethiopia.

Jan. 2007 - U.S. aircraft strike the southern village of Hayo, in an attempt to take out an al Qaeda cell accused of bombing two U.S. embassies in 1998 and an Israeli-owned hotel in 2002. The United States later says that up to 10 "terrorists" are killed, but all three of the most wanted suspects survived.

Posted by alwaysamazed (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 2:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Are you all kidding me? you'd rather have crooks, liars, thieves, criminals, covert theft of our constitutional rights?
Everyone is always so quick to be critical.
Have you ever thought we should get rid of that crap and start working together to help? Everyone knows better and spouts it but I don't see any of you Albert Leans bringing prosperity to Albert Lea let alone the US

I'd rather have socialism than a dictatorship!

Posted by controlledhyperness (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just for the record..I re-read what I wrote, and nope...did not see any reference to Al Queda in there. Thanks for playing though :)

I DID state however that in my opinion (notice I did not say Bush's opinion or anyone else's for that matter) it was a good thing Hussien was out. I still stand by that..not because of any affiliation, but merely because he WAS plotting (it was found out as far as records are concerned) against us.

Now that I have the air cleared on THAT subject...can someone please tell me how we got on this topic rather then on whether or not Obama is doing a good job or not?

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

quote "I'd rather have socialism than a dictatorship!"

You can't have one without the other and with Obama you get both in one nice little package.

The problem with this question is it is to open. To my friends talking about Iraq. How do you feel about Obama's foreign contingency plan (we can not say war on terror) in Afghanistan. He refuses to listen to the boots on the ground and will never call for a surge. I worry people have been brained wash by his American Idol ways. This will end badly.

Posted by awooduck (Mike Lee) on April 3, 2009 at 4:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I see that our local Republicans friends are at it again. spewing their right wing rhetoric. I find it amazing that the local Freeborn County Republican party has yet to come out and tell us who they elected to chair their party for the next two years. What the secret? Didn’t anyone want the job?

Posted by OldTrojan (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 8:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NoDFL: There he goes being negative again! It happens every time. Blah, blah, blah! You lost, now get over it!

Posted by chrish (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 11:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Virginian:

Lay off the "dumbocrats" comments. Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them stupid. It simply means they have a difference of opinion. Not all Democrats make comments with incorrect facts, etc. so knock off the generalizations. If you meant as a more light hearted joke, sorry, but it comes across a bit rude.

And for the record, I do not identify as Democrat nor do I identify as Republican. I vote based on candidate and have voted both ways, including this last election. So I am not just sticking up for "my party" because I don't identify with this party.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 1:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

metisman-

I agree with you again. Not many on this forum complain about the vast amount of greed, corruption, lies, and facist banking practices. Either they do not want to bite the hand that feeds them; or they, too, want a chance at all that 'glory' and power someday. Cooperation is a filthy idea in their mind. Stab-in-the-back ethics is becoming more popular, as ENRON so clearly showed. I would still love to see a Tribune poll on banking.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 2:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Boys, boys, boys.....don't cry. It's just a cycle. Your banker friends will regroup and elect another corporate puppet soon. All your toys in the sandbox were on credit. All the lies you listened to were borrowed. But all the corruption and greed was real. You can take that to the scheming banks....if they survive, which I hope they do not. The true respondsible banks are surviving. Let the others fail. The whole last 20 years of economic boom was on credit. It was a paper economy, almost literally.
Once again the crooks will go free while the boys fight over the toys(political parties). Even with this great economic scandal, I see few people are able to see the real crooks among us--the elite financiers.

To chrish-- Virginian is not joking when he uses personal attacks. His Lee Atwater methods of smear & laugh should be seen as what they are.

Posted by OLD5 (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 10:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There is definately enough blame for our country's mess to go around. Our constitution is an amazing document that all should read. That and the Ten Comandments, if adhered to, should govern us all.

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 1:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Virginian
If you expect someone to read your e-mails in an attempt to understand what you are thinking I would suggest you stop using derogatory language such as "Dumbocrats" By the way the Marines were not in Somalia in any large numbers if at all!
NoDFL: Reread my e-mail to you, I did make any statement about your teaching I in fact didn't know you were a teacher, please do not add things I didn't say

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 3:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Obama has forgot some of the basic rules. Just something to think about.

There are 2 roles of Government. The first is Direct Role where the government uses scarce resources to create a service that benefits all Americans - national defense. local it is fire and police. The second is the Indirect Role the government acts as an umpire to make sure the market economy operates as the rules say it should. However it is the market not the government who makes the rules. This leds to the benefit principle of taxation which is based on 2 ideas. First, those who benefit from government services should be the ones to pay for them. Second, people should pay taxes in proportion to the amount of services or benefits they receive.

Our current system refuses to follow these ideas. The basic ideas of taxations. We the tax payer are paying for people who get the benefits. Thus we violate the benefit principle of taxation. I hope this makes sence.

Old Trojian you always mistake criticism for negativity. It is not unpatriotic to question the people in charge. Remember we are their boss. They work for us.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Virginain,

Remember the Dems (and for a while the Unions) have run Albert Lea for the last 40 plus years. Albert Lea is a microcosm of what Obama is trying to do to the country. When he is done there will be no economic growth, the government will be in everyone’s life, only those who agree with him will be allowed to speak and we will have lost all of our freedoms. There is a reason why Rochester has grown. Until the last few years (imigration and relocation has had an effect on them.) Rochester was a conservative town. 100,000+ people high job growth and well paid employees and no real Unions to mess up job growth.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 3:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Also if Obama and the congress (let's not let those bums off easy) are doing such a great job why are there so many of these tea parties going on?

