BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 10:07 PM

Distrust Of Government Undermines Obama's SupportNPR April 19, 2010

For a Democratic administration that wants to do big things with government, the severe erosion of trust in government is a real problem -- and President Obama knows it.

"We have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now," he said during this year's State of the Union address. "We face a deficit of trust -- deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years."

What the president calls a deficit of trust has been impossible for him to surmount -- and it's undermining support for him and his policies, says Andrew Kohut, the director of the Pew Research Center that just completed a big survey looking at Americans' growing distrust of government.

"No other factor loomed as large in preventing Americans from embracing the proposals of the Congress and Barack Obama than views about government," Kohut says. "A president who wants to use government to solve problems when a public says, 'We don't trust the government; we want less government,' is a problem."

Continued Loss Of Trust
In Kohut's poll, 84 percent of those opposed to the president's new health care law said the reason was too much government. In November 2008, 43 percent said they wanted a smaller government with fewer services. That number has now grown to 50 percent.

Bill Galston, who served in the Clinton White House when it was grappling with similar anger at big government, says the continued loss of trust in government over the past year is striking given the wave of trust -- at least personal trust -- that swept Obama into office. Explore The Results: Americans' Distrust Of Government

"I think the president assumed ... that the confidence that the American people had invested in him as a leader would somehow spill over to his party and to the instruments of government as a whole," Galston says. "And if that's what he assumed, he was wrong from the start. The American people had not suspended their mistrust of government. For example, candidate Obama issued a large promissory note about an end to partisan bickering and a return to something closer to civility ... in the relations between the political parties."

And when Obama wasn't able to redeem that promise, attitudes toward government got even more negative. But the president's top strategist, David Axelrod, says that's not all Obama's fault. Axelrod accuses the Republicans of trying to de-legitimize government.

"In Chicago, there was an old tradition of throwing a brick through your own campaign office window, and then calling a press conference to say that you've been attacked," Axelrod says.[projects his own dirty tricks on others] "I think it's a little bit the same with the Republicans. They meet, they decide we're not going to give the president any bipartisan support, and then they call a press conference to accuse him of not governing in a bipartisan way. And that, I think, grates on people."

Not The President's Fault, But It Is His Problem
Kohut agrees that the current deficit of trust is due to a lot of factors.

"Trust in government declines when national conditions are bad," he says. "National conditions are bad; the economy is bad. So that's one factor. [The second] factor is that when there's a Democratic president, Republicans become much more mistrusting of government than do Democrats when there is a Republican president."

So the lack of trust in government may not be the president's fault, but it certainly is his problem. The people who tell surveyors they are angriest about the government also favor Republicans. And survey after survey has found that these angry voters are more likely to go to the polls in this November's midterm elections than are Democrats.

What can President Obama do about this? Axelrod says in the long run, the best thing is to solve the country's problems and convince the public the solutions are working. "There is a fundamental sense of jaundice on the part of everyday people who feel like they're meeting their responsibilities, and all around them, they see irresponsibility," he says. "Well, the best way to deal with that is to behave responsibly, to govern responsibly, to be straightforward, to be transparent. That is the goal, and that is the standard by which we want to hold ourselves. It's hard to do, given the nature of politics and government, but that should be our North Star."

Obama himself is bothered by the amount of disdain for government among politicians and the press. He says he's been thinking about ways he might address this -- such as a series of presidential speeches. Of course, the president's conservative critics would argue that Obama might be able to increase trust in government if his government weren't trying to do so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 10:51 PM

Ya know, it's the real deal that friends will step in and say 'Hey, man, you really don't need to be doing that".... Translated, "What the hell you doin'??? You look like a fool out there..."

I am at a loss as to what else to say to ya, son, 'cept that you apparently ain't got no friends here to pull ya' up...

Gettin' purdy sad...

Reminds me of the Scarecrow in Wizzard of Oz....

No heart... Just obsessive compulsive behavior... Must suck to be you, Sawz...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 02:04 AM

Don't need a fan club Pop.

"Hey, man, you really don't need to be doing that"

Your thinking is becoming bent and I ask you as a friend to cool off.

Bobert,

The problem isn't code words or institutionalized racism or subconscious racism.

The problem is that you project your own racist thoughts on the rest of the world. Stop accusing others of subscribing to your own personal prejudices. Some of us don't worry about race; we actually look at the man's words and deeds and consider him based on those. It's obvious you are not able to do that and instead filter the world through your own bigoted glasses.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 08:16 AM

Once again, I don't have racist thoughts... But I fully understand what racism is about... If yer hangin' with some organizations that looks like, and smell like some of the folks who in different times would have been Jim Crowers I'd suggest you find something else to do with yer time...

Once again, I try my level hardest to not personalize terms like "racist, bigot or Nazi" on anyone here in Mudville... But, with that said, I reserve my rights to make statements about various "groups" or "orgainzations" and won't be bullied by anyone from making those statements...

