Since President Obama feels the need to hold a press conference to congratulate himself on lasting 100 days in office (thus moving Scrubs from tonight AND most likely causing Lost to start late) I figure I should pitch in and compile my own list of the presidents fine achievements in these first 100 days.
1. He spent more money in his first 100 days than some presidents spent in their entire terms.
2. He has signed an order to close the military prison at Guantanimo Bay, releasing hundreds of terrorists onto US streets and streets of any country who is stupid enough to accept them.
3. He has given al Queda our interrogation playbook and manipulated Americans to think that a caterpillar constitutes torture.
4. He has become more attached to a TelePrompTer than I am to my own appendages.
5. He broke all codes of behavior upon meeting the Queen of England
5a. He gave the Queen of England an iPod...full of his own speeches.
6. He gave the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom dvds...that were region 1 and would not play on Gordon Brown's region 2 DVD player.
7.He bowed to the leader of Saudi Arabia.
8. He is now BFFs with Hugo Chavez
9. He has repeatedly ruined my television watching schedule with his horribly-timed press conferences and addresses to the nation. Yes, I am bitter.
Those are the most important achievements, I think. 100 days down, 1360 to go. But, you know, I'm not counting or eagerly anticipating it or anything.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Quick Question
If there is a war against swine flu, will the Obama Administration call it the "Global Struggle Against Infectious and Violent Diseases" instead of the "War on Swine Flu"?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
How Far Can We Go?
The Obama administration has made the massive mistake of releasing documents outlining US interrogation techniques since September 11, 2001. Oddly enough, they have forgotten to release the accompanying documents that show the success of these interrogations. Former Vice-President Dick Cheny has been giving interviews, discrediting the administration's claims that these techniques did not work, and calling for them to own up to the memos showing the success of these techniques.
While it is an immense National Security threat to allow al Queda and others the ability to see step-by-step guides to US interrogation techniques, it is an even graver thing for the President of the United States to say that he is "open" to the idea of going after former President Bush and others in his administration for the "torture" of enemy combatants. He will not go after the people who actually did the torturing, however, because they "were just following orders."
Hmmm...we didn't fall for that trick with Nazis, but I guess it's ok when the president just wants to seek some sort of revenge on the previous administration.
I'm going to come right out and say it: sometimes, torture is necessary. It is not good, but it is necessary. Do you think that al Queda or other terror groups would think twice about using techniques far worse than the US has ever used on an American soldier they capture? No, they wouldn't even think about not using it.
And no, using torture does not make the US less of a leader or just like other countries and organizations. It merely evens the playing field. I do not believe that risking the lives of thousands, if not millions of people is worth not using every option to gain intelligence from a terror suspect. These people are not protected under the Geneva Convention. They are not fighting in an organized military, or for a country. They are rogue, evil, terrorists.
President Obama, however, does not seem to feel the same. And if something tragic does happen, I will have to begrudgingly say I told you so.
But really, the point of this is not to go after the Bush Administration (hrm...I seem to remember Candidate Obama talking about how he was looking to the future, not dealing with the past...). This is an attempt to change the focus. President Obama failed to get anything done at the G20, he is failing to fully address the economic crisis, and, most importantly, Rahm Immanuel, his Chief of Staff, is playing damage control by distracting America from the Presidents MASSIVE snafu at the Conference of the Americas and his becoming BFF's with socialist leader and human rights violator Hugo Chavez. Immanuel is killing two birds with one stone, he is getting the Bush Administration, and making President Obama look like the good guy.
America seems to be wising up though. The president's approval rating has dropped from 70% on inauguration day to 54%. 50% of Americans view the tea parties favorably, and a whopping 54% of moderate democrats view the tea parties favorably. Maybe there is hope, after all.
While it is an immense National Security threat to allow al Queda and others the ability to see step-by-step guides to US interrogation techniques, it is an even graver thing for the President of the United States to say that he is "open" to the idea of going after former President Bush and others in his administration for the "torture" of enemy combatants. He will not go after the people who actually did the torturing, however, because they "were just following orders."