Again I think these tea parties are about people taking back their government. In less than 3 months we have a government who has taken from the people, their right to make a living, their right to spend their money, their right to be free. We all must take back the government. We are in charge not them. The Rule of Law demands that you and I be the boss not a congress or a president. We are the government they can only rule us because we give them that right. The unrest has started and I am afraid it will get worse.

Posted by chrish (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 5:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Virginian:

You use words like "Dumbocrats" and you are calling someone else immature? You basically call people "stupid" if they don't agree with you? Who's acting like the teenager here?

You actually make some good points from time to time but they are clouded by this type of language. As I said to you in another post, take some lessons from NoDFL on how to post your points without coming across like a jackass.

Posted by stitch0852 (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 7 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Everyone wants to harangue Bush, yet from what I have seen of him in the three months since he left office, he has shown more grace, more poise, and more respect than Obama deserves.

Bush refuses to speak out against Obama. Even when Obama railed against him during the inauguration speeches, with Bush sitting right there (in very poor taste on the part of Obama). He has made it his mission to reverse everything Bush did while in office, regardless of consequences.

Obama knew the shape the country was in, STOP trying to shine the blame elsewhere and deal with it! He holds the position now, so much like the Captain of a ship, it is HIS responsibility if it sinks or floats. If he didn't want that, he should have never sought election. Stop trying to push blame and take care of business!

Also stop spending money faster than the presses can make it! Putting this country deep into debt will NOT solve our economical issues. One day we will have to cash those debts.

Clinton's watch is where government regulations were removed from banking that allowed this failure to start. It isn't the sole cause. As far as those countries overseas looking to blame the U.S. I don't care their opinions. Americans are not looked upon with favor in many countries overseas. So what!? We should not be doing things just to please them. We MUST do what is best for U.S.!

Until Obama stops trying to strip Veterans of their dwindling benefits, I will never support him.

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am saddened after reading much of what I have on this page. It seems as though their are only folks who are unable to try and see another way of viewing problems responding to each other. It would be nice to have some education taking place, but!
I have yet to see a Republican solution presented that isn't more of what got us here!
Dictatorship does not always come with Socialism, example The U. K..
I also worry about the debt, but neither party can say its the others creation.
As to the Veterans, this administration has already done more than the last, I agree there is more to do such as PTSD.
Many of the rights NoDFL mentions have NOT been taken away. I still make a living, I still spend my money as I see fit, I would challenge you to tell me of one freedom I have really lost. From this weeks "NEWSWEEK" a women approched Adlai Stevenson and said"Governor, you have the support of every thinking American." Stevenson replied, "thats nice, but I need a majority". Look around, you will see what he ment!

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 9:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have said many times in many post do one simple thing. Suspend the payroll tax for 1 year. It would put $100 in working people's pockets and it will give small business a boost to the bottom line. Next cut the cooperate tax rate to 15% thus bring business back to the US. Give back control to the people. The reason they will not do this is because the "majority" Obama and the Dems want and need are the very people who have their hands out and do not pay payroll taxes because they don't have jobs. His goal is to have everyone depended on the government. Once that has happened no one will vote to cut off the (in their mind) free money from the government. It is just like the Drug dealer give then just enough to get hooked after that they will be depended on them the rest of their life.

As for the rights ask the employees at AIG. The bonuas should never have been but they have a contract. Under the rule of law we have to follow it. Obama used these bonuases as a reason to take their rights and encourage the outrage to make political hay but he was not alone Republicans are to blame for fanning the flames as well. Show me a law these guys broke. You can't because they didn't pure and simple. Next Obama fires the head of GM (Government Motors). Show me where in the constitution where the President has the power to fire a CEO in a private company. Then we can talk about the unconstitutional powers old tax cheat Tim G has taken. First he said he will sieze private business he deams vital to the Governments interset. He has no right. But yet away they go.

The UK is a constitutional Monarchy. It's economic system is Socialist. One that is failing. Remember what Marget Thatcher said about socialism. "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend." So you may be right socialism may not be the right word. How about facism. I think it fits better.
Please read part 2 below.

Posted by chrish (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 9:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Virginian:

You refer to Democrats as "Dumbocrats". Last time I checked, dumb and stupid are words that can be used interchangably.

I don't take what you say personally. I just don't believe name calling contributes to a good, open discussion. So I guess I owe you one for calling you a jackass don't I? :)

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 9:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

part 2

Properly understood, fascism and socialism are actually the same thing. The fascist praises the free market, but secretly works to destroy it. The socialist condemns the free market and openly works to destroy it. Both tactics are tools of a monopolistic type of parasitism known as government control (protecting the masses from themselves). The key goal in either case is the destruction of economic market competition so that government can acquire huge wealth and power.
If the socialist had their way, the world would be one giant monopoly government devoid of any troublesome "free market economy." A one-world socialist government would control every aspect of a world economy. Nothing would be left to the untidy devices of the free market. Wages and prices would be controlled by government fiat.
If the fascists had their way, the world would be one giant monopoly government devoid of any troublesome "free market economy." A one-world fascist government would control every aspect of a world economy. Nothing would be left to the untidy devices of the free market. Wages and prices would be controlled by a central bank, fiat currency, and interest rate manipulations.
This sounds very much like what Obama and Tax Cheat Tim have in mind. Listen to the words Obama used at the G20 summit this week. We must have a global new deal (a new one government order). Geithner, at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the U.S. is "open" to a headline-grabbing proposal by the governor of the China's central bank, which was widely reported as being a call for a new global currency to replace the dollar, but which Geithner described as more modest and "evolutionary."
"I haven’t read the governor’s proposal. He’s a very thoughtful, very careful distinguished central banker. I generally find him sensible on every issue," Geithner said, saying that however his interpretation of the proposal was to increase the use of International Monetary Fund's special drawing rights -- shares in the body held by its members -- not creating a new currency in the literal sense.