I mean, that's all part of discussion...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 11:45 AM

Sawz:

You really have the wrong ticket on Bobez, I am here to tell ya. Accusing him of racism is as far-fetched as accusing the Tea Prty of rationality.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 12:35 PM

Or Amos of consistancy ...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 01:12 PM

Whenever you refer to Jim Crow laws please add that they were created by Democrats over the objections of Republicans.

If you can claim anyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist, I can claim you have racist thoughts.

I am not saying there are no racists or racism but your painting of an entire group or class of people like Re****ks with your holier than thou racist paintbrush is the act of a racist.

One thing I admire about Obama is that he is always the first one to claim that something somebody said was not racial. I don't believe he is a racist and he would never play the racist card to get his way. I think a lot of people voted for him because of that.

But I still believe his policies can be wrong, irregardless of his race.

Does that make me a racist?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 01:19 PM

If you can claim anyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist, I can claim you have racist thoughts.

Remember when you use a word to mean something it doesn't mean, you have to pay it extra.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 01:35 PM

Have I been inconsistent, Bruce? I don't think so, not on the important things.

By important things I mean assessing actors, policies and actions against their large impact on the world. I mean supporting the key values of the Constitution and decrying efforts such as the Patriot act to erode them. Things of that order. If you are accusing me of inconsistency, it is probably because you believe I treat Obama with a different standard of performance than I did W. But there's an important difference which has to be figured into the equation. W was a dry alcoholic semi-infantile anti-intellectual uncurious partying fratboy with a "C" average. Obama was and is the opposite in all those things.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 02:08 PM

"By important things I mean assessing actors, policies and actions against their large impact on the world."


And you have failed to judge Obama's actions ( as you have judged Bush's) by these standards.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 06:19 PM

Well, I disagree with your blunt accusation, and I wonder how you would know.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 06:25 PM

By examination of the facts presented to you, and your conclusions.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 12:34 AM

Actors like Booth?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 03:54 PM

"...Today, the economy is growing. In fact, we've seen the fastest turnaround in growth in nearly three decades. But we have more work to do.

Until this progress is felt not just on Wall Street but Main Street we cannot be satisfied. Until the millions of our neighbors who are looking for work can find jobs, and wages are growing at a meaningful pace, we may be able to claim a recovery â€" but we will not have recovered.

And even as we seek to revive this economy, it is incumbent on us to rebuild it stronger than before. That means addressing some of the underlying problems that led to this turmoil and devastation in the first place.

One of the most significant contributors to this recession was a financial crisis as dire as any we've known in generations. And that crisis was born of a failure of responsibility â€" from Wall Street to Washington â€" that brought down many of the world's largest financial firms and nearly dragged our economy into a second Great Depression.

It was that failure of responsibility that I spoke about when I came to New York more than two years ago â€" before the worst of the crisis had unfolded. I take no satisfaction in noting that my comments have largely been borne out by the events that followed.

But I repeat what I said then because it is essential that we learn the lessons of this crisis, so we don't doom ourselves to repeat it.

And make no mistake, that is exactly what will happen if we allow this moment to pass â€" an outcome that is unacceptable to me and to the American people. As I said two years ago on this stage, I believe in the power of the free market. I believe in a strong financial sector that helps people to raise capital and get loans and invest their savings...."

Excerpt, President Barack Obama addressing New York VIPs at Cooper Union this week.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/04/22/2010-04-22_live_video_president_barack_obama_speaks_on_wall_street_reform_at_cooper_union_i.html#ixzz0lrPB9mR1

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 04:05 PM

These are the words of a socialist. Mm-hmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 07:37 PM

Jim Crow was purdy much all southern Democrat... So what??? I'm not a Democrat... I have pointed out that the Democratic party split itself up with the passage of the Civil Rights Act... Lyndon Johnson even said so... He said that in passing that bill that the Democratic Party would suffer for many years to come... He couldn't have been more correct as since the passage of the bill the South has been purdy much Republican territory...

As one who has always been interested in politics, I find it very interesting that the Democrats in Page County, Va. (where I live) tend to be the "hillbillies", many of whom come from families who were put off the mountain by FDR when the feds put in Skyline Drive and the Shenandoah National Park... One would think that it would be the opposite... Yeah, okay, they are a tad distrustfull of the fed but tend to be the Dems... And they are also very tolerant people... Don't wanta fight... Ain't all eat up with egos... The townies and valley folks tend to be Repub... Not too sure why this is but I keep askin' folks questions and am in hot pursuit of the story...

BTW, these people also like their moonshine, their pot and their mergals...

(Geeze, Bobert... That fits you to a tee...)

B~

So it does... No wonder why I like it up here...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 11:13 AM

""Whenever you refer to Jim Crow laws please add that they were created by Democrats over the objections of Republicans.""

