The World Thru My Eyes - I speak my mind and man does it like to talk.

I have to say that Obama has definitely proved he has brought change to the US Gov't for this new Era. Not only is Obama failing to get the Republicans to back his policies (bipartisan? yea right) but now his own Party members are questioning his Stimulus Package. Not to mention he was already having issues agree with Pelosi. Now we have a not so punctual President. According to Foxnews.com, it seems that scheduled meetings and news conferences run on "Obama Time", meaning that rather than being punctual like Former President Bush, Obama gets there when he wants and the meetings and conference start when he gets there. Now I'm sure some will argue that Obama is a busy man and is bound to be late to some appointments. But then ever since Obama won the elections he could have smoked pot, got caught drunk driving, fumbled the inagural speech or even fail to pay his taxes and his precious followers would have forgave him and pass it as "he's only human".

This is definitely change in the US. You get what you pay for. Enjot it.


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Feb 08, 2009

yeah and if there were Rep appointments to positions of bush , and they "forgot" to pay taxes... can you imagine the public outrage? O man people be marching in every town to oppose bush! Now that its dems that do it... thats okay..becuase Bo can do no wrong!

on Feb 08, 2009

So it's Obama's fault that the republicans decided to hypocritcally refuse to back a bail out that would help support the economy even when they'd previously supported one that rewarded banks for failure? Also if punctuality is the worst you can come up with, then I'd suggest that he's doing a pretty good job. No doubt even if Obama did everything perfectly, and never made a single mistake, you'd still have the standard people here ranting about how terrible he's doing.

on Feb 08, 2009

maudlin27
So it's Obama's fault that the republicans decided to hypocritcally refuse to back a bail out that would help support the economy even when they'd previously supported one that rewarded banks for failure? Also if punctuality is the worst you can come up with, then I'd suggest that he's doing a pretty good job. No doubt even if Obama did everything perfectly, and never made a single mistake, you'd still have the standard people here ranting about how terrible he's doing.

 

What? get off the Dems nuts man... maybe the rep learned the lesson the first go? hrmmm? maybe...

on Feb 08, 2009

So it's Obama's fault that the republicans decided to hypocritcally refuse to back a bail out that would help support the economy even when they'd previously supported one that rewarded banks for failure?

You have a very short memory.  The vote for the bank bail out in the Senate only had 10 out of 49 republicans and 46 out of 50 Dems.

While in the House only 20 out of 199 Republicans voted for passage and 203 Dems voted for it.

Where is that overwhelming support at?  It was not on the Republican side.  It may have been Bush's bill to fund failing banks, but it was the Dems who overwhelmingly supported it.

Info from the Washington Post's 110th Congress voting records at: http://projects.washingtonpost/congress/110

on Feb 08, 2009

Lee1776

So it's Obama's fault that the republicans decided to hypocritcally refuse to back a bail out that would help support the economy even when they'd previously supported one that rewarded banks for failure?
You have a very short memory.  The vote for the bank bail out in the Senate only had 10 out of 49 republicans and 46 out of 50 Dems.

While in the House only 20 out of 199 Republicans voted for passage and 203 Dems voted for it.

Where is that overwhelming support at?  It was not on the Republican side.  It may have been Bush's bill to fund failing banks, but it was the Dems who overwhelmingly supported it.

Info from the Washington Post's 110th Congress voting records at: http://projects.washingtonpost/congress/110

 

ive stated that Bush lost his rep lable soon after his second term started... but its us evil rep...you know

on Feb 08, 2009

So it's Obama's fault that the republicans decided to hypocritcally refuse to back a bail out that would help support the economy even when they'd previously supported one that rewarded banks for failure?

I guess Lee1776 said enough but let me add this. The Senate is havng trouble passing the bill, and it's not just because of the Republicans. Not that i would expect you to notice. The fact that you dismissed it in your comment suggest you are one of those who give passes to your own party.

Also if punctuality is the worst you can come up with, then I'd suggest that he's doing a pretty good job.

Not sure what gave you the idea that the punctuality things was suppose to be my secret weapon of some sort but considering Bush was grilled for everything from fumbling words to talking funny, I say Obama's every move is game as far as I'm concerned. I said it once and I'll say it again. Sucks to have the shoe on the other foot doesn't it?

on Feb 08, 2009

punctual like Former President Bush

i guess bush figured he should show up on time (if he truly did; for all i know this is just one more thing you've pulled outta your ass) considering he spent more than 2 years outta 8 on vacation.

on Feb 09, 2009

considering he spent more than 2 years outta 8 on vacation.

