Because he won't post any of the BAD things Obama does.. I still don't see his apologizing to Europe and the Arabs on the list.
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
Once again, please post information about Mr Obama activities. This is the purpose of the thread.
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
Like a previous poster said - Why haven't you included some of the negative things he has done? Like increasing taxes on tobacco? Or his crawling to the UN who didn't respond for like 9 days to the North Korea nuclear launch. Yeah I know a few of these things might be considered negative which is why you won't post them. If you are going to create this 'list' of things Obama has done and you want it to be considered even remotely credible you have to include both sides not just the things YOU like. Of course anything negative you would just spin to be positive.. like him apologizing for America's arrogance, or accepting books from Chavez which in part blame America for Latin America's problems and calling it a 'nice gesture'.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Obama looks like he's becoming quite the pragmatist...I like that and hope he keeps it up. :thumbsup: His real test will be when a SCOTUS position opens up.
Umm.. any debate here? It will be an extreme left person, just like most of his cabinet. My guess is the person will not have paid their taxes.
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the liberal members of the SC up there in age? To keep balance it would make sense to replace them with those of similar view.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
I would like to see something along the lines of the left's equivalent to Sandra Day O'Connor...not the political antithesis of a Robert Bork.
I think Obama's nominees will make O'Conner look like Renquist. But yes, we'll need to wait and see.. unfortunately by then it will be too late to undo the damage.
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
I have posted what he has done not how you or anyone else judges his activities. There are plenty of threads on this forum dedicated to evaluating Mr Obama's actions and words.
If you have information that I have missed please feel to post it, but include links.
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
Week Of April 20
Day 91 (April 20): Obama Holds First Cabinet Meeting, Thanks CIA
Day 92 (April 21): Obama Says Prosecution Of Bush Officials Possible
Day 93 (April 22): Obama Lauds Energy Plan On Earth Day
Day 94 (April 23): Obama Meets With Credit Card Execs
Day 91 (April 20): Obama Holds First Cabinet Meeting, Thanks CIA
Day 92 (April 21): Obama Says Prosecution Of Bush Officials Possible
Day 93 (April 22): Obama Lauds Energy Plan On Earth Day
Day 94 (April 23): Obama Meets With Credit Card Execs
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
This is close to Mr Obama's 100th day in office. I am going to post a number a analyses of this benchmark period.:
Obama's first 100 days in office haven't been quiet
Obama's first 100 days in office haven't been quiet
Buzz Up Send
WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama's first 100 days on the job exploded with activity on many fronts: the $787 billion economic stimulus, the order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison within a year, a withdrawal plan for Iraq , an expansion of U.S. forces in Afghanistan , and outreach to several hostile nations.
Still, America's economic crisis largely shaped these 100 days. It also empowered Obama, even as it overshadowed some of what he'd hoped to do.
"The ability to enlarge executive power is a function of crisis," said Ross K. Baker , a Rutgers University political scientist. He'll help lead a national conference next month on Obama's first 100 days, a traditional measure for new presidents since Franklin D. Roosevelt's ambitious new administration in 1933.
Obama has benefitted from "a double lift-off," Baker said, "not only the normal honeymoon but, in addition, the fact that the American people and Congress are looking to him to get them out of a crisis."
Whether the new president will succeed at that, of course, remains to be seen.
Despite his talk of bringing spending under control, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that Obama's $3.55 trillion budget will drive the deficit to a record $1.8 trillion this year and double the national debt over the next decade.
Meanwhile, some of Obama's initial steps on the foreign stage have raised eyebrows. On Afghanistan and Pakistan , even some of his own top officials concede that the administration's strategy has little chance of halting the advance of Islamic extremism in Pakistan or crushing the Taliban and al Qaida in Afghanistan .
It also isn't clear whether Obama's overtures to Iran , Venezuela , Cuba and North Korea , while demonstrating his preference for cooperation over confrontation, will produce diplomatic breakthroughs or be interpreted as weakness by those countries' leaders.
Much of what American presidents accomplish begins in their first 100 days. Just as the Great Depression allowed Roosevelt to quickly lay the groundwork for the New Deal, Obama seized on today's crisis to frame an ambitious agenda.
He got both chambers of Congress to pass sweeping $3.6 trillion budget plans largely on his terms. His $787 billion stimulus package included tax breaks he wanted and spending on his priorities, including expansions of health care, infrastructure, renewable energy and education. He's also announced a $275 billion plan to stave off home foreclosures and a $100 billion bank rescue program.
He forced out the chief executive of General Motors , told the company to consider bankruptcy, and is pushing Chrysler to merge with a more stable automaker.
Gerhard Peters , a co-founder of the American Presidency Project at the University of California, Santa Barbara , said that Obama's sweeping agenda could make him a transformational president, just as Roosevelt made America more reliant on government and as Ronald Reagan made it less so.
"He is transforming American politics right now," Peters said of Obama, "in terms of reshaping the relationship between government and society, government and business, and society and business. There's a perception now that we need government to protect us."
Obama has signed more executive orders, memoranda and proclamations in his first 100 days than any president since Franklin Roosevelt . One notable order lifted former President George W. Bush's restrictions on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research.
Obama also spent more of those first months outside the country than any of his 43 predecessors, according to the American Presidency Project .