Yeah! Way back when Republican and Democrat meant almost the exact opposite of what they do today.

Bad Luck Sawz

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 12:10 PM

Lyndon Johnson even said "I'll have them niggers voting Democratic for two hundred years"

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 01:20 PM

The Sheriff of Page County was a Repub and the sumbitch turned out to be as crooked and corrupt as any Democrat ever hoped to be. ;-D

Screw it. I'm headin' out for Almost Heaven.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 10:01 PM

Lyndon Johnson said alot of very stupid stuff by today's standards, Sawz... But Lyndon Johnson also had a soft spot... The "Great Society" wasn't about getting black votes to ol' softie Lyndon (former high school teacher) it was about doing something right that he would be remembered for having done...

I mean, we judge people on the body of their work... Not isolated incidents... Johnson was probaly the most crass (Nixon included) of any president we have ever had... That is a given... He was purdy much a redneck... But he did have this sense of purpose that trumped his crassness... It's not fair to judge a man so narrowly that we aren't able to appreciate the goodness in him...

Yeah, I was real pissed at Johnson for Vietnam until the day he told the nation he wasn't going to seek re-election... Yeah, Vietnam had worn him down... And then over time I realized just how anguished the man was...

Lyndon wasn't a perfect man but to have his life and what he did somehow narrowed down to one stupid statement is not only unfair to a great man but also not exactly how history will remember this guy...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:17 PM

When Trent Lott said something stupid it suddenly became the focus of his whole life. It overshadows every thing he has ever done.

But that was a different standard than the one used to judge LBJ.s racism.

LBJ: "Son, when I appoint a ni**er to the court, I want everyone to know he's a ni**er."

Yeah, LBJ was one of those politicians that saw the black vote as an election tool.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:20 PM

How dare he not be 50 years ahead of his time.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 09:27 PM

Trent Lott wasn't drummed out of politics for just one statement but a life time of dumbass statements for which he never seemed to figgure out were dumbass... Lyndon??? He was a changed man at the end of his life... Lott??? I don't think so....

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 10:04 PM

I guess it is important to really work hard to clarify these past issues, Sawz. Thanks for hanging back there...


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 10:56 AM

Interesting piece HERE

Be sure to also read the ignorant fools'comments which
follow.

Back to the Future- its 1960 all over again.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 12:18 PM

"a life time of dumbass statements"

Care to back that phony bulshit up Bobert or would you rather refuse and sidestep as usual?

Harry McPherson remembered, "And about five minutes later I heard (LBJ) say to some southerner . . . , "I'm going to have to bring up the ni**er bill again.""