"We’re actually quite open to that suggestion – you should see it as rather evolutionary rather building on the current architecture rather than moving us to global monetary union," he said.
"The only thing concrete I saw was expanding the use of the [special drawing rights]," Geithner said. "Anything he’s thinking about deserves some consideration."

Yep he has done all of this in only 3 months.

Posted by time2share (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 10:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just curious NODFL, aren't teachers supposed to be unbiased?

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 10:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

With all of the fear NoDFL speaks about for the last 3 months, where was He or She over the last 8 years. The neocons have put us in much more danger than Obama has on his watch. We are no closer to the end today than we were 4 years ago, quit looking for armageddon and look for true solutions, stop throwing rocks and give solutions, start working together as Americans all or we will surely destroy each other. The people spoke in November, you don't have to agree, but we must quit crying that the sky is falling.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 8:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

time2share,

The classroom in the past few years has become very bias to the liberal side. Go on any campus and you will see that. I do not bring my poltical views into the class. I test my kids every qrt. Tell me what poltical party I am. I always get 1/3 Dem, 1/3 Rep, little less say independent. Most say (and it is true) that I do not trust any one poltical party. They all have their faults and they do not follow the Constitution. One last point look at the NEA (the teachers union) or Education Minnesota once you attack their bias then we will talk.

lallen,

Funny the question was is Obama doing a good job. (A very open end question I might add.) So why should I talk about the last 8 years. HMMMMMMM I know when Obama is failing we must bring out the old prerecorded sound bite. It is Bush's fault. You need some new matterial. Obama has said this is now his economy. David Axlerod is on the news today saying we are great and we have the right to control privatly owned companies. There is a disconnect right now and I would say you are part of it. You project all your hopes and dreams on this man. You see what you want and refuse to listen to his words. You are in love with the cult of personality. The one thing you must give to Obama is he has done what he said he would. HE SAID I WILL REDISTRUBITE THE WEALTH OF THE NATION and he has done it. Everyone talked about how when he took over he would have to goveren from the center. He hasn't he is left of Stalin. You can not see the forest because of the trees. Also what do you think, was the attack on the world trade center a terrorist attack or a man made disaster. According to Obama we no longer have terrorist attacks or a war on terror. His words matter. Say what you mean and mean what you say.? Your words will speak volumes about what you stand for.

Posted by stitch0852 (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"As to the Veterans, this administration has already done more than the last,"

BULL!

The last administration made huge steps to phase out concurrent receipt. For those who do not understand this concept, allow me to explain.

I am a 20-year U.S. Military veteran of our armed services with an honorable discharge. I earn a "retainer" meaning I receive monetary income based on the time I served. (NOTE: It is called a retainer because until I have been out of service for 10 years I am subjected to being recalled back into the service.) I am also partially disabled due to my military service (less than 50%). As such, I receive a small amount from the V.A.

Concurrent receipt means that for each dollar I am paid from the V.A. as compensation for my injuries/disabilities, I LOSE one dollar from my retainer/retirement amount. Only military veterans are subjected to this antiquated policy (dating back to the Civil War), mainly because of budgetary concerns.

THIS ADMINISTRATION was attempting to BILL Veteran's insurance companies for treatment the V.A. provided for service connected disabilities! Only a huge outcry from Veterans Groups seemed to have quelled this attempt, for now. In addition, THIS ADMINISTRATION is attempting to modify our medical care coverage by INCREASING our out of pocket medical expenses for Tricare as well as our medical cap and annual membership dues.

So pardon me if I call the line that this administration has done more than the past FOR Veterans because IT IS NOT TRUE! This administration seems intent on reducing our benefits as much as possible in the name of budget cuts. Maybe if he had ever served, this would not be occurring. It is laughable because his wife was on GMA a few weeks ago lamenting the fact that spouses of active duty service members are living on Food Stamps will their other half is serving overseas. Yet nothing has been done to correct this.

Interestingly enough, when I enlisted, I was told about medical and retirement benefits, but no mention was ever made that worthless political figures would continually attempt to erode these benefits in the name of budget cuts.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

stitch0852,

Thank you for your service. Your choice has given us all the freedom to post here. We should do more for our vets. Please keep us informed and let me know what I can do to help you and others.

God Bless.......

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 9:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To the left of Stalin???? You just lost all credibility with that statement! You project a whole lot on me without knowing anything about me, all based on your own considerable biases. Please try not to lecture others about what THEY believe! You may be wrong. He, meaning Obama, has all ready redistributed the wealth of the nation? Its not even April 15th yet, sure comes as a surprise to me. I checked my accounts this morning and they are still there! Perhaps if you took the blinders off you might be able to see that on occasion a little wealth redistribution would be appropriate, after all that was the reason for the original income tax. Sure we could use some major tax changes, a flat tax, a VAT, etc. but right now we have what we have. But then maybe we can all "eat cake".