Hmmm...we didn't fall for that trick with Nazis, but I guess it's ok when the president just wants to seek some sort of revenge on the previous administration.
I'm going to come right out and say it: sometimes, torture is necessary. It is not good, but it is necessary. Do you think that al Queda or other terror groups would think twice about using techniques far worse than the US has ever used on an American soldier they capture? No, they wouldn't even think about not using it.
And no, using torture does not make the US less of a leader or just like other countries and organizations. It merely evens the playing field. I do not believe that risking the lives of thousands, if not millions of people is worth not using every option to gain intelligence from a terror suspect. These people are not protected under the Geneva Convention. They are not fighting in an organized military, or for a country. They are rogue, evil, terrorists.
President Obama, however, does not seem to feel the same. And if something tragic does happen, I will have to begrudgingly say I told you so.
But really, the point of this is not to go after the Bush Administration (hrm...I seem to remember Candidate Obama talking about how he was looking to the future, not dealing with the past...). This is an attempt to change the focus. President Obama failed to get anything done at the G20, he is failing to fully address the economic crisis, and, most importantly, Rahm Immanuel, his Chief of Staff, is playing damage control by distracting America from the Presidents MASSIVE snafu at the Conference of the Americas and his becoming BFF's with socialist leader and human rights violator Hugo Chavez. Immanuel is killing two birds with one stone, he is getting the Bush Administration, and making President Obama look like the good guy.
America seems to be wising up though. The president's approval rating has dropped from 70% on inauguration day to 54%. 50% of Americans view the tea parties favorably, and a whopping 54% of moderate democrats view the tea parties favorably. Maybe there is hope, after all.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Tea Time
Today, thousands if not millions of Americans expressed their displeasure with the government with Tax Day Tea Parties. In my hometown of Lafayette, IN, protesters threw hundreds of teabags into the Wabash River. In my current residence of Bloomington, people gathered outside of Representative Baron Hill's office. All over the nation, people gathered, chanted, and raised signs together.
It is important to realize that these parties are not political. Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, liberals. All stand together at these rallies to express their anger and outrage. They feel government has grown too large, that taxes have risen too high, and that we have spent enough money helping out companies that refuse to help themselves.
We have not seen something of this scale since the protests against the Vietnam War. People claim that the participants should not claim they are having tea parties, as the Boston Tea Party was held over the principle of no taxation without representation. To those participating in these parties, they feel that they are not being represented in government. And for the most part, I have to agree with them. Congress is going unchecked, as they and the president are of the same political party, so there is nothing to stop any far-left agendas from going through. I believe that while many people voted for change, they did not know that they were voting for people who were for such large expansion of government and spending.
I do have one qualm. While people complain about having high taxes, they offer no alternatives. They offer no list of government programs to cut funding for, or eliminate all together. They don't want to continue funding government bailouts, but they may not necessarily want companies to go bankrupt either.
It remains to be seen if these parties will have a lasting affect on government. ABC News reported that President Obama was unaware of the parties, so I doubt he will change any policy because of them. The parties will only have a lasting impact if the people behind them continue them. Parties, marches, anything. If they truly feel that they are being disenfranchised, then they must continue to have their voices heard, even if the mainstream media chooses to ignore them.
It is important to realize that these parties are not political. Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, liberals. All stand together at these rallies to express their anger and outrage. They feel government has grown too large, that taxes have risen too high, and that we have spent enough money helping out companies that refuse to help themselves.
We have not seen something of this scale since the protests against the Vietnam War. People claim that the participants should not claim they are having tea parties, as the Boston Tea Party was held over the principle of no taxation without representation. To those participating in these parties, they feel that they are not being represented in government. And for the most part, I have to agree with them. Congress is going unchecked, as they and the president are of the same political party, so there is nothing to stop any far-left agendas from going through. I believe that while many people voted for change, they did not know that they were voting for people who were for such large expansion of government and spending.