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 01:49 PM

Lott is on the hot seat for telling a 100th birthday party for Thurmond, the South Carolina senator who in 1948 ran an overtly racist campaign for president on the State's Rights Party ticket: "I want to say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either."
Those remarks have caused a major stir, which is appropriate. But this is hardly the first time that Lott, who began his political career in the 1960s as an aide to segregationist Democratic Congressman William Colmer, has hailed the legacy of those who fought to defend the practices of slavery and segregation. Nor is the tortured "apology" Lott has issued the first to come from the senator.
Indeed, there is no greater constant in Trent Lott's political career than his embrace of all things Confederate.
To wit:
* In 1978, after his election to the US House, Lott led a successful campaign to have the US citizenship of Jefferson Davis restored. Davis lost his citizenship when he became president of the Confederate States of America when southern states were in open revolt against the US government.
* During the 1980 campaign, after Thurmond spoke at a Mississippi rally for Ronald Reagan, Lott said of the old Dixiecrat: "You know, if we had elected that man 30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today."
* In 1981, when he was lending his prestige as a member of the US Congress to an effort to preserve the tax-exempt status of Bob Jones University -- the notorious South Carolina college that was under fire for prohibiting interracial dating -- Lott insisted that, "Racial discrimination does not always violate public policy."
* Despite the fact that he represents the state with the largest percentage of African-American citizens in the US, Lott has throughout his career been an active supporter of the Sons of the Confederacy, a group that celebrates the soldiers who fought to defend the "right" of Mississippians to own African-Americans as slaves." Lott even appears in recruitment videos for the group.
* Speaking at a 1984 convention of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, Lott declared that "the spirit of Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican Platform." Asked to explain his statement in an interview with the extreme rightwing publication Southern Partisan, Lott said, "I think that a lot of the fundamental principles that Jefferson Davis believed in are very important to people across the country, and they apply to the Republican Party... and more of The South's sons, Jefferson Davis' descendants, direct or indirect, are becoming involved with the Republican party."
* Lott gave the keynote address at a 1992 national executive board meeting of the Council of Conservative Citizens, a successor organization to the old white Citizens Councils, segregation-era groups the Southern Poverty Law Center refers to as "the white-collar Ku Klux Klan. The C of CC may have changed its name, but it remains a passionate "white racialist" group that condemns intermarriage, integration and immigration by non-whites. As Boston Globe columnist Derrick Z. Jackson, who has researched the group, argues, "There is no question of the resegregationist agenda of the Council of Conservative Citizens when four of the seven links listed on the home page for former Klan leader David Duke link back to the Council of Conservative Citizens." Other links, Jackson has noted, "deny the Holocaust and sell T-shirts with swastikas and Nazi stormtrooper symbols." But when Lott appeared at that Greenwood, Mississippi, meeting of C of CC leaders, he did not address his disdain for racism or anti-Semitism. Rather, he discussed his concerns about "the dark forces" that he said were overwhelming America and said, "We need more meetings like this across the nation... The people in this room stand for the right principles and the right philosophy. Let's take it in the right direction and our children will be the beneficiaries."
* In 1997, Lott was photographed meeting with national leaders of the C of CC in his Washington office. At his side were two prominent C of CC leaders: Gordon Baum, a former field organizer for the Citizens Councils in the days when they were referred to as the "uptown Klan," and William Lord, who has acknowledged using the mailing lists of the Citizens Councils to build the C of CC in the 1980s and 1990s. That same year, the C of CC used an endorsement quote from Lott in recruitment literature.
* When the Washington Post began to detail Lott's ties to the C of CC, his office announced that he had "no firsthand knowledge of the group's views." But when The New York Times asked Lott's uncle, former Mississippi state Sen. Arnie Watson, a member of the C of CC executive board, about ties between the senator and the organization, Watson said, "Trent is an honorary member." When a reporter for the Jackson Clarion-Ledger showed up at a 1998 C of CC meeting in Mississippi, he was told by those in attendance that Lott was a member. Lott's office never challenged the report when it appeared in his homestate's largest newspaper. But a year later, when the Washington Post took the issue up, Lott said, "I have made my condemnation of the white supremacist and racist view of this group, or any group, clear."
* Yet, a column written by Lott still appeared on a regular basis in the Citizens Informer, the group's publication, alongside articles thick with statements like: "Western civilization, with all its might and glory, would never have achieved its greatness without the directing hand of God and the creative genius of the white race. Any effort to destroy the race by a mixture of black blood is an effort to destroy Western civilization itself."
* Go to the website of the Council of Conservative Citizens today and you will find, beneath the Confederate flag and the section attacking an African-American professor at Vanderbilt, a big smiling picture of the Mississippi senator next to headlines that read: "A Lott of Courage!" "C of CC Passes Resolution Commending Lott" and "Lott Needs Your Support."
When he started to face questions about his most recent praise of Thurmond's 1948 Dixiecrat campaign, Lott initially said that his remarks were just part of "a lighthearted celebration" of the retiring segregationist's career. That was enough for Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, to give Lott an initial pass. But, thankfully, Julian Bond and the NAACP, and a few African-American and progressive members of the House, refused to allow the matter to die. Only under this lingering pressure did Lott sort of apologize by saying of his statement at the Thurmond bash: "I regret the way it has been interpreted."
That's the standard line from Lott, who always apologizes when he gets caught defending the defenders of slavery and segregation. But, so far, Lott has never failed to follow each "apology" with another tribute to the Confederacy or the segregationists who seek even in the 21st century to maintain the racist legacy of Jefferson Davis, Strom Thurmond and the "uptown Klan."

---

n Congress Lott has rarely authored legislation, but he is seen as a master deal-maker behind the scenes. The insurance and oil industries are Lott's biggest campaign donors, and he has an almost perfect rating from the American Conservative Union. He has generally supported increased spending on the military, farm subsidies, and rural public-works projects, and opposed tax increases and programs that would help the poor. He supported a proposed constitutional amendment to prohibit school busing in 1979, and in 1983 he voted against a holiday honoring Martin Luther King, complaining about the cost.

In the 1990s, Lott spoke at five separate meetings of the Council of Conservative Citizens, a hate group that routinely describes blacks as "genetically inferior", calls gays and lesbians "perverted sodomites", and complains that immigrants are making the US a "slimy brown mass of glop". In 1998 he spoke at the Mississippi home of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, saying "Sometimes I feel closer to Jefferson Davis than any other man in America."

In 2002, Lott became suddenly controversial when he said at the 100th birthday party of Sen Strom Thurmond, "I want to say this about my state: when Strom Thurmond ran for President, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either." Lott was referring to Thurmond's 1948 campaign for President on the Dixiecrat ticket's platform of "racial integrity", endorsing segregation and miscegenation statutes, and opposing "social equality" in voting rights, law enforcement, and "the misnamed civil rights program". Thurmond's campaign fliers warned that if Harry S. Truman were re-elected, "anti-lynching and anti-segregation proposals will become the law of the land and our way of life in the South will be gone forever."