So far, a majority of Americans like what they see.
Obama's average approval rating for his first three months in office was 63 percent in the Gallup Poll.
That's the highest since Jimmy Carter's 69 percent rating after his first 100 days more than three decades ago. However, Carter's presidency is widely considered a failure, which underscores the risk of reading too much into a president's first 100 days.
Obama also opened a new era of relations with Congress , moving quickly to enact legislation that Democrats couldn't get past Bush: expanded children's health insurance coverage (paid for with higher cigarette taxes) and pay equity legislation giving women more grounds for lawsuits. He also delivered a signature expansion of national service programs in the tradition of Democratic presidents John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton .
Obama signed orders to expand access to information under Freedom of Information and Presidential Records laws. But while making good on his promise to make government more transparent, Obama's White House nonetheless tries to shape the media message by limiting access to much information via selective leaks by unnamed sources.
The president also has begun laying the groundwork for sweeping health care and global warming legislation. He says he'll preserve private health insurance but offer more government-managed insurance so that everyone is covered. Critics think that will guarantee significant tax increases down the road, despite the president's promise to raise taxes on only the wealthiest Americans.
His health-care overhaul is far from assured of passage. Neither is his plan to curb greenhouse gases. Both face epic struggles in Congress .
Turning to national security, Obama ordered the closure of secret CIA prisons overseas and of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba , within a year. He rescinded the Bush administration's authorization of harsh interrogation techniques, and he made public four previously secret Bush-era memos that described those methods in detail.
At the same time, he told CIA officials who followed the Bush guidelines that they won't be prosecuted, and invoked the same state secrets privilege that he'd criticized Bush for abusing to shield other details about spying and anti-terrorism programs. Both moves have frustrated some of his liberal backers.
Obama then waffled on his no-prosecution pledge last week, saying that the decision of whether to prosecute Bush administration officials who authorized the harsh techniques will be up to Attorney General Eric Holder .
The new president has brought a warm new tone to global diplomacy. He sought to recast relations with the Muslim world, including his video overture to Iran for new diplomatic relations. He relaxed Cuba policy, opening what some see as a window toward lifting the almost 50-year-old trade embargo. He was all smiles when shaking hands recently with Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez , a leftist who once denounced Bush at the United Nations as "the devil."
Obama's campaign promise to open a new era of bipartisanship has fallen short. Only three Senate Republicans and none in the House of Representatives supported his stimulus bill.
His effort to change the culture of revolving-door and special-interest politics also achieved mixed success at best. While putting in place a detailed ethics policy that aims to reduce lobbyists' influence, he made exceptions to his own rules. And several of his Cabinet nominees ? from Tom Daschle to Timothy Geithner ? were felled or tainted by controversies over their failure to pay taxes.
Obama's also fallen short so far in his effort to convert his campaign's effective grassroots and Internet operations to a force that can help him govern. Lawmakers report no evidence of political impact from those efforts.
Still, the new president has brought a new-media sensibility to the White House : His YouTube videos of Saturday radio addresses, his first "online town hall" meeting, and his administration's creation of a Web site to track the spending of the economic stimulus have made the White House more accessible.
Each presidency has its own 100-day narrative, but scholars who study presidential records made public years later say they're struck by how much all presidents tend to have in common ? and how often perceptions of how a president spends his time doesn't match reality.
Historically, the public component represents only about 6 percent of a president's day , and much of his time goes to behind-the-scenes duties as commander in chief and head diplomat.
"So much of what they do is dictated by what they must do," said Terry Sullivan , the executive director of the nonpartisan White House Transition Project and an associate professor of political science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill .
"The first 100 days is about figuring out, 'How are we going to focus on the things we want to focus on?'"
Obama's first 100 days in office haven't been quiet
Obama's first 100 days in office haven't been quiet
Buzz Up Send
WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama's first 100 days on the job exploded with activity on many fronts: the $787 billion economic stimulus, the order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison within a year, a withdrawal plan for Iraq , an expansion of U.S. forces in Afghanistan , and outreach to several hostile nations.
Still, America's economic crisis largely shaped these 100 days. It also empowered Obama, even as it overshadowed some of what he'd hoped to do.
"The ability to enlarge executive power is a function of crisis," said Ross K. Baker , a Rutgers University political scientist. He'll help lead a national conference next month on Obama's first 100 days, a traditional measure for new presidents since Franklin D. Roosevelt's ambitious new administration in 1933.
Obama has benefitted from "a double lift-off," Baker said, "not only the normal honeymoon but, in addition, the fact that the American people and Congress are looking to him to get them out of a crisis."
Whether the new president will succeed at that, of course, remains to be seen.
Despite his talk of bringing spending under control, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that Obama's $3.55 trillion budget will drive the deficit to a record $1.8 trillion this year and double the national debt over the next decade.
Meanwhile, some of Obama's initial steps on the foreign stage have raised eyebrows. On Afghanistan and Pakistan , even some of his own top officials concede that the administration's strategy has little chance of halting the advance of Islamic extremism in Pakistan or crushing the Taliban and al Qaida in Afghanistan .
It also isn't clear whether Obama's overtures to Iran , Venezuela , Cuba and North Korea , while demonstrating his preference for cooperation over confrontation, will produce diplomatic breakthroughs or be interpreted as weakness by those countries' leaders.