I do have one qualm. While people complain about having high taxes, they offer no alternatives. They offer no list of government programs to cut funding for, or eliminate all together. They don't want to continue funding government bailouts, but they may not necessarily want companies to go bankrupt either.
It remains to be seen if these parties will have a lasting affect on government. ABC News reported that President Obama was unaware of the parties, so I doubt he will change any policy because of them. The parties will only have a lasting impact if the people behind them continue them. Parties, marches, anything. If they truly feel that they are being disenfranchised, then they must continue to have their voices heard, even if the mainstream media chooses to ignore them.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Pay No Attention to that Money Behind the Curtain
While everyone was focusing on the AIG brouhaha yesterday, a far more serious thing was happening. The US treasury decided to put $1 trillion in to the system by buying up its own bad debt.
This is the same as writing an IOU to yourself. They are taking a trillion dollars from one pocket, and putting it into another pocket. Nothing gets accomplished, and there is still money owed to people.
But no one heard about this, because everyone: congress, the media, the president, were focused on AIG paying :gasp: contractually obligated bonuses to its employees! Bonuses that were perfectly legal because they were promised before the February 1st deadline passed by congress!
Imagine that, a company holding up its end of the deal and fulfilling its contracts! Oh my! Sound the alarm! We need to tax these bonuses at 100% and get this money back! How dare they use the money we gave them to fulfill their contractual obligations!
What else? Oh, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac ALSO used bailout money to pay contractually obligated bonuses to their employees. Why are people not running after them with torches and pitchforks?
Really, it's all the fed can do at this point. Interest rates range between 0 and .25%, so they can't really go any lower. The US Treasury Department currently consists only of the completely incompetent Tim Geithner as Treasury Secretary, and President Obama apparently has much more important things to attend to: like appearing on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
This country is falling apart at the seems. At the G20 conference, a meeting of the top 20 industrialized nations, former Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin will propose changing the world bank reserve currency from the US dollar to something else. The dollar has lost all it's clout in the world. Gold rose $50 an ounce yesterday upon news of the Treasury's plan.
The rest of the world wants no part of the US dollar, because they've read a middle school history book and remember the pictures of people bringing wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread in Germany Post-World War I. Obviously Secretary Geithner and President Obama never read that chapter. And we are all going to pay for that in the end.
This is the same as writing an IOU to yourself. They are taking a trillion dollars from one pocket, and putting it into another pocket. Nothing gets accomplished, and there is still money owed to people.
But no one heard about this, because everyone: congress, the media, the president, were focused on AIG paying :gasp: contractually obligated bonuses to its employees! Bonuses that were perfectly legal because they were promised before the February 1st deadline passed by congress!
Imagine that, a company holding up its end of the deal and fulfilling its contracts! Oh my! Sound the alarm! We need to tax these bonuses at 100% and get this money back! How dare they use the money we gave them to fulfill their contractual obligations!
What else? Oh, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac ALSO used bailout money to pay contractually obligated bonuses to their employees. Why are people not running after them with torches and pitchforks?
Really, it's all the fed can do at this point. Interest rates range between 0 and .25%, so they can't really go any lower. The US Treasury Department currently consists only of the completely incompetent Tim Geithner as Treasury Secretary, and President Obama apparently has much more important things to attend to: like appearing on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
This country is falling apart at the seems. At the G20 conference, a meeting of the top 20 industrialized nations, former Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin will propose changing the world bank reserve currency from the US dollar to something else. The dollar has lost all it's clout in the world. Gold rose $50 an ounce yesterday upon news of the Treasury's plan.
The rest of the world wants no part of the US dollar, because they've read a middle school history book and remember the pictures of people bringing wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread in Germany Post-World War I. Obviously Secretary Geithner and President Obama never read that chapter. And we are all going to pay for that in the end.