---

'NUFF SAID. THIS TOOK THREE MINUTES, SAWZ, AND YOU COULD HAVE DONE IT YOURSELF.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 05:02 PM

I doubt that Amos.

He suffers from a rare form of selective blindness, which prevents him from seeing anything which will expose his ignorance and bias.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 09:06 PM

Thanks, Amos... Sawz knows that I have limited computer skills and even less time to actually be on the thing... (Maybe a hour a day, sometimes less or not at all) so he tries to bully me 'cause he prolly doesn't work (and if so not like I do) and has lots of time to roll up lots of his "stink bombs" (BTW, Saws, that's proff that you were both Old Guy and Dickey and you can deny it but that "stink Bomb" think done blew up in yer face and got the stink all over you)... But I ain't worried about Saws trying to bully me 'casue I can't be bullied... Never have been... In the 8th grade there was this kid who have failed so many grades that he was like 17 years old and outweighed me by a hundred pounds and decided that he was gonna try to bully me, too, so in English class he sucker punched me so hard in the face that everything just went black... Yeah, he got suspended for it.... 'Bout a month later in the boy's locker room I jumped Mr. Bully and got in at least a dozen punches on him before he got me controlled and was startin' a land a few of his own and the gym teachers broke it up... Mr. Bully never messed witrh me again... I'd use his name but, just incase he ever got educated somewhat and might Google up his name, I don't want to embarrass him... But his initials are C.C.

Lott, unlike Lyndon or Robert Bryd,has never shown that he finally got it... I can forgive a man if he he changes course... Lott never changed course...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 11:12 PM

Bobert:

Threatening or inflicting physical harm is bullying.

Asking people to back up their claims is not bullying.

I have shown posts of yours demanding that others respond to your question and then accusing them of subterfuge, evasive BS being full of hate because they would not answer your straight up question.

I am not doing anything you don't do.

You have a right to your opinion but when you claim something is a fact you should be able to have a source of that fact. Otherwise it is your opinion or belief.

At least Amos finally admits it when he presents something that is not correct and I respect him for that.

I have no problems with admitting when I am wrong when presented with the facts.

When you resort to claiming I need a shrink, you leave the door wide open for my diagnoses of your inability to answer straight forward questions except with subterfuge and evasive BS.

Have I ever dodged one of your questions? The only questions I don't answer are the complex questions that are based on the assumption that something is true or not true. And I state why I believe it is a complex question.

I believe the reason you post those outlandish "facts" is because you want people to argue with you about their veracity. But you also like to win the argument and you get hostile when you can't and the other person does not give up.

And you want an ego building fan club to defend your "facts".

It seems to me that people would want to be factual and well informed rather that belligerent and uninformed.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 11:14 PM

Over 700 killed in 44 drone strikes in 2009

PESHAWAR: Of the 44 predator strikes carried out by US drones in the tribal areas of Pakistan over the past 12 months, only five were able to hit their actual targets, killing five key Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders, but at the cost of over 700 innocent civilians.

According to the statistics compiled by Pakistani authorities, the Afghanistan-based US drones killed 708 people in 44 predator attacks targeting the tribal areas between January 1 and December 31, 2009.

For each Al Qaeda and Taliban terrorist killed by US drones, 140 innocent Pakistanis also had to die. Over 90 per cent of those killed in the deadly missile strikes were civilians, claim authorities.....

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 08:42 AM

Sorry, Sawz, but what you do is well beyond asking people to back up their claims.... You nit-pick insignificant parts of my posts that have little or nothin to do with the geberal flow of a thread and try to turn that insignificant part into the new topic of the thread... On my end it is harassment but to others who are trying to allow a thread to follow the topic it is downright rude and borish...

If you disagree with something that I say then ask yerself if making a fedearl case over it serves the thread or serves Sawz ego... If it's the later of the two, start anew thread about whatever nit-picking you wnat to do...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 03:53 PM

"The Obama administration said Tuesday it would provide more information to Congress about the Fort Hood shootings but continued to defy a subpoena request for witness statements and other documents.

After days of negotiations, the Pentagon and Justice Department informed a Senate committee that they would not comply with congressional subpoenas to share investigative records from the Nov. 5 shootings at Fort Hood, Tex., which killed 13 people. The agencies said that divulging the material could jeopardize their prosecution of Army Maj. Nidal M. Hasan, the accused gunman.

The Pentagon did budge in other areas, however, saying it had agreed to give the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs access to Hasan's personnel file, as well as part of an Army report that scrutinized why superiors failed to intervene in Hasan's career as an Army psychiatrist, despite signs of his religious radicalization and shortcomings as a soldier.

Leslie Phillips, a spokeswoman for the Senate committee, called the refusal by the Pentagon and the Justice Department to hand over all the requested material "an affront to Congress's constitutional obligation to conduct independent oversight of the executive branch."

