GoldenDogs

I had previously stated to Greg that the world was not happy with President Obama. I guess I'll offer this for Roman, who demands that I provide links to the "bullshit" that I'm "making up".

"It is a meddling in the internal affairs of Europe. The EU is not Obama's plaything. ...He should accept Turkey as America's 51st state instead." --Bernd Posselt, European Parliament, Bavaria.

"There is no question that the US has a voice in NATO. But when it comes to membership in its own club, the EU decides by itself. We don't need any tutoring from abroad." --Markus Ferber, European Parliament Candidate

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe...00.html#ref=rss

One group that isn't angry with him currently, though, are Muslims. I'm relieved that they have cheered him for his comments that we are not at war with Islam. Oddly enough, Bush said that same thing repeatedly. I guess it isn't what is said... but who says it that matters.

Ah, now that's a good question. How free is our free will? Well, I think we have the ability to make a choice, but that choice is shaped by so many parameters. Laws, social conventions, what would my family say, what would Jesus do? All of that affects the chioces we make.

In regards to grad requirements. We already "force" so much on our students. In the past 20+ years, the number of credits required for graduation has risen from 160 to 230. LAUSD is even thinking of adding 10 more. How many of our students are even interested in courses offered in H?. They take them cause they have to. Could this be one of the reasons our dropout rates are so high? Our kids just aren't into school. I believe we need to go to a model like one in England where students can attend a vocational or trade school to prepare them for a job.

Ahh, yes, we agree about that. I also work in education, though not directly with students. My son is a freshman in high school so I have a front row seat right now in what he is doing at that level, while my nieces are both in elementary school. Most of the electives offered are time-fillers and time-wasters...

But back to what we were previously discussing... Do you feel that free will should be disregarded and mandatory community service be pushed forth as a graduation requirement? Do you feel kids would put their heart and soul into something they didn't wish to be involved in?

No. Why don't you actually find something from one of the sites you go to, instead of responding like this and coming up with nothing.........if you have any site to get this from, or are you just making this bullshit up, you know, like you usually do? LOL!

Huh? What is it I've posted that you are curious about? I'm asking what it is you think I've made up, or what it is you wish for me to offer a link for. Let me know what you want me to provide, and I'll provide it.

Thanks!

B

Thanks for pointing that out, UCLAN. Let's play a little game called "What if...."

WHAT IF Obama parted the Red Sea?

Brian : "Why is he RUINING the environment?!?!?!"

WHAT IF Obama achieved peace in the Middle East?

Brian : "Obama is cowtowing to terrorists!!!!"

WHAT IF Obama balanced the budget?

Brian : "It's the policies of the past 8 years of Republican rule that balanced the budget"

WHAT IF Obama made health care affordable to ALL Americans?

Brian : "SOCIALIST!"

I know you can take a joke, Bri. Just thought I'd lighten things up a little. How have you been buddy? Look for an email from me in the next couple days.

LOL!! Thanks, Greg... but I'm in a fairly decent enough mood. I am enjoying the debate here... UCLAN and even Roman have been great to chat with these days, whether or not we all agree on something. It's just nice to have intelligent conversation about issues with cool people... haven't done this in a good while!

I actually want Obama to succeed and turn things around. The world is a scary, uncertain place right now and I'll frankly take positive results from anyone, even a Democrat! And I'm missed chatting with you, dude! I look forward to catching up via email... Lots of stuff to talk about...

Well, being in education, I see the value of a service learning requirement. Granted, there are many clubs in hs, but the majority are not service oriented. At my school, we have an annual canned food drive for our local senior center. The drive is coordinated and run by our graduating seniors, thus they earn their service learning credit. Many times you need to bring the horse to the water. Many of our students wouldn't think about doing something like this unless they were exposed to the opportunity. Yes it is a shame that courts order community service as restitution. As far as I can remember, service requirements for HS were in place long before NCLB (late 80s early 90s George 1's thousand points of light)

Agree with all that you have said, UCLAN, however I still don't think it should be a mandatory requirement for graduation. Offer an incentive to entice them to engage in some form of community service, but don't force it. Forcing people to do things against their will never works... Do you believe, UCLAN, that free will is overrated?