Entertainer In Chief?
News reached today that President OBama will be appearing on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno this week to sell his economic policies to the american people.
Someone needs to give this guy the message that he already won and doesn't need to campaign. Is anyone else not ok with their sitting president appearing on talk shows to sell his policies? I am no OK with my president being equal to some C-list celeb pimping out their latest piece of crap movie.
Or, when I think about it, Obama's economic policies are about on par quality wise with Paul Blart: Mall Cop, so I guess this is the perfect venue for him.
Someone needs to give this guy the message that he already won and doesn't need to campaign. Is anyone else not ok with their sitting president appearing on talk shows to sell his policies? I am no OK with my president being equal to some C-list celeb pimping out their latest piece of crap movie.
Or, when I think about it, Obama's economic policies are about on par quality wise with Paul Blart: Mall Cop, so I guess this is the perfect venue for him.
Republican Hypocrisy
Yes, you read that title correctly: I'm taking on my own party. However, this is a pretty common thing, despite perceptions of me and my politics. I'm pro gay rights, pro stem cell research, and pro gun control just to name a few disagreements I have with the Republican Party. However, these disagreements are overwhelmed by my agreements with the party's platform.
That, however, is for another post. Right now my beef is the republicans and this $418-ish billion spending bill with 9000 earmarks. Guess what...60% of those earmarks are from democrats. But, if elementary school math serves me correctly, that leaves 40% of the earmarks going to republicans.
I find it almost reprehensible that republicans are stalling the bill and going on television talking about how much they are against this bill and all of the pork in it. However, as soon as it passes they are going to be completely happy to take all the earmark money they receive and take it back to their constituents.
I agree with Senator John McCain- some of these earmarks are necesary and would do good. However, they are directed to a specific geographic location. If they were nation-wide projects they would be more accepted and do more good, but as they are they are lumps of fat in an omnibus spending bill.
Don't get me wrong, I am totally opposed to this. Yes, the government runs out of money on Wednesday, but they've spend like, five years worth of money in two months. You can only print so much money before people stop using it because it's worth less than the paper its printed on, but the government doesn't seem to realize this. I am considering sending President Obama and Senator Pelosi a chapter from a world history book that talks about Germany's economic policies after World War I, so that they can see what happens when money is printed off willy nilly. I doubt it would do any good, as they can't seem to read reports about our own, current economy.
The bill is going to pass. All republicans can do is get popular support against it and hope that their hypocrisy is not pointed out. If the courts gave President Obama the power of line-item veto, maybe that would solve the problem. That, however, is a blog for another day.
That, however, is for another post. Right now my beef is the republicans and this $418-ish billion spending bill with 9000 earmarks. Guess what...60% of those earmarks are from democrats. But, if elementary school math serves me correctly, that leaves 40% of the earmarks going to republicans.
I find it almost reprehensible that republicans are stalling the bill and going on television talking about how much they are against this bill and all of the pork in it. However, as soon as it passes they are going to be completely happy to take all the earmark money they receive and take it back to their constituents.
I agree with Senator John McCain- some of these earmarks are necesary and would do good. However, they are directed to a specific geographic location. If they were nation-wide projects they would be more accepted and do more good, but as they are they are lumps of fat in an omnibus spending bill.
Don't get me wrong, I am totally opposed to this. Yes, the government runs out of money on Wednesday, but they've spend like, five years worth of money in two months. You can only print so much money before people stop using it because it's worth less than the paper its printed on, but the government doesn't seem to realize this. I am considering sending President Obama and Senator Pelosi a chapter from a world history book that talks about Germany's economic policies after World War I, so that they can see what happens when money is printed off willy nilly. I doubt it would do any good, as they can't seem to read reports about our own, current economy.
The bill is going to pass. All republicans can do is get popular support against it and hope that their hypocrisy is not pointed out. If the courts gave President Obama the power of line-item veto, maybe that would solve the problem. That, however, is a blog for another day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)