She said the committee, chaired by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), was still deciding whether to pursue the subpoenas in court. The committee has complained that the Obama administration has been stonewalling it for months over its Hasan probe, prompting it to issue the subpoenas April 19.

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said the Defense Department has tried to cooperate as much as possible with the Senate investigation.


He said that Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III spoke Friday with Lieberman and Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), the committee's ranking Republican, in an attempt to resolve the dispute but added that he didn't know whether the Obama administration's offer would be enough to satisfy the panel.

"We feel as though we have leaned very far forward," Morrell said. "This is as far as we are prepared to go." "

---

For once, I feel I really am showing a double standard, just to make Bruce's day. If this story had been published about W's administration I would have been certain it was creeping fascism raising its ugly head.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 12:09 AM

Amos, you're as bad as Sawz. Where is this quote from, and what conclusions do you wish for us to draw from it?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:45 PM

Sorry, man.

Source: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/.../AR2010042704501.html

Conclusions: Draw as you prefer.


Elsewhere, the President instructs in the art of basic citizenship:

(NYT) "The president told students and others in the audience Ñ the school stopping giving out tickets once 80,000 were distributed Ñ that debates about the size and role of government are as old as the republic itself.

"But it troubles me when I hear people say that all of government is inherently bad," said Obama, who received an honorary doctor of laws degree. "For when our government is spoken of as some menacing, threatening foreign entity, it conveniently ignores the fact in our democracy, government is us."

Obama didn't mention Palin in the speech, according to remarks the White House released in advance, nor was there any reference to the tea party movement. Palin, a potential Obama opponent in 2012, told activists that "big government" led by Obama's White House has become "intrusive" in Americans' lives.

In Obama's view, there are some things that only government can do.
Government, he said, is the roads we drive on and the speed limits that keep us safe. It's the men and women in the military, the inspectors in our mines, the pioneering researchers in public universities.

The financial meltdown dramatically showed the dangers of too little government, he said, "when a lack of accountability on Wall Street nearly led to the collapse of our entire economy."

Obama told both sides in the political debate to tone it down. "Phrases like 'socialist' and 'Soviet-style takeover,' 'fascist' and 'right-wing nut' may grab headlines," he said. But such language "closes the door to the possibility of compromise."
That kind of passion isn't new, he acknowledged. Politics in America, he said, "has never been for the thin-skinned or the faint of heart. ... If you enter the arena, you should expect to get roughed up."

Obama hoped the graduates hearing his words can avoid cynicism and brush off the overheated noise of politics. In fact, he said, they should seek out opposing views.
His advice: If you're a regular Glenn Beck listener, then check out the Huffington Post sometimes. If you read The New York Times editorial page the morning, then glance every now and then at The Wall Street Journal.

"It may make your blood boil. Your mind may not often be changed. But the practice of listening to opposing views is essential for effective citizenship," he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:37 PM

U.S. Economy Grew at a 3.2% Annual Rate in First Quarter

The United States economy continued to expand in the first
quarter, but economists cautioned that the pace of growth is
still not nearly fast enough to recover ground lost during
the recession.

National output grew at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of
3.2 percent last quarter, after growth of 5.6 percent in the
fourth quarter of 2009 and 2.2 percent in the third quarter.

The steady growth has quelled fears that the downturn is not
quite over. Consumers were a major contributor to the
expansion last quarter. Consumer spending grew at an annual
rate of 3.6 percent in the first part of the year, after
growing at an annual rate of 1.6 percent in the previous
three months.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com?emc=na

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:43 PM

I see Bobert did not back up his claims, Amos did and he did a fine job. So fine that it leads me to believe he was originally a Democrat.

"Lott was raised as a Democrat. He served as administrative assistant to House Rules Committee chairman William M. Colmer, also of Pascagoula, from 1968 to 1972.

In 1972, Colmer, one of the most conservative Democrats in the House, announced his retirement after 40 years in Congress. He endorsed Lott as his successor in Mississippi's 5th District"

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 May 10 - 11:18 AM

Hot diggety dang! There's a pair of cardinals at my feeder.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 03 May 10 - 12:48 PM

Sawz, you're bouncing off the walls again. What the hell does 1972 and Lott have to do with this thread?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 03 May 10 - 05:39 PM

Not a Lott.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 04 May 10 - 12:52 AM

Well Amos. You posted about a page and a half about Lott so you must think it is important.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 04 May 10 - 12:59 AM

Who is going to bail out the US?

WSJ

Then there's the United States which, like Greece and Britain, is facing double-digit deficits. In February, the Obama administration predicted an eye-popping $1.6 trillion deficit for this year, or 11.2% of GDP. Barring an unexpected windfall, the federal government will borrow fully 40% of the $3.6 trillion it is on course to spend this fiscal year. The administration's response? It passed a new $1 trillion health-care entitlement and asserted that this new spending would lower the deficit over the coming decade...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 May 10 - 09:23 AM

Right now there are 3 goldfinches and a couple of mourning doves balancing their respective budgets at the feeders in the backyard. They are masters of fiscal responsiblity.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 04 May 10 - 11:14 AM

Nation's GDP grows at 3.2% rate in first quarter

LA Times Apr 30

The economy grew 3.2% in the first quarter of the year, the Commerce Department reported Friday, another indication a steady, though modest, recovery has taken hold.