Talk about pulling something out of your ass.

on Feb 09, 2009

if he truly did; for all i know this is just one more thing you've pulled outta your ass

Which doesn't seem to be much anymore, but I actually pulled this out of Foxnews.com ass.

Link

Does that look better for you? Figures you wouldn't look at the link.

on Feb 09, 2009

LW,

 

I agree this is same old boss concept, but it's a tradition to pick on the new guys as if he was the first so. And that press secretary? He drives me nuts to.

on Feb 09, 2009

You have a very short memory.  The vote for the bank bail out in the Senate only had 10 out of 49 republicans and 46 out of 50 Dems.

While in the House only 20 out of 199 Republicans voted for passage and 203 Dems voted for it

I never said the democrats didn't support it. However the republicans (some of them) supported it as well. The democrats are mostly being consistent by supporting both (since the first one had far weaker reasons in favour of it, to me a consistent approach would either be to reject the first and support the second, or support both, or reject both). The republicans supported the first bail out in some cases (and let's not forget it was done under a republican president), and then refused to support the second one. To me that's playing politics, not having faith in your convictions. Also amusing how with many things done under Bush's term the republicans (and frequently Bush) are absolved of most blame, and instead it's the senate/house's fault. Then when Obama becomes president suddenly everything is his fault. Either being the president confers meaningful power (and hence responsibility+accountability) or it doesn't. You can't have one rule for Bush and a different one for Obama.

on Feb 09, 2009

The republicans supported the first bail out in some cases

So did the Democrats, whats your point?

and then refused to support the second one.

Funny, I recall several Democrats in the senate and around10 in Congress who refused to support this bill. Am I missing something here or is hypocrsy your second language?

To me that's playing politics, not having faith in your convictions.

Tell that to President Obama who said there would be n lobbyist in his admnistration and who chose to pick people who avoid paying taxes.

Also amusing how with many things done under Bush's term the republicans (and frequently Bush) are absolved of most blame, and instead it's the senate/house's fault.

That would be because this is a Check and Balance Gov't and the Senate and Congress have just as much to blame as Bush does. Not that i would expect someone like you to grasp the concept of check and balances, you all think Bush ran the whole country all by himself.

Either being the president confers meaningful power (and hence responsibility+accountability) or it doesn't.

So what you are saying is if this bailout fails, we can blame the whole thing on Obama and give Congress and the Senate a pass?

You can't have one rule for Bush and a different one for Obama.

Not sure what you are talking about. We all know those in Congress (all but the Republicans and 10 Democrats or so) and those in the Senate in favor of this new bailout crap will be to blame but Obama will take the brunt of it because he is the one showing his face on tv screaming how the Republicans are not being bipartisan, all while ignoring the few Democrats in Congress and those in the Senate against the current bill.

But what can I expect from people who believe their party members could do no wrong and that any choices they make they are doing the right thing, even if it looks a lot like what the Republicans are doing.

on Feb 09, 2009

Obama will take the brunt of it because he is the one showing his face on tv screaming how the Republicans are not being bipartisan,

What I love is that at the moment bipartisan means that Republicans cave to whatever the Democrats want to do instead of what it should mean as the Democrats and Republicans actually working together to come to a consensus.

on Feb 09, 2009

What I love is that at the moment bipartisan means that Republicans cave to whatever the Democrats want to do instead of what it should mean as the Democrats and Republicans actually working together to come to a consensus.

Hey, now that they have control of all 3 houses, they seem to think they should be feared. That somehow hey control everyone. I say let them have their fun. The average voter getstired of new things pretty  quickly and things will "change" again in 4 to 8 years.

on Feb 09, 2009

Talk about pulling something out of your ass.

hardly.  this is a link >>>> click me <<<<<<< one of many publishing these numbers:

as of 1/16/09, bush had spent a total of 487 full or partial days at camp david & another 490 full or partial days playin cowboy at his crawford property (if it were really a ranch, its owner wouldn't be afraid of horses) during the 8 years he served as president. 

remembering your difficulty with arithmetic, lemme help out by tellin you the sum of those two numbers is 977 vacation days.  that total doesn't even include trips to kennebunkport, me.

next we use something called multiplication to determine how many days there are in 8 years and discover the answer is 2920.

clearly i was incorrect in my claim bush spent 1/4 of his terms vacationing.   

in fact, he spent a taste over 1/3 of that time fuckin the dog.

 

2 Pages1 2