Brian, why don't you provide a link to this information that does notr come from some site you frequent. Sorry, sir, but you make alot of statements and never seem to back them up with anything. Just you one-sided view on things.

Hi Roman!

What information are you referring to that needs some backup reference? If you like, I can try to excerpt some stuff from the "crooks and liars" website you like to like to, if you find that more reliable...

The one way one doesn't have to do CS? Don't do dumb [!@#$%^&*] in the first place. You have something against doing CS when you get arrested for doing something stupid?

Ummm, actually no, Roman. I wasn't speaking of court-ordered community service. I'm discussing mandatory community service as imposed upon us by the Obama Administration.

UCLAN, as to your comments regarded court-ordered community service, it is a shame it is regarded as a punishment -- helping others. But when a judge orders it, a person serves it. However, I don't agree it should be imposed upon students. There are already many clubs in high school where students do positive work in the community... why give them yet ANOTHER requirement to meet for graduation? Are we not disgusted with the requirements No Child Left Behind has imposed upon teachers and students? Let's not burden them more with some ridiculous community service requirement... it's ridiculous.

Is there really a problem with community service? (Peace Corp, VISTA, Teach for America) These programs have existed for years.

Yes, there IS a problem with community service when you are required to complete it not of your own free will.

However, not as interesting as wiretaps that were intially sold to the American public as only to be used against terrorists. In actuality, every American was subject to such wiretaps. Why did they feel the need to hide this from everyone?

It's funny how all this "outrage" concerning presidential authority was absent during the last 8 years. And now, all of a sudden, it's a problem. Mind you, the last 8 years saw was historically the period that saw the president - and VP - gain more power than in the HISTORY of the USA.

And NOW it's a problem? GMAMFB.

It's a huge problem when it inches us closer to socialism, unless, of course, you desire that far left a move.

I don't.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/iain_martin/b...oes_go_on_a_bit

And on an unrelated note, it seems the Brits are ready for Obama to go home. There was only one "Great Communicator", and Obama it ain't.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

http://cdt.org/security/CYBERSEC4.pdf

Interesting... Couple this with a revived "Fairness Doctrine" and I wonder how the news and information landscape might change under President Obama... Mix in a little "Mandatory Community Service" and we have interesting developments in America today.

OK. Let's see......

Hmmm. You got me. You never said the exact words "YOU MUST VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS". No, you didn't say that verbatim. But you encouraged it. And you most certainly did give anyone you deemed as a left-leaning partisan a fair amount of [!@#$%^&*] for not considering voting for someone that your party nominated. You don't agree with that?

Actually, I don't agree with that. During the election, I spent more time debating issues at hand that encouraging people vote Republican. I can't recall a time I ever encouraged, say, Roman for example, to vote Republican. Why would I waste my breath?

Remarkable judgement? Probably not. Listen. I love the man. I think he's the perfect person for the problems this country faces. But Bri - you are setting higher standards for Obama than you would have for someone with an ® behind his name, wouldn't you agree?

I wouldn't agree with that, either. My standards for Bush were never met and I have often made that a big deal. The man with an ® behind his name failed. However, the man with an ® behind his name did not campaign on a platform of "CHANGE". Tax cheaters galore, worsening economic outlook, skyrocketing debt thanks to the porkulus, government takeover of the banking and auto industries, mandatory community service for all young people (the Obama Youth Corp?), failure to keep his promise on bringing troops home, turning US foreign policy into a joke, etc. In addition to doing everything BUT "CHANGE", I see some scary socialistic items on Obama's agenda. I didn't set higher standards for Obama... Obama did. And he has failed to meet them.