The annualized rate of growth of the gross domestic product -- the nation's total production of goods and services -- was down from the 5.6% rate of the last three months of 2009. But that had been expected as the effect of the federal government's stimulus policies peaked during that period.

"We're still running on the fumes of stimulus in the U.S. economy," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial in Chicago. "It's a recovery, but by any standard is still a muted recovery. But we're thankful to have what we've got," given the depth of the recession, she said.

The median forecast for first quarter GDP was 3.4%, according to a survey of economists by Thomson Reuters, and Friday's figure fell below that. But that projection reflected more bullish sentiment about the economy in recent weeks. The National Assn. of Business Economics had forecast in February that first-quarter GDP would be 3%.

The GDP growth rate released Friday by the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis is only modest, but still is a dramatic improvement over the same period last year. At the bottom of the recession, the U.S. economy shrank 6.4% in the first quarter of 2009.

That was the low point for the deepest recession since the 1930s, which began in December 2007. Economic growth returned last summer when the third-quarter GDP increased at an annualized rate of 2.2%.

"I think its well in line with expectations," Swonk said of the first-quarter figure. "The recovery's more broad-based. Although the momentum slowed quite a bit from the fourth quarter, the consumer showed up and we had a lot of demand, which is good."

The Bureau of Economic Analysis said growth was boosted in the first quarter by consumer spending. Real personal consumption expenditures increased 3.6%, compared with a 1.6% increase in the last three months of 2009.

Despite three straight quarters of economic growth, the recession still has not been declared officially over. The National Bureau of Economic Research, which determines the lengths of business cycles, said this month that it "would be premature" to set a date marking the end of the recession and the start of an economic expansion.

A major reason for that decision was the still-high unemployment rate.

Although job growth returned in March, with the economy creating 162,000 jobs, the national unemployment rate remained at 9.7%. The figure is higher in many states, including California, which reached a new high of 12.6% in March, tied for third-worst in the nation. The state trailed only Michigan's 14.1% jobless rate and Nevada's 13.4% figure, and was tied with Rhode Island.

"At the end of the day, none of this really matters unless we can get the employment machine going, which is coming, but very slowly," Swonk said.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 07 May 10 - 10:38 AM

A dialogue at the New York Times:


"David Brooks: Gail, would you mind if I praised Barack Obama today? I thought not. I'm feeling grateful to the prez these days because we happen to be in the middle of a bunch of midsized crises. There's the oil spill in the Gulf (which is verging on a big crisis, I guess). There's the Times Square bomber. There are various floods in Tennessee and elsewhere. The European Union is falling apart over the Greek debt crisis, and so on and so on.

It's good to have a president with equipoise.
It seems to me that Obama is handling his role, which ranges from the marginal to the significant, in these events with calm professionalism. He's active yet not annoying. He's not taking credit for everything. He's not creating friction by making any missteps. He is calm, cool and collected.

Gail Collins: Please, feel free to applaud the president as much as you like. But I'm sorry I can't return the favor when it comes to the Republicans. All we're hearing is carping or sullen silence. And there's John McCain, complaining again about giving the alleged Times Square bomber his Miranda rights. (Nothing worse than handling a prisoner in a way that will make it possible to take him to trial.) And while it's not exactly in the same category with Rush Limbaugh's claim that the administration wanted a big oil spill, I was kind of bemused by the House minority leader, John Boehner, who seems to be claiming that a monster spill demonstrates our need for more offshore drilling.

David Brooks: Sometimes people fault Obama for being too cool. I can see their point 5 percent of the time, but 95 percent of the time, it's good to have a president with equipoise. Times like this — with stuff bubbling in all directions — are typical.

This is why people elected him over McCain.
Gail Collins: Well, this is why people elected him. When the economy collapsed they looked at him and McCain and decided in about three seconds which one they wanted running the show in a crisis.

David Brooks: When the oil thing blew, he mobilized what he could, he delegated authority, especially to the Coast Guard, and he reminded the world that even amid disasters like this, we still need a variety of energy sources.

Gail Collins: Certainly true, but I suspect we won't be hearing a whole lot of "drill, baby, drill" in the near future.

David Brooks: It took a long time to get to the point when we stopped debating which energy source was best and started agreeing that we need a lot of different sources. The debate went from "x or y" to "x and y." We could have lost that near-consensus, but Obama kept his head, while still putting pressure on BP. Those are small acts of statesmanship, but valuable ones.