Much of what American presidents accomplish begins in their first 100 days. Just as the Great Depression allowed Roosevelt to quickly lay the groundwork for the New Deal, Obama seized on today's crisis to frame an ambitious agenda.
He got both chambers of Congress to pass sweeping $3.6 trillion budget plans largely on his terms. His $787 billion stimulus package included tax breaks he wanted and spending on his priorities, including expansions of health care, infrastructure, renewable energy and education. He's also announced a $275 billion plan to stave off home foreclosures and a $100 billion bank rescue program.
He forced out the chief executive of General Motors , told the company to consider bankruptcy, and is pushing Chrysler to merge with a more stable automaker.
Gerhard Peters , a co-founder of the American Presidency Project at the University of California, Santa Barbara , said that Obama's sweeping agenda could make him a transformational president, just as Roosevelt made America more reliant on government and as Ronald Reagan made it less so.
"He is transforming American politics right now," Peters said of Obama, "in terms of reshaping the relationship between government and society, government and business, and society and business. There's a perception now that we need government to protect us."
Obama has signed more executive orders, memoranda and proclamations in his first 100 days than any president since Franklin Roosevelt . One notable order lifted former President George W. Bush's restrictions on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research.
Obama also spent more of those first months outside the country than any of his 43 predecessors, according to the American Presidency Project .
So far, a majority of Americans like what they see.
Obama's average approval rating for his first three months in office was 63 percent in the Gallup Poll.
That's the highest since Jimmy Carter's 69 percent rating after his first 100 days more than three decades ago. However, Carter's presidency is widely considered a failure, which underscores the risk of reading too much into a president's first 100 days.
Obama also opened a new era of relations with Congress , moving quickly to enact legislation that Democrats couldn't get past Bush: expanded children's health insurance coverage (paid for with higher cigarette taxes) and pay equity legislation giving women more grounds for lawsuits. He also delivered a signature expansion of national service programs in the tradition of Democratic presidents John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton .
Obama signed orders to expand access to information under Freedom of Information and Presidential Records laws. But while making good on his promise to make government more transparent, Obama's White House nonetheless tries to shape the media message by limiting access to much information via selective leaks by unnamed sources.
The president also has begun laying the groundwork for sweeping health care and global warming legislation. He says he'll preserve private health insurance but offer more government-managed insurance so that everyone is covered. Critics think that will guarantee significant tax increases down the road, despite the president's promise to raise taxes on only the wealthiest Americans.
His health-care overhaul is far from assured of passage. Neither is his plan to curb greenhouse gases. Both face epic struggles in Congress .
Turning to national security, Obama ordered the closure of secret CIA prisons overseas and of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba , within a year. He rescinded the Bush administration's authorization of harsh interrogation techniques, and he made public four previously secret Bush-era memos that described those methods in detail.
At the same time, he told CIA officials who followed the Bush guidelines that they won't be prosecuted, and invoked the same state secrets privilege that he'd criticized Bush for abusing to shield other details about spying and anti-terrorism programs. Both moves have frustrated some of his liberal backers.
Obama then waffled on his no-prosecution pledge last week, saying that the decision of whether to prosecute Bush administration officials who authorized the harsh techniques will be up to Attorney General Eric Holder .
The new president has brought a warm new tone to global diplomacy. He sought to recast relations with the Muslim world, including his video overture to Iran for new diplomatic relations. He relaxed Cuba policy, opening what some see as a window toward lifting the almost 50-year-old trade embargo. He was all smiles when shaking hands recently with Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez , a leftist who once denounced Bush at the United Nations as "the devil."
Obama's campaign promise to open a new era of bipartisanship has fallen short. Only three Senate Republicans and none in the House of Representatives supported his stimulus bill.
His effort to change the culture of revolving-door and special-interest politics also achieved mixed success at best. While putting in place a detailed ethics policy that aims to reduce lobbyists' influence, he made exceptions to his own rules. And several of his Cabinet nominees ? from Tom Daschle to Timothy Geithner ? were felled or tainted by controversies over their failure to pay taxes.
Obama's also fallen short so far in his effort to convert his campaign's effective grassroots and Internet operations to a force that can help him govern. Lawmakers report no evidence of political impact from those efforts.
Still, the new president has brought a new-media sensibility to the White House : His YouTube videos of Saturday radio addresses, his first "online town hall" meeting, and his administration's creation of a Web site to track the spending of the economic stimulus have made the White House more accessible.
Each presidency has its own 100-day narrative, but scholars who study presidential records made public years later say they're struck by how much all presidents tend to have in common ? and how often perceptions of how a president spends his time doesn't match reality.
Historically, the public component represents only about 6 percent of a president's day , and much of his time goes to behind-the-scenes duties as commander in chief and head diplomat.
"So much of what they do is dictated by what they must do," said Terry Sullivan , the executive director of the nonpartisan White House Transition Project and an associate professor of political science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill .
"The first 100 days is about figuring out, 'How are we going to focus on the things we want to focus on?'"