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 9:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

stitch0852
Thank you for pointing out the concurrent receipt situation. I agree with you 100% on that subject. I must point out to you though that you say this has been ongoing since the Civil War. It seems to me that Obama has only been in office 3 months others could have done something years ago, Reagan" perhaps as an example Eisenhower as another.
I must also point out that there are others that have retirement benefits modified. I for example should receive around $900.00 in payment from soc. sec. because of deductions due to my retirement pay from other sources I get $200.00. You also know that all Americans are facing raises in medical insurance all the time not just Veterans.

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Virginian
Since you cannot, or refuse to see the truth, put the blinders back on. The Presidents name is Obama, if you cannot be respectful of the office I suggest you just shut up! In three years and seven months we will be better off and looking forward to 4 more years of American greatness.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

lallen,

Barack Obama revealed his long-term goals in a radio interview on Chicago's WBEZ-FM in 2001. Asked about the Earl Warren court decisions that started long lines of activist decisions in many areas, Obama argued that the Warren court didn't go far enough: The Warren court changed the laws, but failed to address the economic issues to bring about "redistributive change."
Obama complained that "the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth" or "economic justice" and failed to "break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution." The stimulus plan is designed to break through those constitutional restraints on government action.
Here are some of the major "change" provisions of the 1,000-plus page act that all admit no member of Congress read before passage. This list doesn't include any of the dozens of "porky" items that Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., boasts Americans don't care about (and usually don't know about).
First, the stimulus bill repeals the essentials of welfare reform passed by the Republican Congress in 1996. It was reluctantly signed by President Bill Clinton after he realized the public was demanding reform, and after it proved popular, he tried to take credit for it.
The Obama stimulus plan increases the taxpayers' money that the federal government gives to the states for welfare, and reverses incentives by giving bonuses to states that put more people on welfare. The stimulus is even worse than the Great Society policies of the 1960s.
That is a good example of the Obama goal to spread the wealth around (regardless of the harm it does).
Second, the stimulus plan calls for nearly doubling federal spending on education, which means doubling federal control. This money gives Obama the opportunity to spread his friend William Ayers' "social justice" teaching (i.e., that America is an oppressive and unjust society) throughout K-16 education.
This goal will be facilitated by Obama's appointment of Arne Duncan for secretary of education, who like Obama and Ayers, is an alumnus of the Chicago political machine. Duncan made news last year with his plan to open a "gay-friendly" public high school in Chicago with a curriculum teaching "the history of all people who have been oppressed and the civil rights movements that have led to social justice and queer studies."
Third, the stimulus plan calls for Obama "change" by giving government control over access to medical treatments plus surveillance over online medical records for every American. Giving bureaucrats the power to decide which procedures have "clinical effectiveness" and may be used means nationalizing the health care industry and rationing medical care. Part 2 to follow.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

part 2

Fourth, the stimulus bill greatly expands by about $23 billion nearly every element of the welfare state, including food stamps, Medicaid eligibility, the earned income tax credit, the Special Supplementary Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, and child-support enforcement for single moms. The governors have just awakened to the fact that the stimulus plan will require their states to raise business taxes if they accept this new free money.
Fifth, Obama's claim that the stimulus plan cuts taxes is a fraud. A large percentage of the alleged tax "refunds" is just another handout because it will go to people who don't owe any income taxes.
Sixth, the announced purpose of the stimulus is to create jobs, but Obama's photo-op to illustrate this at Caterpillar Tractor in Peoria, Ill., turned into a political donnybrook. National television showed Obama speaking to some of the 20,000 whose jobs have been outsourced by Caterpillar and implied that the plan will enable them to be rehired.
Minutes later, Obama was contradicted by Caterpillar's CEO, who warned that, on the contrary, more layoffs are coming. DECATUR, Ill. (AP) — Caterpillar is speeding up layoff plans at a central Illinois plant, letting go of more than 1,000 workers two weeks early with pay.
The Peoria. Ill.-based heavy equipment manufacturer started sending the workers from its Decatur plant home on Thursday. The company had planned to keep them on through April 13.
Caterpillar said it decided to speed up its layoffs at the plant because of slowing demand for its mining trucks and earth moving equipment.
Caterpillar spokesman Jim Dugan says the workers will be paid through April 13.
Layoffs in Decatur are part of more than 24,000 job cuts the company is making worldwide.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 2:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

lallen,

Quote " It seems to me that Obama has only been in office 3 months others could have done something years ago, Reagan" perhaps as an example Eisenhower as another.
I must also point out that there are others that have retirement benefits modified" Here are the facts about what Obama wants to do to our disabled vets. This is his plan.