I especially appreciate this because I have never been able to assign moral value to different energy sources. "

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 10 - 11:56 AM

How interesting it is to watch people fling large chunks of other people's words at each other. Not.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 May 10 - 12:11 PM

Yeah. ;-) Gets pretty tedious, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 07 May 10 - 09:00 PM

Yeah.... Even I'm out...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 May 10 - 11:40 PM

Obama's 'no tax hike' pledge on the line

My fellow members of the President's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and I met for the first time on April 27. Like many Americans, I wonder if the commission is an attempt by the Obama administration to sweep the spending and debt crisis under the rug until after the November election or provide political cover for a massive tax increase, perhaps through a European-style value-added tax (VAT). Then again, it might represent a sincere effort and unique opportunity to save America from a fiscal crisis of historic proportions. Only time will tell.

However, I was encouraged to hear the president reiterate during our meeting with him that "everything" must be on the table. Let us hope that "everything" includes more than token spending reductions and reforms. If not, in order to solve the debt crisis, the president will likely be forced to again break his "no tax increase" pledge to families making less than $250,000 a year.

According to the Office of Management and Budget, federal revenues have averaged 18 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and federal spending has averaged 20 percent of GDP since World War II. Over the last few years as tax revenue has fallen, federal spending exploded to 24.7 percent of GDP in 2009 to create the largest debt and deficit since World War II. CBO data shows that the president's fiscal year 2011 budget will result in a debt of 90 percent of GDP at the end of the decade, more than double its historic norm of 43 percent. Greece could prove to be a preview of coming attractions to Main Street, USA.

Despite the president's claim to the contrary, the chief actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services recently certified the president's new health care plan actually increases national health care costs, adding another unsustainable entitlement program to the existing "Big 3" unsustainable entitlement programs - Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. These programs will help drive federal spending to approximately 40 percent of GDP over the course of the next generation, according to CBO's 2009 Long-Term Budget Outlook.

To tackle this crisis mainly or, in a worst-case scenario, solely on the tax side, would be a huge mistake, or simply impossible.

First, it is important to note that, unless Congress and the president intervene, under current law, taxes will increase, including taxes for families who earn under $250,000. The 2001 and 2003 tax relief is scheduled to expire at the end of this year. For many Americans, the dividend tax will increase 164 percent and the capital-gains tax will increase from 15 percent to 20 percent. The alternative minimum tax is due to hit millions. The death tax will revert from nothing to confiscatory levels, and at least 18 new taxes in the new health care law, including a new 3.8 percent investment tax, will soon follow.

What if Congress intervened and tried to limit tax increases to just those households earning $250,000 or more annually? A study by the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center estimated that to reduce the deficit to 2 percent of GDP under the administration's baseline, in 2019 those households making over $250,000 would see the top two marginal tax rates rise to 85.7 percent and 90.9 percent.

The more likely scenario is that, according to the CBO, to finance current projected spending only on the tax side, assuming current policies continue, all taxpayers would be punished by requiring the 10 percent bracket to increase to 25 percent, the 25 percent bracket to jump to 63 percent, and the 35 percent rate to rise to 88 percent. The CBO noted "such tax rates would significantly reduce economic activity and would create serious problems with tax avoidance and tax evasion," which understates the point.

Former CBO Director Robert Reischauer testified before the commission that the fiscal crisis is so serious that, "raising taxes on the rich or corporations ... simply won't be enough." Another former CBO head, Rudolph Penner, told the commission that if we maintain current federal spending patterns and stabilize the debt at 60 percent of GDP, the U.S. total tax burden would be higher than today's Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development average by midcentury and that a few years after that we would be "the highest-taxed nation on Earth."

Without intervention from Congress and the president, taxes on all Americans, including families making less than $250,000, are due to increase. If the president is serious about fiscal responsibility, he needs to either roll up his sleeves on the spending side or be prepared to acknowledge that his "no tax increase" promise to those households making under $250,000 has already been broken.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 11 May 10 - 12:25 AM

Barack Obama September 16, 2008:
"This morning, instead of offering up concrete plans to solve these issues, Senator McCain offered up the oldest Washington stunt in the book. You pass the buck to a commission to study the problem."

Obama passes the buck:

Feb. 18, 2010: A bipartisan commission on fiscal responsibility and reform came into being Thursday when U.S. President Barack Obama signed an executive order.

And appoints a lobbyist to the commission who's organization gathered $60 million for his election campaign:

Andy Stern has become an influential figure under the new administration after endorsing Obama in the Democratic primary, while the other main axis of Labor's political power, the AFL-CIO (whose political committee is led by AFSCME's Gerald McEntee) endorsed Clinton. SEIU went on to pour millions into Obama's campaign, and the AFL-CIO (now led by President Richard Trumka) went on to back Obama in the general election.

Oddly enough, SEIU actually lobbied against the creation of a bipartisan deficit commission when it was being considered in the Senate.