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
100 Days: Analysis
First 100 Days: Unfilled Positions Threaten Obama's Ambitious Agenda
First 100 Days: Unfilled Positions Threaten Obama's Ambitious Agenda
President Obama is outpacing George W. Bush and Bill Clinton on appointments. But, like his predecessors, he is bogged down in a system that has grown increasingly cumbersome over the years.
By Stephen Clark
FOXNews.com
Saturday, April 25, 2009
President Obama, during his first 100 days in office, hasn't allowed modesty to stop him from pushing the most ambitious agenda since FDR.
But his plan to reform health care, energy and education could be upended by gaping holes that he has yet to fill in his administration.
Obama is outpacing George W. Bush and Bill Clinton on appointments, but like his predecessors, he is bogged down in a system that has grown increasingly cumbersome over the years. And his task has been made even more difficult by his own tougher-than-ever background checks and ethics rules.
"It's not hampering his ability to set his agenda," New York University professor Paul Light, an expert on the federal government, told FOXNews.com. "But it will hamper the implementation of his agenda. The real challenge for Obama is to get some people in key positions where they have to produce actual results."
As of this week, Obama has had 74 appointments confirmed by the Senate, compared with 30 by George W. Bush at the same point in time.
Ronald Reagan holds the record among modern presidents for most appointments confirmed by the Senate at the end of 100 days: 83, according to the White House Transition Project.
"Obama right now is out in front of all those guys, except Reagan," Terry Sullivan, executive director of the project, told FOXNews.com.
But Obama still has hundreds of positions left to fill. Of the 542 positions that affect policy, the Senate has confirmed 37 percent, according to the project.
What's at stake is much more than bragging rights for how quickly Obama can fill in an organizational chart with undersecretary of this and deputy assistant secretary of that.
These boxes represent the people Obama needs to carry out all sorts of promised initiatives and policy shifts, and to assure that the nation stays safe along the way.
Obama is moving at a good pace compared to Bush and Clinton, Light said. "But he's got a big agenda, more appointments to fill. The activist agenda requires more implementers and executors."
At a recent congressional hearing, for example, Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., lamented that Dennis Blair, Obama's national intelligence director, doesn't have time to manage the extra responsibilities he's been given on economics and climate change.
"The ideal person for that is the principal deputy director of national intelligence," suggested Edward Maguire, the agency's outgoing inspector general.
But that's one of hundreds of seats that remain empty. Similar stories abound all across government.
NASA is awaiting a new administrator as it approaches its deadline to announce when it will retire the space shuttle program. At the Health and Human Services Department, where Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is still awaiting confirmation by the Senate for the secretary position, 19 of the top 20 slots are being filled by acting career employees, and the 20th is empty.
Obama also has not picked someone to head the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., a quasi-government outfit that insures the pensions of 44 million workers and retirees -- critical when bankruptcies are mounting. The corporation is being run by an acting director from the civil service.
Obama himself has bemoaned the "onerous" appointments process, taking note in particular of early trouble filling critical spots at the Treasury Department, where several potential nominees backed out after their names were announced.
"A lot of people who we think are about to serve in the administration and Treasury suddenly say, 'Well, you know what? I don't want to go through some of the scrutiny, embarrassment, in addition to taking huge cuts in pay,'" Obama told CBS's "60 Minutes" last month.
The president added to his hurdles by imposing tougher ethics rules and by increasing scrutiny of nominees' taxes after revelations that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner had failed to pay $34,000 in payroll taxes and that former Senate Majority leader Tom Daschle, Obama's first pick for health secretary, owed $140,000 in back income taxes and interest.
But some say that given the scope and magnitude of the positions that remain to be filled, Obama should exercise caution when making appointments.
"They're not really taking that long," Sullivan said. "The fact of the matter is, there's nothing more important than these positions. Pepsico takes half a year to hire people, and they're just making potato chips."
First 100 Days: Unfilled Positions Threaten Obama's Ambitious Agenda
First 100 Days: Unfilled Positions Threaten Obama's Ambitious Agenda
President Obama is outpacing George W. Bush and Bill Clinton on appointments. But, like his predecessors, he is bogged down in a system that has grown increasingly cumbersome over the years.
By Stephen Clark
FOXNews.com
Saturday, April 25, 2009
President Obama, during his first 100 days in office, hasn't allowed modesty to stop him from pushing the most ambitious agenda since FDR.
But his plan to reform health care, energy and education could be upended by gaping holes that he has yet to fill in his administration.
Obama is outpacing George W. Bush and Bill Clinton on appointments, but like his predecessors, he is bogged down in a system that has grown increasingly cumbersome over the years. And his task has been made even more difficult by his own tougher-than-ever background checks and ethics rules.
"It's not hampering his ability to set his agenda," New York University professor Paul Light, an expert on the federal government, told FOXNews.com. "But it will hamper the implementation of his agenda. The real challenge for Obama is to get some people in key positions where they have to produce actual results."
As of this week, Obama has had 74 appointments confirmed by the Senate, compared with 30 by George W. Bush at the same point in time.
Ronald Reagan holds the record among modern presidents for most appointments confirmed by the Senate at the end of 100 days: 83, according to the White House Transition Project.
"Obama right now is out in front of all those guys, except Reagan," Terry Sullivan, executive director of the project, told FOXNews.com.
But Obama still has hundreds of positions left to fill. Of the 542 positions that affect policy, the Senate has confirmed 37 percent, according to the project.