WASHINGTON—The Obama administration is considering making veterans use private insurance to pay for treatment of combat and service-related injuries. The plan would be an about-face on what veterans believe is a long-standing pledge to pay for health care costs that result from their military service.
But in a White House meeting Monday, veterans groups apparently failed to persuade President Obama to take the plan off the table.
“Veterans of all generations agree that this proposal is bad for the country and bad for veterans,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “If the president and the OMB [Office of Management and Budget] want to cut costs, they can start at AIG, not the VA.”
Under current policy, veterans are responsible for health care costs that are unrelated to their military service. Exceptions in some cases can be made for veterans who do not have private insurance or are 100 percent disabled.
Veterans claim that the costs of treating expensive war injuries could raise their insurance costs, as well as those for their employers. Some worried that it also could make it more difficult for disabled veterans to find work.
The leaders of several veterans groups had written Obama last month complaining about the new plan. “There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran’s personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide,” they wrote.
Many veterans had high expectations for Obama after years of battling the Bush administration over benefit cuts and medical concerns such as post-traumatic stress disorder.
But the VA’s decision to float a potential change in its policy of paying for service-related injuries could signal a quick end to the honeymoon.
“It’s a betrayal,” said Joe Violante, legislative director of Disabled American Veterans, which signed the letter to Obama. “My insurance company didn’t send me to Vietnam, my government did. The same holds true for men and women now fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s the government’s responsibility.”
Meanwhile, a new poll by the independent Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has found Obama’s approval rating falling to 59 percent from 64 percent in February. It also found the ranks of Americans who disapprove of his job performance rising, to 26 percent from 17 percent.
Pew found that 44 percent think that the president listens more to liberals than to moderates in his party, while 30 percent think he listens more to moderates. In January, 44 percent thought he listened more to moderates and 34 percent more to liberals.

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I cannot believe all of those who voted for that Schwartza, cannot see that you all have been hoodwinked. This Caeta has over stepped his authority granted to him under the US Constitution, has spent more in 2 months than all of the Presidents since George Washington combined. All I can say is you got what you asked for, and because of that our Country and your fellow man has to pay dearly for it, so all I can say is Thanks, thanks for restricting my monetary freedom, thanks for nationalizing bank, thanks for allowing a Schwartza to think that he somehow has the authority to fire someone in the private sector, thanks for making my health records available to some other gov't agency when its none of their business, thanks for raising the debt so high, that our children and their children will suffer in a deluge of taxes, thanks for the ever more increased taxation with out representation.

To those of you who refer to him as the prez, that moron is seen BOWING to a Saudi, great just great, this is a sign as weakness.

To lallen, Virginian or anybody else has the Constitutional Right to call b.o. any name they want, and for you to suggest that they "shut up" is an infringement on their 1st Amendment. Why should I be respectful of the Office when he himself has NO RESPECT OF THE OFFICE NOR THE CONSTITUTION, OR TO WE THE PEOPLE. So until then I will never refer to him as the president, I cannot, and will not recognize him as such either.

Our Country is in peril.

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS.

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)

A whole lot of OPINION in the last NoDFL post, and we all know the old adage about opinions, "they are like" well you know. Just maybe if the great market system really worked all that well we wouldn't have the government filling in the gaps, such as children with no health insurance. I have first hand experience with the "Health Care System " in the US, and it was not good. I bet I cannot find "William Ayers" name in the Bill! So that part is suspect. The biggest problem with this post is NO suggested solutions, just complaints!

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

veneratio,
I wonder what you would have said if your post was sent by someone else about President Bush, you see, many people felt the same about him as you do about Obama, the big difference being that Bush fit all of the duragotory terms you used to describe Obama
The Bush family has deep and long standing TIES to the "House of Saud". I wonder what the Saudis got for that?
For you I will finish the adage about opinions, They are like A-- H----, everyone has one and they all stink" especially yours.

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have a solution its called a REVOLUTION.

The free market works when the GD gov't keeps its fingers out of it, but as with any bully that acts like the mafioso, they have to have their cut of the pie.

And why is it gov't (read: WE THE PEOPLE) job to provide health insurance? If they want gov't funded health move to Canada or France then, they do such a fine job at it RIGHT?

DON'T TREAD ON ME.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Quote "Perhaps if you took the blinders off you might be able to see that on occasion a little wealth redistribution would be appropriate, after all that was the reason for the original income tax."

Again you play fast and loose with the facts. Time to tell the truth.

Although the tax that concerns most people is "income tax", the Constitutional question really rests on whether a tax (any tax) is a "direct tax" or an "indirect tax". As an example, Congress may pass a tax law that clearly structures a tax as a direct tax, and call that tax an "income tax". The following month they may pass another tax measure that is clearly structured as an indirect tax, and also call that an "income tax". If properly constructed, one bill would lay a direct tax, while the other bill would lay an indirect tax, and both would be referred to (by ignorant politicians) as "income tax" bills. You can see that the term "income tax" does not really answer a Constitutional question concerning taxation. For almost a century now people have been making the mistake of trying to define "income tax" as being exclusively within one tax class or the other, not understanding that it can be can be either depending on how Congress structures any particular tax.
As a nation, we have been fixated by the phrase "income tax", but it is important to know that term is one that can shift like the wind. We must focus on the issue of direct v. indirect. While the phrase "income tax" has a historic meaning in law, that formerly fixed meaning has been eroded to the point of near uselessness by misapplication of the phrase by Congress, the courts, and the public over the last 90 years.

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

lallen - I didn't support Bush either, and did not recognize him as president either, with the usurpation of powers (read: Patriot Act) NOT granted to him by the Constitution I lost all respect for him.
I bashed him as well. Until this Country returns to its Constitutional Republic roots, and actually elects a man / woman who is true to the true intent of the founding of this Country laid forth by our Founding Fathers, I hereby declare my self Sovereign unto myself.