And lastly, I can't remember the last administration that "performed to its highest level of competency". Can you? I don't know if there was EVER such a thing in the HISTORY of the United States.

Actually, I will say that the Reagan and Clinton Administrations did quite well for themselves. I think both can be termed as successful and I personally regard them as having performed to their highest levels of competency. Prosperious times... America was secure... I don't feel so secure today. And I don't feel the greatest threat to America now is external.

Just my humble opinion.

And my condolences on the news of GL's cancellation. I honestly can say that I'm not surprised as I predicted this... Next to fall will be DAYS... then ABC will follow suit by cancelling either AMC or OLTL. At this point, I'm leaning heavily toward AMC. I believe the industry has held its collective breath for a while now... but with the ax having finally fallen on the vintage crown jewel of daytime (though tarnished the last year or two), the rest will start falling like dominoes...

First of all, WHAT'S UP BRIAN! It's great to see my good buddy back here posting again.

<< Gives Brian a hug >>

<< G mutters: Even if it is a bunch of hogwash >>

In short, this post of yours from 3.22 was primarily what I was talking about, Brian. Of course, I'm not confused as to where your political loyalties lie as you've posted enough on here for me to know that. Hello!

Specifically, the bold part of your post is what prompted me to post what I did. Why? Because throughout the campaign, you needled and egged on hard left-leaning Dems to vote for Republicans quite a few times. (And no, I'm not going to post every quote from you on this matter. You know you did it.) And you turn around and make a statement like this - the bold text above. Your duplicity comes from pretending to be an open-minded Republican and then making this statement. It's not hard to understand, is it bro?

I am not only an open-minded Republican, but I am also partisan. Greg, I always lean right. However, I'm tolerant to opposing viewpoints. If I wasn't, I wouldn't like YOU at all! Nice try to discredit me on this issue, buddy... But people can be partial to one set of beliefs while still being tolerant of others. And I never EVER needled and egged on hard left-leaning Dems to vote for Republicans. I have occasionally discussed ideology, but have I ever stated to others "YOU MUST VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS"?? Hell no. Even YOU know that McCain was my last choice to run for the party.

So I fail to see his priorities being "out of whack".

Do you think he should have started to work on the justice system first? Would that be a priority that you claim is important to the majority of Americans?

His APPROACH to resolving issues indicates that his priorities are out of whack, Greg. Pork? How does that resolve the economic issues? Why would he sign so much waste into law? How does spending more pork on Acorn and other pet projects of lawmakers resolve our economic woes? Do you agree that Obama has displayed remarkable judgement in how he has proceeded? Do you agree that his administration has performed to its highest level of competency?

Enlighten me please. You seem to think that I'm living under a rock so please, Brian. Guide me. Educate me with some right-wing propaganda. Be my Guiding Light through the storm of the liberal left-wing media!!!

Not a problem. I don't have time to post more right now as I must get ready for work, but I will today or tomorrow...

See ya bud!!

I think the issue with New Orleans and Katrina is based mostly on the perception that Bush didn't deem it important. Note that I said perception. Celebrating a birthday while tv was inundated with pictures of people in distress, looting and the like didn't sit well with many Americans. This coupled with the fact that recovery in NO is extremely slow. (especially in impoverished areas) Many people don't realize that Galveston and lots of the Texas Gulf area is still in dire staits since Gustav. We needed FEMA to take more of a leadership role during Katrina.

I agree with you 100%, UCLAN. And to take Steve's examples a step further, Obama's "60 Minutes" interview, in which he chuckled and seemed amused by the plight of struggling Americans, is yet another example. But my concern is that a fuss was made when it seemed as if Bush was detached, but when it seems as if Obama is disconnected, little is said about it.

Is Obama a better man than Bush? Is he more compassionate? I didn't feel Bush was disconnected or lacking compassion when he shed tears in the oval office following the 9/11 attacks.

Perception... it is an interesting thing, indeed.