What's at stake is much more than bragging rights for how quickly Obama can fill in an organizational chart with undersecretary of this and deputy assistant secretary of that.
These boxes represent the people Obama needs to carry out all sorts of promised initiatives and policy shifts, and to assure that the nation stays safe along the way.
Obama is moving at a good pace compared to Bush and Clinton, Light said. "But he's got a big agenda, more appointments to fill. The activist agenda requires more implementers and executors."
At a recent congressional hearing, for example, Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., lamented that Dennis Blair, Obama's national intelligence director, doesn't have time to manage the extra responsibilities he's been given on economics and climate change.
"The ideal person for that is the principal deputy director of national intelligence," suggested Edward Maguire, the agency's outgoing inspector general.
But that's one of hundreds of seats that remain empty. Similar stories abound all across government.
NASA is awaiting a new administrator as it approaches its deadline to announce when it will retire the space shuttle program. At the Health and Human Services Department, where Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is still awaiting confirmation by the Senate for the secretary position, 19 of the top 20 slots are being filled by acting career employees, and the 20th is empty.
Obama also has not picked someone to head the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., a quasi-government outfit that insures the pensions of 44 million workers and retirees -- critical when bankruptcies are mounting. The corporation is being run by an acting director from the civil service.
Obama himself has bemoaned the "onerous" appointments process, taking note in particular of early trouble filling critical spots at the Treasury Department, where several potential nominees backed out after their names were announced.
"A lot of people who we think are about to serve in the administration and Treasury suddenly say, 'Well, you know what? I don't want to go through some of the scrutiny, embarrassment, in addition to taking huge cuts in pay,'" Obama told CBS's "60 Minutes" last month.
The president added to his hurdles by imposing tougher ethics rules and by increasing scrutiny of nominees' taxes after revelations that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner had failed to pay $34,000 in payroll taxes and that former Senate Majority leader Tom Daschle, Obama's first pick for health secretary, owed $140,000 in back income taxes and interest.
But some say that given the scope and magnitude of the positions that remain to be filled, Obama should exercise caution when making appointments.
"They're not really taking that long," Sullivan said. "The fact of the matter is, there's nothing more important than these positions. Pepsico takes half a year to hire people, and they're just making potato chips."
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
The first 100 Days: This Game Is Still Obama's to Lose
April 25th, 2009 9:53 PM Eastern
KIM STOLZ ? THE FIRST 100 DAYS: This Game Is Still Obama?s to Lose
By Kim Stolz
MTV Correspondent/Writer
In the age of Twitter, Facebook, and the ever-growing blogosphere, Americans are more A.D.D. than ever. What this means for a president, of course, is that the public expects immediate fulfillment of campaign promises and, further, is quicker than ever to criticize a ?symbolic? action if it doesn?t immediately lead to results. With President Barack Obama?s campaign tenets of ?hope? and ?change,? he was destined for major criticism from both the left and the right in his first one hundred days.
Republicans hailed the overseas G-20 summit as a PR stunt that got, quite literally, nothing done. True, Obama was unable to garner the support he hoped for from NATO with regard to his mission in Afghanistan, but Democrats and Obama supporters argue that the trip was a success in that he succeeded in giving the United States the positive reputation abroad that was lacking for the past eight years.
Before we write off Obama as weak or ineffective, let?s give the guy more than one hundred days.
Similarly, as Republicans hailed the beginning of the end of American power with the notorious Chavez handshake - and the suddenly very vocal Dick Cheney ? claimed that the friendly act would be seen as ?weakness,? Democrats either applauded Obama?s diplomacy or laughed at the notion that a ?handshake? was even a topic of controversy. Personally, I fall into the latter school of thought. It?s a handshake, and I don?t expect Obama to be joining Chavez? book club anytime soon. After all, when Nixon engaged in jovial relations with Mao, many conservatives were instilled with surprise and anger, only to have the newfound partnership between the United States and China later looked upon as one of the most positive aspects of Nixon?s legacy.
Before we write off Obama as weak or ineffective, let?s give the guy more than one hundred days. Obama has some 1,460 days to go in his presidency, at least, to fulfill the campaign promises that won him the election. I would argue that the international PR Obama is doing in the short-term will lead to a greater likelihood that we will find support from our foreign allies in the long term.
Further, his stimulus bill, deemed the ?porkulus? bill by his adversaries, while quite taxing (pun-intended) does, in fact, focus our attention as a nation inward, relying less on foreign imports, which the Obama administration feels is what we need to do to accomplish a more stable economy. Relying too much on borrowing abroad is, what, at least in part, led us into this recession.
President Obama has certainly made his fair share of communication mistakes and gaffes, some of which he?s apologized for. The recent debacle over the ?torture memos,? is, to me, his first big mistake since taking office, and is probably not going away anytime soon. Still, it?s only been one hundred days. Let?s see what the ?rock star? president is able to actually accomplish during the next two hundred or three hundred days. If he?s still shaking hands and going on PR-related trips abroad, then we can start to worry. Until then, Obama?s popularity is still hovering around 60% and this game is still his to lose.