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death.
Molon Labe.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

part 2

Historically speaking, until the adoption of the 16th Amendment blurred the lines, the US Supreme Court had always viewed an "income tax" as a tax solely in the form of a direct tax. The Court did not view "excise taxes" as "income taxes". In many of the Court's decisions between 1913 and 1921, the Court clearly stated that the various tax acts passed by Congress, which laid excise taxes under the guise of "income taxes", were not really "income tax acts". I describe the 16th Amendment as "dastardly" not because of the politics attendant to its drafting or its alleged ratification, but because of the great misunderstandings that have followed its alleged ratification and the massive governmental theft of property from the American people that has occurred due to that misunderstanding. It is a completely factual statement to say that the 16th Amendment has resulted in the largest fraud ever perpetrated by a government against its Citizens.
I say "fraud" because one of the elements of the crime of fraud is to remain silent when there is a clear duty to speak, and certainly our government has a clear duty to come out and tell the public that most Americans do not owe a penny of Subtitle 'A' or 'C' taxes, either under the original provisions of the Constitution, or under the alleged authority of the 16th Amendment.

Here is what the 16th Amendment says:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
That's it! That's the entire text of the Amendment that has caused so much confusion and trouble.
Historically, Americans of yesteryear were aware that a direct tax was upon their person, or their real property (including slaves), or their exercise of other fundamental rights. They were also aware that a tax on the fruits of one's property (such as receiving payment from renting a piece of real property) was also a direct tax unless those earnings where in the course of a privileged activity, and then they were subject to an excise tax.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

part 3

Let's review what we've covered:
1.The US Constitution grants the federal government the authority to lay only two classes of taxation - direct and indirect.
2.Direct and indirect taxes are subject to Constitutional regulations concerning their mode of operation.
3.Direct taxes are subject to apportionment - even after the 16th Amendment.
4.Indirect taxes are subject to the rule of uniformity.
5.No direct tax on private earnings exists in this country - the disagreement of the federal courts notwithstanding.
6.The federal judicial circuits are split as to whether the 16th Amendment merely confirmed the government's excise taxing power concerning shareholder profits from corporate investment, or whether the Amendment created a new "special" form of direct tax that does not require apportionment.
7.In the Brushaber case, the US Supreme Court stated that any tax act under the authority of the 16th Amendment must properly be considered an excise, and is thus not subject to apportionment.
8.The definition of income used in the Corporate Tax Act of 1909 must be used in the income tax acts of Congress (passed under the authority of the 16th Amendment).
9.The definition of income used in the Corporate Tax Act of 1909 is the same definition that must be used when interpreting the 16th Amendment.
10.The 16th Amendment only pertains to "income" in the form of dividends, patronage dividends, and interest from corporate investment.
11.The 16th Amendment tax is upon the privilege (to shareholders) of operating a business as an artificial entity.
12.The 16th Amendment tax is not upon "income"; the income is only the yardstick used to determine the value of the privilege, and hence the amount of tax to be paid.
13.If you have no 16th Amendment income, you have no liability for a tax imposed under the authority of the 16th Amendment.
14.Other legitimate types of federal and state taxation do exist beyond the tax imposed under the authority of the 16th Amendment. They are all excise taxes.
15.Capital investment funds, even when invested in a corporation, are not subject to taxation except by a direct tax subject to apportionment.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

part 4

16.A tax on your private earnings still needs to be apportioned to be constitutional.
17.If you wish to conduct only your private affairs, do not trespass into areas that give rise to the presumption of federal or state authority for taxation and/or regulatory authority.
18.In most statutes, "business" means the activities of a legislatively created entity such as a corporation, partnership, statutory trust, etc., and does not embrace the your private affairs, which includes your livelihood.
19.Giving out a SSN or TIN (when lawfully required) creates a powerful presumption of federal and state taxing authority over your earnings.
20.Signing any federal or state tax forms (including a Form W-4, creates a powerful presumption of federal and state taxing authority over your earnings.
21.The Gross Income argument is legally accurate, but is not intended to take the place, and does not take the place, of a constitutional argument.
22.If you choose to engage in an excise taxable activity, you must pay the tax.
23.If you choose to engage in an excise taxable activity, you are expected (by the government as well as your fellow citizens) to practice voluntary compliance.
24.An indirect tax can be effectively converted into a direct tax by improper enforcement by the Executive Branch. In that event, the US Supreme Court has said that it is its duty to declare the former excise tax to be a direct tax absent apportionment, and thus unconstitutional.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It is very funny that when you use facts to agrue against Obama and his plans you are brushed off. But when they spout their ideas as facts than you are negative because you don't think like they do.

V I am with you time for a good old revolution and we may get our wish before the summer is over with. His budget may be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 4:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NoDFL,
Could you cite the 24 statements you just listed? If you paraphrased please give a citation anyway. It looks very official so I would guess you researched the info somewhere.
Be careful about what you wish for, you may not be able to control it as there are some pretty whacked out groups on the FAR RIGHT!!! Ask Germans who were alive in 1933.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 5:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Those 24 statements came from a paper I wrote in college. I am sure there are sites out there that have the same info. Mine came from some old law books in the Lib. I do try to site my sites (like the Ap for those news stories) sometimes I forget. Sorry.

By the way there some pretty whacked out groups on the FAR LEFT!!! Ask the Russians who were alive from 1917 to 1989 or the Chinese from 1949 to today or the Cuban's from 1959 or Vietnam from 1954. I can go on but you get the point. Plus remember socialism and Facism are one in the same.

Posted by stitch0852 (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 6:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Obama has been spending his time in office enjoying traveling around this country on Air Force One. He is spending money hand over fist (much like he did with his campaign where he broke one of many campaign promises) and is now doing the same. The only problem is he is STILL CAMPAIGNING!!! He travels to Indiana, west coast, etc to "promote support" for his budget. He is trying to stay popular while attempting to perform the duties. He cannot have it both ways. Eventually, he will have to make an unpopular choice.