Or on the inexperienced FEMA director he put in place.

I agree that there's blame to go all around, but c'mon you don't put someone who's never had any experience whatsoever in government in the position to head FEMA.

Why not? Obama got elected President and he doesn't have any experience!

Sorry... I'm teasing now... LOL... a little levity, of course. But with all that said, Michael, I still say the ultimate resposibility for what went down during Katrina lies with local authorities there. As others have pointed out, Mississippi and Alabama were hit, too... but those folks had their act together. Just my opinion, though, based on observations and news reports.

B

Well GD and SF, we agree on some things but not all. Both of you seem to be compassionate and you are guided by your conscience and your heart. I venture to guess that you are both active in your repective communities. Like me, we all want what is best for our country. Sometimes the paths we choose to get there are different. I have found that it is best to accept the things I cannot change but strive to make things better. Like Jess said, many of us don't exercise our right to vote.

I am hoping that Obama and Congress can come together to find solutions to move us forward. I am extremely tired of the blame game. GW"s presidency is over and it is time to move on. The past is the past. I am hopeful in Obama and I realize that he is very different in his way of dealing with issues. (or different from GW). Those differences make people uneasy. It is understandable because change is often difficult to deal with.

SF, I am sorry for your hard times just as I am happy that all is going well for GD. That is the nature of these times. I am optimistic that things will get better.

Thanks, UCLAN... I hope all is well with you right now, too. I sincerely hope Obama can stabilize the economy and improve things in America for us all...

B

I'll state some of my basic views and maybe that will explain for one why I can't identify with parties. The other reason is I am just tired of them and what they stand for. Neither represent who I am anymore or even what I stand for.

My basic political beliefs:

• For Gun Control
• For the right of gays to serve in the military and get married
• Against abortion
• Less taxes
• For stronger immigration laws and enforcement
• Less foreign aid
• More aid to help homeless and the poor of this country
• A tax structure with stronger taxing on the ones who have more
• More help for small businesses and the same type of breaks for small business owners that are given to foreigners who come here to open up businesses
• Tax breaks for all American business owners to help encourage more to invest in jobs and things here and not have the advantages of moving their businesses out of the country
• An open policy like now for foreigners to seek the American Dream but cut out the advantages that they have over Americans in opening and starting businesses
• For Health Reform
• Against national health care
• Cutting out of any illegal alien benefitting from Social Security or any type of government aid. That is a right that should only go to US Citizens
• For capital punishment
• Have no problem with drilling for oil in Alaska
• Less governmental control over issues like smoking, seat belts, etc.
• For taking away the ability of politicians to vote on their own benefits and pay raises. That should be the people who are their bosses decision and not theirs.
• Cutting out of the ability of politicians to be given gifts of any kind by special interest groups. Make it illegal to accept any trips or gifts of any kind.
• National language made English

I never vote in primaries anymore because here and I guess everywhere in the primaries you have to vote all one party. I have not voted all one party since 1983.

this last time I didn't vote for McCain or Obama. I couldn't. It was a bad choice and I couldn't support either of them for President. I guess many would say I threw my vote away, but I looked at it as sending a message to the parties. I voted for one of the Indepedents. Right now I don't remember which one. It wasn't Nader.

I voted for Gore when he first ran against Bush even though I didn't really like Gore but I thought of the two he was better. But I did vote for Bush the 2nd time because I thought Kerry was a worse choice.

Since I have been able to vote my Presidential votes have been like this:

Reagan

Reagan

Bush

Clinton

Clinton

Gore

Bush

Independent (I think now his name was Barr)

<<sighs>> You're cool, Steve. Your stand on issues match mine almost identically!!!

Yeah but even with that there is so much blame to go around from Bush, FEMA, to the governor and officials in the New Orleans area.

My former in-laws live in the coastal Mississippi area and while New Orleans and LA were down there still doing nothing many in that area were on top of things and getting ready for Katrina.

They should have started evacuating New Orleans long before they did. And then just like my former in-laws who were stubborn you had so many of those people who chose to stay and wait it out. They wouldn't even leave even though people were telling them this could be bad.

And don't take this wrong - I feel bad for New Orleans - but even moreso I feel so much more worse for the people of Coastal Mississippi and Mobile area of Alabama who lost just as much as those in New Orleans but are never remembered. The press and celebrities played up New Orleans so much that the injured in those cities have totally been forgotten and overshadowed.

My former in-laws lost everything they owned. And just barely escaped with their lives. A friend I grew up with lived in the Gulfport area and they did evacuate. When they went back there was nothing left of their house. It was as if the water just washed it and everything they owned away.

What happened down there was bad, but it didn't just happen to New Orleans and I think we forget that sometime.

I may be wrong but I think Rhiannon who is a member here is still living in one of the FEMA trailers. She lives in the coastal area too and lost her home.

Hey Steve,

Excellent points and I disagree with absolutely NOTHING you have said. In fact, I wish more would say it often and loudly...

B

I hope Obama can keep us safe too, while upholding are values as a country.

But I gotta say that those who live in New Orleans wouldn't be so fast to agree with your statement.

Well, I'm not sure what Bush could have done to prevent the hurricane... Ummm, did you happen to see "The Simpsons Movie"? Perhaps a huge, clear shield would have done the trick and stopped the hurricane from lashing the Gulf Coast. I know, silly statement... but I have yet to see accountability demanded from Ray Naggin, or the former Louisiana Governor What's-Her-Name...

There have been hurricanes since and the toll hasn't been as high. Why? Certainly not because federal government has its crap together... Any improvements are likely due to leadership at the state level, which is where regional crisis management originates anyway. That fact has long been lost on Katrina-ites who desire to pin natural disaster on a sitting President.

B

People might have questions, I know I do, but there is no comparison between now and then. We have an intelligent statesman who inherited a problem from a bumbling fool.

Well, TC, at least the bumbling fool kept us safe from attack for seven years. I hope Obama can continue that policy...

B

The thing is ....

1. It's very interesting how Republicans always want Dems to be "open-minded" and non-judgemental when it comes to their president (YES - GWB) giving away 700 BILLION dollars with no oversight (the little there was included was because of the Dems in Congress, thank you very much) to the banks.

2. I'm feeling a bit deceived. And yes, I'm calling you out Brian. Because it's funny how the Repubs always want the Dems to be open-minded and non-partisan. Now I see in writing from Brian's earlier post how he is very partisan. Hmm. NICE. So....let me get this straight. I'm supposed to give a president that started an illegal war with Iraq and squandered a budget SURPLUS some extra lee-way, but you can't give a president that's been in office a little over 60 DAYS any lee-way?!?!?! That seems a little fucked up to me. Brian - can you say DUPLICITOUS? But I guess it's unfair for me to pin this all on Brian. All Repubs are this way. Just look at the postings by the other conservatives - they aren't willing to give President Obama a chance regardless of the state of the union he inherited after their president left office.

3. All the complaining from the right about the budget is hypocritical. President Bush would submit the annual budget WITHOUT the costs of the Afhgan and Iraq wars included. Then (very slyly, of course) he would turn around and request some "special funding" for his wars. No wonder his budgets were never as expensive as the one President Obama turned in - but they would have been if GWB would have been forth-right in his!

4. During the Presidential Press Conference tonight, President Obama fielded some very tough questions from the press corps and I would dare any right-winger to claim differently. GWB was always lobbed softballs during his press conferences and hmmmmmm......he damn sure didn't have 2 of them within 65 days of assuming office! Oh wait...silly me. That's because of the "liberal press" mmmm hmmmm. RIGHT.

5. At least President Obama is WORKING HIS ASS OFF trying to get the county on the right track. No one in this thread can say that he's been resting on his laurels. Compare that to GWB (who created this mess with his 8 years of horrendous governing) that did NOTHING other than give the big banks 700 BILLION dollars with no oversight. I would honestly like to see his actions defended. GWB knew how fucked up the country was and was more than happy to hand over his [!@#$%^&*] up to a Democrat.

Finally, I believe President Obama is off to a fine start. Is it perfect? No. But what is? GWB's reign certainly was not. His father's governship was far from perfection. [!@#$%^&*], Ronald Reagan's time in office was no where NEAR it. So whom are they to complain when members of their own party have fallen short? GMAMFB.

Like y'alls hero GWB would say "Bring it on". You can't defend yourselves or your treasonous way of treating President Obama.

The thing is:

1. I have been quite judgemental of George W. Bush. I've expressed my disappointment in his presidency more times than I can count. But apparently not enough times for you to have read it, Greg.

2. You haven't figured out my political persuasion yet? Again, I have hardly kept that secret. Why would you be deceived by the blatantly obvious, Greg? Describe my "duplicitous" nature... I'm curious. If need be, quote me from previous posts.

3. I have repeatedly complained about how George W. Bush handled the budget during his time in office. Again, I have done so here in this forum repeatedly. How you could have missed those posts, Greg, is beyond me. But, if you like, I can state it again: President Bush failed on many levels in office. If need be, I'll send you a private message echoing those statements.

4. I agree that Obama fielded tough questions. The media is no longer handling him with kid gloves. I say this because even THEY are uneasy right now about Obama's performance to date. Read the papers, Greg.

5. I agree that Obama is working his ass off... problem is, his priorities have been out of whack. And, in many cases, he's doing things nobody wants him to do.

Greg, you're acting as if nobody actually reads the posts here... I mean, you call me out for things I haven't said or done. Of all the people who post here who are clearly partisan, I frankly feel as if *I* have been generally fair-minded about things. I trash Republicans when they are behaving foolishly, just as I do Democrats. I have been VERY harsh with Republicans here in the forum. However, I have also acknowledged, unlike you, that Democrats are as responsible for the budget crisis as Republicans. As disappointed as I am with George W. Bush, it is clear that Democrats, too, have contributed to our economic plight.

It isn't just me who is not pleased with Obama... search the headlines, my friend. The world is unhappy with our President, too.

But all that aside... how you been buddy? I've missed chatting with you!!! Email or IM me so we can catch up!!

B

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politi...E2%80%9850-50_/

Just thought I'd add this article to the conversation, from the Boston Herald. It indicates that Obama's approval is slipping. I thought this was relevant to our discussion here, as the article was just posted today.

B

Clinton got alot of heat his first few months in office, when he nominated alot of his friends, who had no experience in Washington whatsoever, to be in his cabinet. I might also add that Obama currently has more filled positions in his cabinet than when both Bush Jr and Clinton had during their first few months.

I didn't say America did not prosper, but Reagan did get off to a rocky start, just like Obama has. Some would say we didn't really begin to prosper as a country until 85. In fact it took Reagan alot longer to turn a nation that had one of the highest unemployment rates in history than Obama's 70 something days currently in office. It took Reagan more than a year to completely turn things around, and some would say he did so simply by spending. Just like Reagan, Obama didn't create this economic crisis, he inherited it from his predecessor and it's going to take a very long time to turn things around, alot longer than two months. Whether you agree or disagree about his policies is another thing, but at least he's doing something about it. I think the best thing to do now is wait to see how things play out.

I also seem to recall one of either Bush Jr or Clinton's appointee's having issues regarding having hired an illegal immigrant to work for them.

Regardless of my personal politics, Michael, I definitely hope Obama can get us out of the mess we're in. I'm feeling fairly secure in my situation... we're doing very well right now... but I also believe things can change quickly in this economic environment. We just bought a house and a car. While at one of the dealerships we visited this past weekend, there was a couple nearby who was told flat-out by the salesman that he couldn't sell them a car because the bank wouldn't give them a loan because of poor credit. I felt kind of bad for them, particularly because we were obviously working on a deal (meaning WE were in a position to buy) -- but more so because the salesman said it so loud that everyone nearby could hear. The woman had this distressed look on her face... While I felt bad, I couldn't help but wonder how they could be out shopping for a car... they HAD to know they had rotten credit!

While I agree that Bush bears some responsibility for the current crisis, I think it is unfair to pin it ALL on him. I think a lot of the problem really rests on the banks, lenders, greedy wall street dicks, realtors and their dishonest brokers, and stupid people living beyond their means.

And how big was the deficit when he left office?

On both sides, many need to look at what was and is instead of seeing what they want to see.

Bush had aprroval ratings in the low 50s and couldn't get much of anything done. So, Brian, if you are a student of history, it is real easy to say Obama is doing a horrible job but you can't remember what Bush did.

Oh Brian not angry at all. But if it was so bad why is his approval numbers sill high? There must be most people who think he's doing a good job. Many think he needs to slow down. Never heard that about Bust, Clinton, Reagan, or Bush Sr.

Hey Roman,

Actually, we don't disagree on your point. You may recall that I have said many times that President Bush failed on many levels, particularly managing government spending. It is a laugh to state that he is a fiscal conservative because he had absolutely no reservations about signing into law any and every pork-filled bill that passed across his desk.

A majority of those polled in America do NOT like the stimulus bill(s). But the majority of those polled in America still like Barack Obama. You can like a guy but dislike his policies. You can be uneasy about the guy's capabilities in office but still concede that he's a nice guy. I think Bush is, for example, a really nice guy... I just think he and his administration derailed.

I think Obama is attempting to do too much too early... and many aren't ready for much of what he wishes to do. And whoever is counseling him to go on Leno and "60 Minutes" needs to be fired. We don't want to be entertained by our President... we desire that he lead the country. I'm much more interested in his policy decisions than his March Madness picks...

I'd love to see where those who are worried about our country right now, predicting the apocalypse and the end of democracy, are gonna be four years from now.

And I wonder what would the right would have said under Ronald Reagan, when he first stepped into office and the economy hit rock bottom in 1982? (Which it did) Would they have been as eager to put it on him, as they are doing now with our current president?

I admit these first few months of Obama's presidency have not been the smoothest, but compared to the start of both Clinton and Bush's presidencies, it makes these first few months seem like a walk in a park. Just because the past three months have not been the most easiest, doesn't mean the next four years are going to be the end all be all of America as some are making it out to be.

Actually, Michael, Reagan DID take a LOT of heat but somehow sold his economic policies to both Democrats and Republicans. And America did prosper in those "self-indulgent" 80's. Some have argued that Clinton rode the crest of Reagan's wave. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. As for Clinton, then Bush, Jr., I don't really recall a rocky start to Clinton's presidency - at least policywise. And I don't really recall much about Bush's first months in office... nothing really happened until 9/11.

Brian, guess what?

I no longer give a [!@#$%^&*] what you think.

If you think he's doing poorly, fine. [!@#$%^&*] it.

After what he was left, and after a long campaign season where everyone else sounded like the idiots they were, things are more important than a partisan who no matter what seems to not long at things objectively and seems to hang on to the hatred he or she has for a president, even when they are telling others not to do the very same thing they are doing.

Oh well, Brian. Your [!@#$%^&*] loss, man.

Roman, no gain - no loss. Honestly, Obama is having a really bad run out of the gate. I'm not making it up... The country is uncomfortable with the massive waste in the stimulus, and every time the man courts the media, he puts his foot in his mouth. I wasn't particularly offended by the joke about special olympics... but his performance on "60 Minutes" was stunningly poor. He just isn't doing well and, yes, it is strictly and solely my opinion.

But please don't take my opinion personally, Roman. I was just responding to Steve's post so don't be angry with me...

B