April 25th, 2009 9:53 PM Eastern
KIM STOLZ ? THE FIRST 100 DAYS: This Game Is Still Obama?s to Lose
By Kim Stolz
MTV Correspondent/Writer
In the age of Twitter, Facebook, and the ever-growing blogosphere, Americans are more A.D.D. than ever. What this means for a president, of course, is that the public expects immediate fulfillment of campaign promises and, further, is quicker than ever to criticize a ?symbolic? action if it doesn?t immediately lead to results. With President Barack Obama?s campaign tenets of ?hope? and ?change,? he was destined for major criticism from both the left and the right in his first one hundred days.
Republicans hailed the overseas G-20 summit as a PR stunt that got, quite literally, nothing done. True, Obama was unable to garner the support he hoped for from NATO with regard to his mission in Afghanistan, but Democrats and Obama supporters argue that the trip was a success in that he succeeded in giving the United States the positive reputation abroad that was lacking for the past eight years.
Before we write off Obama as weak or ineffective, let?s give the guy more than one hundred days.
Similarly, as Republicans hailed the beginning of the end of American power with the notorious Chavez handshake - and the suddenly very vocal Dick Cheney ? claimed that the friendly act would be seen as ?weakness,? Democrats either applauded Obama?s diplomacy or laughed at the notion that a ?handshake? was even a topic of controversy. Personally, I fall into the latter school of thought. It?s a handshake, and I don?t expect Obama to be joining Chavez? book club anytime soon. After all, when Nixon engaged in jovial relations with Mao, many conservatives were instilled with surprise and anger, only to have the newfound partnership between the United States and China later looked upon as one of the most positive aspects of Nixon?s legacy.
Before we write off Obama as weak or ineffective, let?s give the guy more than one hundred days. Obama has some 1,460 days to go in his presidency, at least, to fulfill the campaign promises that won him the election. I would argue that the international PR Obama is doing in the short-term will lead to a greater likelihood that we will find support from our foreign allies in the long term.
Further, his stimulus bill, deemed the ?porkulus? bill by his adversaries, while quite taxing (pun-intended) does, in fact, focus our attention as a nation inward, relying less on foreign imports, which the Obama administration feels is what we need to do to accomplish a more stable economy. Relying too much on borrowing abroad is, what, at least in part, led us into this recession.
President Obama has certainly made his fair share of communication mistakes and gaffes, some of which he?s apologized for. The recent debacle over the ?torture memos,? is, to me, his first big mistake since taking office, and is probably not going away anytime soon. Still, it?s only been one hundred days. Let?s see what the ?rock star? president is able to actually accomplish during the next two hundred or three hundred days. If he?s still shaking hands and going on PR-related trips abroad, then we can start to worry. Until then, Obama?s popularity is still hovering around 60% and this game is still his to lose.
Fingolfin269
Lifer
- Feb 28, 2003
- 17,948
- 34
- 91
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...ama_defendants__rights
Obama legal team wants to limit defendants' rights
AP By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer ? Fri Apr 24, 4:17 am ET
WASHINGTON ? The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to overrule a 23 year-old decision that stopped police from initiating questions unless a defendant's lawyer is present, the latest stance that has disappointed civil rights and civil liberties groups.
While President Barack Obama has reversed many policies of his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, the defendants' rights case is another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather than expand rights.
Since taking office, Obama has drawn criticism for backing the continued imprisonment of enemy combatants in Afghanistan without trial, invoking the "state secrets" privilege to avoid releasing information in lawsuits and limiting the rights of prisoners to test genetic evidence used to convict them.
The case at issue is Michigan v. Jackson, in which the Supreme Court said in 1986 that police may not initiate questioning of a defendant who has a lawyer or has asked for one unless the attorney is present. The decision applies even to defendants who agree to talk to the authorities without their lawyers.
Anything police learn through such questioning may not be used against the defendant at trial. The opinion was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the only current justice who was on the court at the time.
The justices could decide as early as Friday whether they want to hear arguments on the issue as they wrestle with an ongoing case from Louisiana that involves police questioning of an indigent defendant that led to a murder confession and a death sentence.
The Justice Department, in a brief signed by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, said the 1986 decision "serves no real purpose" and offers only "meager benefits." The government said defendants who don't wish to talk to police don't have to and that officers must respect that decision. But it said there is no reason a defendant who wants to should not be able to respond to officers' questions.
At the same time, the administration acknowledges that the decision "only occasionally prevents federal prosecutors from obtaining appropriate convictions."
The administration's legal move is a reminder that Obama, who has moved from campaigning to governing, now speaks for federal prosecutors.
The administration's position assumes a level playing field, with equally savvy police and criminal suspects, lawyers on the other side of the case said. But the protection offered by the court in Stevens' 1986 opinion is especially important for vulnerable defendants, including the mentally and developmentally disabled, addicts, juveniles and the poor, the lawyers said.
"Your right to assistance of counsel can be undermined if somebody on the other side who is much more sophisticated than you are comes and talks to you and asks for information," said Sidney Rosdeitcher, a New York lawyer who advises the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.
Stephen B. Bright, a lawyer who works with poor defendants at the Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta, said the administration's position "is disappointing, no question."
Bright said that poor defendants' constitutional right to a lawyer, spelled out by the high court in 1965, has been neglected in recent years. "I would hope that this administration would be doing things to shore up the right to counsel for poor people accused of crimes," said Bright, whose group joined with the Brennan Center and other rights organizations in a court filing opposing the administration's position.