Use the transportation when needed, but I believe traveling to "garner support for his stimulus bill and then again to get support for his budget" is wasteful spending!

He signed a bill loaded with pork under the pretense it was "last year's business." BULL! HE had the pen and HE could have stricken some of that garbage out of the bill or sent the bill back for trimming. He did not, another promise broken. Keeping track?

It is very difficult to determine which face he talks out of. I don't believe this country can survive 3.5+ years of his remaining time in office.

Then again, maybe that's the plan....

This is not about what a prior office holder should have or could have done. You stated that Obama has done more for Veterans in his three months in office than Bush did. He has not, he did not, and he will not.

Military veterans are being targeted because he is a sniveling wimp who STILL HAS NOT PROVEN HE IS LEGAL in the office. I don't mean where he was born. I mean HOW DID HE GET TO PAKISTAN in the 80s when Americans were prohibited from getting there? I believe he had a passport from Indonesia. IF so, HE CANNOT BE PRESIDENT! However, his transparent office is as easy to see through as a brick wall, thereby preventing anyone from learning the truth! Show the passport or proof he possessed a U.S. passport in 1980/81 or for that trip and I will drop this line. He refuses. I believe that refusal is because he cannot provide what he does not have and did not have. I believe our country has been handed to someone not legally able to lawfully hold that office. Another smack into the face of our Constitution.

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 6:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You are right about Germany in the 1930's, seems there is a parallel in how Hitler took control of a country through, Political correctness, the control of education, heavy taxation, nationalizing the private sector and banks, secularization of society. And it seems the United States presidents of late have been taking cues straight from the Reichstag playbook, and we all know how it ended for Germany..

tyrannicida arbitratus conluvies dextertera Deus

Posted by lallen (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 7:36 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 8:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Whoa, whoa there lallen, every citizen has the right to question the eligibility of someone who has been elected to an office of the people. The man works for us remember, he is not our boss, he has no authority over we the people, he is elected to represent us that is all.

There are some very valid points that have been brought to light, and it seems there is a case on the docket at the Supreme Court to hear on whether or not to go forward with Quo Warranto proceedings. There are also some active and retired military officers that are also questioning his eligibility.
The president also has been named in an indictment turned in by a peoples' grand jury in Georgia, and one other man has sought a criminal complaint against the president.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 9:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

lallen,

Here is your proof. Obama Administration Has Plan to Make Veterans Pay for Health Care.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article...

Just wondering if this is how it starts. People tell others they can not question the government. That they must be P.C. (Which by the way was created by the Nazis.) I have several family members in the service. One who just got back from Iraq. He and his buddies have openly question the leadership of Obama. Am I to say you have no right to question Obama because he has only been on the job for 3 months? Or you can't question him because it is unamerican. Sorry I don't buy it. Now they are getting ready to ship out to Afghanistan. Do you want me to say defend lallen rights but don't question his/her faith in Obama. Sorry can't do that. You should be thankful that people are willing to serve.

Also lallen defend Obama's choice to call the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center a man made disaster. I can't wait to hear this one.

Posted by tallyman (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 10:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

For the record, you are all incorrect. Here is the truth: George H.W. Bush was president in December 1992 when the U.S.-led Unified Task Force invaded Somalia. A Republican got us into it. A Democrat got us out.

Posted by altaxpayer (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Do you think President Barack Obama is doing a good job?

Compared to what, Bush? Heck yeah!

Posted by controlledhyperness (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am with feedman NoDFL! I throughly enjoy learning more about how our Govenrment is SUPPOSED to be, and refreshing my mind as to what I had learned all those years ago in MY US Govenrment class!

I know what I am about to say will open up a whole new term to attacks, but I feel it is time to be said. I am a daughter of a Vet who recently passed away. His death, whether directly or indirectly, was due to the fact the VA didn't do the job they were required to do in regards to heathcare. It started here in this state, and carried over to another state. His is one of many stories I have heard of late...and one that started under the last administration. I had originally wanted to fight for justice in his death (as he was 100% service connected disabled), but since reading and hearing all of what is going on with VA, I am holding off, as nothing will get done. As much as it pains me to say so, I am glad he passed when he did, as any treatment would have to be paid for from my parents according to what I have been reading/hearing. This is part of that change that was comming. I do agree with what some have said..he (the President) was never in the Armed Services, so he really has no pull or ties to that branch of the government.
To those who post and have posted on this blog, and have either served or currently served in the Military....THANK YOU!!!! If it weren't for you, and others like you, we would not be able to say, do, or think the way we do currently.
With that, chirish, lallen, and a few of you others, feel free to tee off...

Posted by crzy_mama2mny (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 2:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

grow up

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 4:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is from the Washington Times. Why did it come out on Saturday. Oh I know because then no one would make a big deal. Where is the outrage? This is way bigger than AIG but nothing why? I know because Obama got big bucks from Fannie and Freddie and his buddies got big pay offs. Just another example of do as I say not as I do from Obama.

Fannie, Freddie defend big bonuses
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr...

The federal regulator of bailed-out mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac defended plans Friday to give $210 million in retention bonuses to employees he said had lost years of savings when the companies' stock collapsed in 2008.

Bonuses, some as high as $1.5 million, will go to 7,600 employees at the two federally established home mortgage companies that lost more than $100 billion last year. They are needed to restrain the best talent from leaving in the midst of the economic crisis spawned when the housing bubble burst, said James B. Lockhart III of the Federal Housing Finance Agency in a letter to Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the Senate Finance Committee's ranking Republican.

Mr. Lockhart argued that the companies' previously strong stock prices, now worth less than a $1, were used to woo and pay talent that is now needed more than ever

Mr. Grassley wasn't convinced.

"It is hard to see any common sense in management decisions that award hundreds of millions in bonuses when their organizations lost more than $100 billion in a year. And it is an insult that the bonuses were made with an infusion of cash from taxpayers," Mr. Grassley said in a fiery statement Friday.

Barney Frank is in charge of these companies. Maybe Acorn should hire busses and go to his home and protest. Are these exc's familes being threaten? Is Mr. Frank's family being threatened and are people in congress shrugging of his worries? I don't think so. How can anyone support this double standard from the Obama Administration and congress.

Posted by chrish (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 7:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Controlled:

First of all, I am very sorry to hear of your father's passing.

Why would you assume I would tee off on this? I don't disagree with you and you are speaking from a very real personal experience that should be shared to educate. I realize on another post I may seem very liberal - and I am on social issues - but on fiscal issues, I am more on the conservative side. I only came after Virginian a bit for the name calling but "it's all good".

I have the upmost respect for those in the millitary. A friend of mine is currently serving in Iraq and I have nothing but admiration for him. Vets more than deserve the benefits they receive and they are to be revered for their heroism and courage.

Again, sorry for your loss and for the experience you had to endure with the VA, benefits, etc. I wish your family the best.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LOL!!

Hilarious! Conservative yuppies standing by the water cooler munching on doghnuts and speaking of revolution.
Let's see.....how would that go?.....a self-help speaker at the local gym?....some bankers and lawyers invited to finance?....and guest speaker Dick Cheney?....and right-wing para-military as security?

But first someone, one person, must have the guts. Will the great new revolutionaries step forward! Better check with your broker first. Nothing should be done without first checking if it is profitable.

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 7:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LOL!!!! trifid will be the first one to a re-education camp, and think its a gov't paid vacation spot, all the while praising the same very gov't while they steal, more of your Constitutional freedoms, and raping your bank accounts all under the guise of security and erasing poverty, all the while cursing patriots from coast to coast, made up of military and civilians restoring Constitutional rule and law, because we are obviously misguided and fail to see our true role is a member of the world instead of expressing the we Americans are a Sovereign Nation and we are unique. Ahh, sheeple, just like German Jews, led astray and eventually slaughtered all while believing the lies..
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Spineless from the start, sucked into the part
circus comes to town, you play the lead clown
Please, please
spreading his disease, living by his story
Knees, knees
falling to your knees, suffer for his glory
You will

Time for lust, time for lie
time to kiss your life goodbye
Send me money, send me green
Heaven you will meet
Make a contribution
and you'll get a better seat

Bow to Leper Messiah

Marvel at his tricks, need your Sunday fix
blind devotion came, rotting your brain
Chain, chain
Join the endless chain, taken by his glamour
Fame, Fame
Infection is the game, stinking drunk with power
We see

Bow to Leper Messiah

Witchery, weakening
Sees the sheep are gathering
set the trap, hypnotize
now you follow

Lie.
Lie.
Lie.
Lie.
Lie.
Lie.
Lie.
Lie.

Posted by Culture_Warrior (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 8:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

veneratio: Obama lie? I think he has been all too honest about the implementing of his socialist world view. He believes he has a mandate from us to do so.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 10:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"and we are unique" . Kindergarden philosophy.

The local capitalists yet haven't the guts to ask why their bankers invested in risky schemes, causing local customers to lose big time. Poor babies. The Confused end up hanging the messenger, while the bankers have both hands filled with stolen coin, one with government money, and the other with private money. Clever indeed.

Revolt yuppies!! Show the working class how ye suffer. One less trip to Vegas! OHHHHH!.. One less Nexus! Oh, no!! ....one less bathroom & edition! Terrible!!!.....one less facial for Miss Louis XlV.....insufferable!! Defend your "rights" to purge the natural world of every last element of value, all in the name of a god created in the likeness of greedy men. Luther must be seizuring in his grave.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 10:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Virginian is not joking when he uses personal attacks. His Lee Atwater methods should be seen as what they are.That's something teenage girls do. Lie.
Lie.
Lie.
Lie.

Lie. I hereby declare my self Sovereign unto myself.
Lie.
Lie.chrish, I do not apologize to trifid for what I said and he knows why.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 11:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

chrish: one more 'twisting of the truth' by Virginian.....

"trifid lives in Twin Lakes, Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!"

He/she was attempting to infer that I am a thief. Be warned!

Posted by chrish (anonymous) on April 8, 2009 at 3:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is there something wrong with being Muslim?

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 9, 2009 at 12:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Commandment 11: Thou shalt not get caught.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 9, 2009 at 12:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

".....humans so desperately want to matter."

One reason people 'believe'.

Posted by chrish (anonymous) on April 9, 2009 at 4:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

On what? If they are "extreme" or "radical"? What would be wrong with being a Muslim?

Let me ask this. Would anyone object to a Jewish President? How much does religion matter or come into play here?

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on April 16, 2009 at 1:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

chrish- don't you love argueing with this surrogate Limbaugh?!!

Any statement over two sentences and smears is beyond his intelligence. So he plagarizes Limbaugh the Oinker.