Former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson and former FBI Director William Sessions are among 19 one-time judges and prosecutors urging the court to leave the decision in place because it has been incorporated into routine police practice and establishes a rule on interrogations that is easy to follow.
Eleven states also are echoing the administration's call to overrule the 1986 case.
Justice Samuel Alito first raised the prospect of overruling the decision at arguments in January over the rights of Jesse Montejo, the Louisiana death row inmate.
Montejo's lawyer, Donald Verrilli, urged the court not to do it. Since then, Verrilli has joined the Justice Department, but played no role in the department's brief.
Obama legal team wants to limit defendants' rights
AP By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer ? Fri Apr 24, 4:17 am ET
WASHINGTON ? The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to overrule a 23 year-old decision that stopped police from initiating questions unless a defendant's lawyer is present, the latest stance that has disappointed civil rights and civil liberties groups.
While President Barack Obama has reversed many policies of his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, the defendants' rights case is another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather than expand rights.
Since taking office, Obama has drawn criticism for backing the continued imprisonment of enemy combatants in Afghanistan without trial, invoking the "state secrets" privilege to avoid releasing information in lawsuits and limiting the rights of prisoners to test genetic evidence used to convict them.
The case at issue is Michigan v. Jackson, in which the Supreme Court said in 1986 that police may not initiate questioning of a defendant who has a lawyer or has asked for one unless the attorney is present. The decision applies even to defendants who agree to talk to the authorities without their lawyers.
Anything police learn through such questioning may not be used against the defendant at trial. The opinion was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the only current justice who was on the court at the time.
The justices could decide as early as Friday whether they want to hear arguments on the issue as they wrestle with an ongoing case from Louisiana that involves police questioning of an indigent defendant that led to a murder confession and a death sentence.
The Justice Department, in a brief signed by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, said the 1986 decision "serves no real purpose" and offers only "meager benefits." The government said defendants who don't wish to talk to police don't have to and that officers must respect that decision. But it said there is no reason a defendant who wants to should not be able to respond to officers' questions.
At the same time, the administration acknowledges that the decision "only occasionally prevents federal prosecutors from obtaining appropriate convictions."
The administration's legal move is a reminder that Obama, who has moved from campaigning to governing, now speaks for federal prosecutors.
The administration's position assumes a level playing field, with equally savvy police and criminal suspects, lawyers on the other side of the case said. But the protection offered by the court in Stevens' 1986 opinion is especially important for vulnerable defendants, including the mentally and developmentally disabled, addicts, juveniles and the poor, the lawyers said.
"Your right to assistance of counsel can be undermined if somebody on the other side who is much more sophisticated than you are comes and talks to you and asks for information," said Sidney Rosdeitcher, a New York lawyer who advises the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.
Stephen B. Bright, a lawyer who works with poor defendants at the Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta, said the administration's position "is disappointing, no question."
Bright said that poor defendants' constitutional right to a lawyer, spelled out by the high court in 1965, has been neglected in recent years. "I would hope that this administration would be doing things to shore up the right to counsel for poor people accused of crimes," said Bright, whose group joined with the Brennan Center and other rights organizations in a court filing opposing the administration's position.
Former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson and former FBI Director William Sessions are among 19 one-time judges and prosecutors urging the court to leave the decision in place because it has been incorporated into routine police practice and establishes a rule on interrogations that is easy to follow.
Eleven states also are echoing the administration's call to overrule the 1986 case.
Justice Samuel Alito first raised the prospect of overruling the decision at arguments in January over the rights of Jesse Montejo, the Louisiana death row inmate.
Montejo's lawyer, Donald Verrilli, urged the court not to do it. Since then, Verrilli has joined the Justice Department, but played no role in the department's brief.
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
Bipartisanship didn't last long in Obama's first 100 days
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- There's little debate that Democrats who run Congress mark President Obama's 100-day milestone with some significant victories.
First and foremost, they passed the president's $787 billion measure intended to stimulate the economy with warp speed, meeting his February deadline.
Congressional Democrats also made good on promises to push through several priorities that President Bush had refused to sign into law.
They finally approved last year's bill to fund the government, with significant increases in spending for things such as education, health care and transportation.
And Democrats passed long stalled legislation for children's health insurance -- the State Children's Health Insurance Program, known as S-CHIP -- as well as the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act mandating equal pay for women in the workplace.
But the slew of legislative achievements during Obama's first 100 days have come at the cost of bipartisanship.
The president's stimulus package passed with three Republican votes.
Obama's budget blueprint passed the House of Representatives and the Senate without a single GOP vote. And the $410 billion bill to fund the government turned into a partisan clash.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, opened the Senate in January declaring that "when we allow ourselves to retreat into the tired, well-worn trenches of partisanship, we diminish our ability to accomplish real change." Video Watch Reid in January predict Congress will work together »
Now, that feels like ancient history.
So does Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's more hopeful tone in January.
"If we see sensible, bipartisan proposals, Republicans will choose bipartisan solutions over partisan failures every time," said McConnell of Kentucky. Video Watch McConnell in January say that Republicans will cooperate, not compromise »
In the blame game over the breakdown of bipartisanship, Republicans said Democrats shut them out and never really considered GOP ideas. Democrats accused Republicans of making a political calculation to be the party of "no."
But the real reason for the partisan divide may be genuine philosophical differences, especially when it comes the No. 1 issue during the president's first 100 days -- the economy.
Republicans working to recover from their drubbing during the last two elections said they are trying to return to their small government roots. That means opposing Obama's economic prescriptions.
"We've been throwing trillions of dollars around like it was Monopoly money," McConnell said in the heat of the spending bill debate. Video Watch Reid and McConnell argue over the spending bill »
"A way of looking at it is we have spent more in the first 23 or 24 days of this administration, in other words, charged more, than it cost post-9/11 for the war Afghanistan, the war in Iraq and the response to Katrina already."
Yet most Democrats fundamentally believe government spending is the only way to jump-start the economy.
"We're going to have to spend some money to get out of this hole. The government's the only body that has any money," Reid said.
The reality is that bipartisanship on big, controversial issues is usually born out of necessity -- the ruling party historically reaches across the aisle only when it needs votes to prevail.
The Democrats' wide majority has meant that, for the most part, they haven't had to compromise.
It's not clear whether things will be any different over the next 100 days.
Democrats last week, at the behest of Obama's team, decided to use a rule that ultimately will prevent Republicans from waging a filibuster against the overhaul of health care. At the end of the day, if they can hold their own members in line, Democrats won't have to make concessions to Republicans to pass health care legislation.
Perhaps House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, was the most honest in her early assessment of the new Democratic-dominated Washington dynamic.
advertisement
"We had an election which was about our differing views of the direction our country was going in," Pelosi said at a press conference a week after Obama's inauguration. "The American people agreed with us."
Whether the American people continue to agree with Democrats won't be tested until the 2010 elections. Given their significant majorities, it's likely that Democrats will build up a significant legislative resume for voters to judge -- with or without the bipartisanship that eluded Congress' first 100 days.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- There's little debate that Democrats who run Congress mark President Obama's 100-day milestone with some significant victories.
First and foremost, they passed the president's $787 billion measure intended to stimulate the economy with warp speed, meeting his February deadline.
Congressional Democrats also made good on promises to push through several priorities that President Bush had refused to sign into law.
They finally approved last year's bill to fund the government, with significant increases in spending for things such as education, health care and transportation.
And Democrats passed long stalled legislation for children's health insurance -- the State Children's Health Insurance Program, known as S-CHIP -- as well as the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act mandating equal pay for women in the workplace.
But the slew of legislative achievements during Obama's first 100 days have come at the cost of bipartisanship.
The president's stimulus package passed with three Republican votes.
Obama's budget blueprint passed the House of Representatives and the Senate without a single GOP vote. And the $410 billion bill to fund the government turned into a partisan clash.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, opened the Senate in January declaring that "when we allow ourselves to retreat into the tired, well-worn trenches of partisanship, we diminish our ability to accomplish real change." Video Watch Reid in January predict Congress will work together »
Now, that feels like ancient history.
So does Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's more hopeful tone in January.
"If we see sensible, bipartisan proposals, Republicans will choose bipartisan solutions over partisan failures every time," said McConnell of Kentucky. Video Watch McConnell in January say that Republicans will cooperate, not compromise »
In the blame game over the breakdown of bipartisanship, Republicans said Democrats shut them out and never really considered GOP ideas. Democrats accused Republicans of making a political calculation to be the party of "no."
But the real reason for the partisan divide may be genuine philosophical differences, especially when it comes the No. 1 issue during the president's first 100 days -- the economy.
Republicans working to recover from their drubbing during the last two elections said they are trying to return to their small government roots. That means opposing Obama's economic prescriptions.
"We've been throwing trillions of dollars around like it was Monopoly money," McConnell said in the heat of the spending bill debate. Video Watch Reid and McConnell argue over the spending bill »
"A way of looking at it is we have spent more in the first 23 or 24 days of this administration, in other words, charged more, than it cost post-9/11 for the war Afghanistan, the war in Iraq and the response to Katrina already."
Yet most Democrats fundamentally believe government spending is the only way to jump-start the economy.
"We're going to have to spend some money to get out of this hole. The government's the only body that has any money," Reid said.
The reality is that bipartisanship on big, controversial issues is usually born out of necessity -- the ruling party historically reaches across the aisle only when it needs votes to prevail.
The Democrats' wide majority has meant that, for the most part, they haven't had to compromise.
It's not clear whether things will be any different over the next 100 days.
Democrats last week, at the behest of Obama's team, decided to use a rule that ultimately will prevent Republicans from waging a filibuster against the overhaul of health care. At the end of the day, if they can hold their own members in line, Democrats won't have to make concessions to Republicans to pass health care legislation.
Perhaps House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, was the most honest in her early assessment of the new Democratic-dominated Washington dynamic.
advertisement
"We had an election which was about our differing views of the direction our country was going in," Pelosi said at a press conference a week after Obama's inauguration. "The American people agreed with us."
Whether the American people continue to agree with Democrats won't be tested until the 2010 elections. Given their significant majorities, it's likely that Democrats will build up a significant legislative resume for voters to judge -- with or without the bipartisanship that eluded Congress' first 100 days.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter