SteveFrame

The sad thing is that what some see as sincerity some others see as good acting. I have said all along that Obama is a good politician - just like so many others before him. Not since day one of his campaign have I trusted him. That is not to say that I don't think he has some good ideas but as far as sincerity I don't see what others do. I see him as Ronald Reagan and so many others before him. They are good politicians and to be a good politician you have to be a good actor to make American believe the [!@#$%^&*] your are piling on them. Reagan just had one step up on the rest - he had done his in the movies a lot longer than just dishing it out to the American people.

But what is sad is that while we are fighting for the ability to make our own moral decisions, we are losing the right to make other decisions for ourself. We have to wear a seatbelt now. It's a law. In some states, you can't make the decision to smoke in public anymore or even in a restaurant or bar. And if you do then just like in Tennessee it costs you an arm and a leg to smoke as with the added tax some packs of cigaretts are now 10 dollars a pack. Next year Tennessee and a few other states are even talking about a "fat" tax for people who are overweight. They have taxed the hell out of cigarette smokers citing that they cause health issues so they should pay more than other American's. Now they are going over the "fat" people since they meet the same criteria and they need more money so let's let the smokers rest. And all these at least in Tennessee have been done with a Democratic governor in charge and while the Democrats briefly had control of the state house or senate. Some states are pushing more and more to make it mandatory that a parent has to immunize their child when that has always been the right of the parent to make that choice for their child. We immunized ours but we understood the health risks that were there, and know of many parents who didn't. You have people in Government and teaching jobs who are being forced to learn Spanish in order to keep their jobs. Many of them have been in their positions for years, but now face early retirement or the loss of their jobs because they don't know Spanish. I have been to other countries, and it is rare that you find someone in a shool or a government office that knows how to speak English. Yet we are forcing restrictions on our teachers and employees to learn a second language to accomodate foreigners here. Where is it going to stop. If the US suddenly has a influx of Russian immigrants coming in, are these same employees going to be required to learn Russian too. Instead we should be focusing on forcing the immigrants to learn our language - even offering more programs to educate them. Why punish our citizens? And I guess many would argue that their right to bear arms is being infringed on too. Personally I don't see why anyone needs to own some guns, but at the same time if all the guidelines are followed who is to say what guns they should and should not have. I agree that there should be a separation of church and state, but I think way too much emphasis has been put on it in recent years. I want to get back to less government involvement in our lives. I think in many areas the government has way overstepped its bounds. Hell I don't even think the government should be regulating abortion at all. I think that is a medical thing and should be up to the doctor and the patient. And I am one who thinks that except in extreme cases abortion is wrong. But I don't think the government should have a say in that at all.

But is it the actual majority. There are still a lot of Democrats that are on that line or else things like Prop 8 wouldn't have passed. Yes there are a lot that don't want it but at the same time there is a large part of the Democrats who feel that the Democratic party has gone too far to the left in embracing gay marriage and issues in that vein. Many strategist said this last election would have been closer if those were the basic issues but when the economy went south it pushed the advantage in favor of Obama. Obama was truly benefited by the economy this last election in much the same way that Reagan was in 1980 when he beat Carter. It was very similar then. The economy was so bad and just like George Stephanopolous said one morning whenever the economy is bad the party in charge no matter which one it is always gets the blame. The right - left and religious - anti-religion thing is the biggest thing that turns me off about the parties. When they both started embracing those instead of what I feel are real political issues is when I could no longer identify with them. And it is because of all that [!@#$%^&*] I no longer am registered as a party member. I agree with Greg 100% on this. It will not be a good thing for the country for any party to be in full charge. And it will not be good at all for the Democrats if things don't turn around big time in the next 4 years. Who in the hell will they blame when they have a Democratic President and full control. A political party always need a fall back or else they have to say well this one was all on us. The party go to has always been well the Republican's block us on this or we just couldn't get enough Democrats to vote with us.

Talk about misleading headlines, that headline of the article posted above - something about Fox network being too critical of Obama. Boy is that one misleading. Quote from the article: The latest weekly News Interest Index survey, conducted April 17-20 by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, finds a substantial partisan divide in views of how TV news networks cover Obama. More than four-in-ten Democrats (44%) say Fox has been too critical of Obama, compared with 25% of independents and just 18% of Republicans. No other network comes close to Fox, though 11% overall – including 18% of Democrats – say CNN has been too critical of the president. Very few Americans cite the broadcast networks – ABC (4%), NBC (4%) or CBS (3%) – as too critical. I might put some confidence in the article if an overwhelming majority of Independents had said they were or even if a biased group of researchers or focus group did. But with them asking members of each party and separating it by Party Lines - of course they are going to come up with the headline they did. I have never met a Democrat who did not think that Fox News wasn't too hard on any Democrat much less Obama. So wow they broke some real news there. None of those results surprise me at all.

And another: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090426/ts_af..._20090426050150 Obama dominates in first 100 days by Stephen Collinson Stephen Collinson – Sun Apr 26, 1:01 am ET WASHINGTON, (AFP) – In his high-velocity first 100 days, Barack Obama has sketched the outlines of a presidency of astounding ambition, which would remake the United States at home and transform its role abroad. Yet the new president's agenda still faces tests of fire posed by a punishing economic crisis, the scheming of US allies and foes abroad and a poisoned political environment back home. "It is clearly the most ambitious agenda at least since the 1960s," said Princeton University historian and political scientist Julian Zelizer. Inheriting a crisis of a magnitude few recent precessors faced, Obama seems to have steadied America's nerves despite the wrenching financial blight. He unleashed a huge government intervention in the economy, passed a historic 787-billion-dollar stimulus bill and now has high-stakes environmental and healthcare reforms on the launchpad. Abroad, Obama swapped George W. Bush's swagger for a cupped ear, giving Russia respect it craves, reaching out to Muslims and vowing to drain decades of enmity with foes Cuba and Iran. He previewed fundamental policy changes towards China, Mexico and Cuba, apologized to Europeans for past US "arrogance," mandated the closure of Guantanamo Bay, outlawed torture and ordered withdrawal from Iraq. Obama doubled down in Afghanistan and Pakistan, ditched US denial on climate change and called for a world free of nuclear weapons. Tom De Luca, professor of political science at Fordham University, said Obama's foreign policy was "breathtaking in its scope." "I think it clearly illustrates the immense self confidence Obama has in himself and in his administration." Obama, 47, once panned by rivals as inexperienced, slipped on the mantle of president with ease, in unflappable style. Despite missteps on cabinet nominations and the fallout of Bush-era terror interrogations, his team has mostly dominated the political message. The result: Obama is carrying the American people with him. Fifty-six percent in a USA Today/Gallup poll said he had done an excellent or good job. A Fox News poll gave Obama a job approval rating of 62 percent, though like other surveys, found a sharp gap between Democrats and Republicans. But talking about change is easy, effecting it is not: Obama admits America is a "big ocean liner -- it's not a speedboat; it doesn't turn around immediately." He has yet to face a full-scale foreign crisis, and will face rising pressure to lift many families out of economic misery. Many initiatives, including engaging Iran, battling the global crisis and subduing North Korea also depend on events and actors outside Obama's control. For example, despite a euphoric welcome, Obama failed to crown a Europe trip this month with large numbers of new NATO troops for Afghanistan. But the White House says results take time and exuded satisfaction after a Latin American summit last week. "President Obama has on his first two foreign trips changed the image of America around the world through leadership and engagement that advances our national interests, makes us safer and more secure and stronger," his spokesman Robert Gibbs said. Despite a fast start, eased by Democratic majorities in Congress and a demoralized Republican party, it is unclear whether Obama's political touch will endure on divisive issues like healthcare and climate change. "He is going to have to deal with that ambitious agenda in the totally polarized domestic political environment," said Zelizer. Debate still simmers over whether Obama is trying too much, too soon. "It?s not so much a question of whether he?s bitten off more than he can chew, but whether it may be too much for Congress to chew and swallow this year," Bush's final press secretary Dana Perino said. Obama aides counter that in dire times, the administration cannot afford not to attack all America's problems at once. On the model of Franklin Roosevelt, whose frenetic first days in office in 1933 enshrined the 100 days formula, Obama adopted an experimental approach to rescuing shattered banks and frozen credit markets. The stimulus bill, packed with spending on everything from high speed trains to rebuilding schools, also included tax cuts and was twinned by a simultaneous multi-billion dollar plan to aid the foreclosure-sapped mortgage market. But Republicans warn Obama will bankrupt future Americans, eyeing his 3.5 trillion dollar budget and deficits even the White House says will reach 1.7 trillion dollars this year. ************************************** This from that article is the one thing that has bothered me over the last few weeks: Everyone talked about having a President that the world could be proud of again. And Obama got up there and gave speeches and even to my heartbreak said he was not happy with some of the decisions his Country had made in recent years. Almost as if to me he was groveling to the world saying he was ashamed of America. I know he wasn't groveling but it came off that way to me. And yet he does all this and still comes away with no more support for his war than Bush did. No matter what America does the world is going to do what they want too anyway. Maybe they will turn around and say later they will send troops to help out but right now it looks like the same old same old to me. Again proving to me it doesn't matter what party is in there it's all politics all the same. Back to the articles I am proud of some things that Obama has done and I am not proud of a lot of what he has done. His speeches overseas being the biggest one to me. I have a hard time with those things in my mind. To me I feel about his first 100 days the same as I did Bush's - some good, some bad.

Not inserting into the other mess, just wanted to post this article. It is balanced to me and shows a fair measure of his first 100 days: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090426/pl_af..._20090426045715 Scorecard of Obama's campaign promises Sun Apr 26, 12:56 am ET WASHINGTON, (AFP) – President Barack Obama made hundreds of campaign promises on the road to the White House -- and has pressed ahead on several of the most high-profile in his first 100 days. According to a scorecard of more than 500 campaign pledges collated on the Pulitzer Prize-winning website PolitiFact.com, Obama has kept 27 promises and broken six, but the vast majority are still a work in progress. Among the major promises KEPT by the new Democratic leader: -- Most combat troops are being pulled out of Iraq by August 2010 and all US forces are scheduled to leave by the end of 2011. -- Extra troops are being dispatched to Afghanistan -- 21,000 this year -- and Pakistan is at the center of a new drive against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. -- A 75-billion-dollar fund has been created to help embattled homeowners. -- New loans are coming on tap for small businesses. -- A state health insurance scheme for children has been expanded. -- Unemployment benefits have been enlarged. -- Predecessor George W. Bush's restrictions on stem-cell research have been overturned. -- Two Republicans are in the cabinet. Obama had promised at least one. -- Curbs on travel and money transfers by Cuban-Americans to their communist-run homeland have been lifted. -- And the Obama girls have a new puppy. Obama has also made a start on rolling back Bush's "war on terror" policies by ordering the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention site and banning abusive interrogations of terror suspects that critics called "torture." In foreign policy, Obama's pledges to engage with Iran and to reset ties with Russia remain in an embryonic phase. Tough talk on trade has not led to any action against China or America's NAFTA partners Canada and Mexico. But the president did make good on a vow to deliver a speech in an Islamic capital in his first 100 days during a recent visit to Turkey. Among promises BROKEN: -- US recognition of the Ottoman Empire's "genocide" during World War I against Armenians. Obama avoided the word during his stay in Turkey and in a message on Armenian Remembrance Day. -- A ban on former lobbyists working in the White House has been waived for at least three staffers. -- Obama's popular pledge to scrap income tax for seniors earning less than 50,000 dollars a year did not figure in his huge economic stimulus package. -- Also missing from the stimulus bill and subsequent proposals has been a promised tax credit of 3,000 dollars for companies adding full-time workers. Other promises are classed by PolitiFact.com as STALLED with administration officials talking down prospects for action. Those include ending the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays serving in the military. Neither is there any sign of Obama's promised windfall tax on giant oil company profits, with energy prices well off their record highs of last year amid the global economic crunch.

Besides the sound of my boyfriends snoring I am listening to Pat Benatar this morning. She is one of my favorite ladies of all time.

Yes but there is a big difference in learning from the past and using it as an excuse. And that is what politics has been doing for awhile. Instead of holding the current regime whoever it is responsible all that the parties do is use the excuse well at least it is not as bad as so and so. Look at how many times the republicans fell on the old excuse that Bush might not be perfect but at least he was not Clinton. And now with Obama it is well at least he is better than Bush. How many times has that been said in this thread alone. It is time we do move on from the past in that sense in that as party members we hold our party man whoever he is responsible for his [!@#$%^&*] and not just say well he may not be perfect but at least he is not (fill in the blank).

But that is the same perception that so many people had about the inaugural too. And should be had any day. I mean look around every day in the US and you see all kinds of people hurting and in dire straights. They are just forgotten about and they aren't all lumped around in one big area like New Orleans was. Plus as was mentioned think about Galveston, think about Biloxi, Gulfport, Mobile, and even recently Kentucky with the ice storm where many died and people were without power and daily necessities for weeks. Think about the recent floods in the mid-west where many lost homes, many died, etc. And the list could go on and on and on and on. I have often wondered where is the outrage for these people when Washington went on about its daily lives while all these people suffered. Where is the outrage when Washington partied while people throughout the United States have been hurting. That goes back to 1980 when the Reagans first went into office and America was in a recession. There were the usual parties and you had Nancy Reagan bragging about the dress she was wearing and you had her talking about the china she was purchasing for the White House. And boy did the Reagans get crucified in the media for it - esp. Nancy Reagan. you had people in these casual on the street interviews who wanted to know how could they be doing all that when they were losing their jobs and barely holding on to their homes. If Nancy Reagan esp. had not backed off of all that [!@#$%^&*] Reagan would have really had a hard time ever getting anything done. I think alot of things are totally manipulated by the press. Many of these things don't get alot of coverage by the press and thus America doesn't know about them. Most people would not even know that Gulfport and areas of Mississippi were hit bad if they didn't go there because the press played up New Orleans. I went to Biloxi and that area and I went to New Orleans. The amount of damage was no different in my eyes. Mississippi had better evacuation precedures and thus cut down on the loss of life. I am not saying that FEMA should have not responded quicker, but also each person there needs to bear some responsibility themselves. They were told to evacuate and they were told to prepare. My in-laws decided to stay but in the process of doing so they did prepare themselves the best they could. Some of the people that lost their lives lost them because they chose to stay - not because they could not be evacuated. I remember the headlines about one of my favorite singers Fats Domino and how they even said that he chose to stay in New Orleans and didn't even try to evacuate. What happened there was bad, but I can't say that it is the worst thing that has ever happened to Americans or happened in America. And as I said before there is a lot of blame to go around for why it happened so bad there.

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)

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.

That is another thing I hate too. Is the name calling. Come on people can't we act like adults. Children call each other names - not adults. On another site I used to go to there are folks on there that call George Bush, McCain, Palin, their spouses all kinds of names all the name. Another member called Obama one and all those same folks went up in arms and ended up getting the guy who called Obama a name banned from the site. It used to be that religion brought out the biggest hyprocrites but in this day and time politics seems to be turning more people to hypocrisy than religion or at least just as many.

Wow Talk About Mixed Reactions: Poll done on TV Guide What did you think of President Obama's news conference? Liked it 38% Didn't like it 29% Didn't watch it 33%

As an Independent what I don't understand is why we can't ever discuss the issues. the majority of the posts in here (even many of mine) are not discussing issues but just BLAME. Or even worse arguing about which of the f*uck ups is a worse f*uck up. Oh gee all of them from Reagan on down have been f*uck ups. And if we won't to go to issuing blame there is enough to go around from the Democrats who were the original ones that pushed some of the Fanny Mae & Freddy regulations that were too lenient to the Bush's esp. GWB and his liberal spending. The mess that this country is in wasn't done by one man, one party, etc. - they all did it. And we as Americans for the most part sat back and let it happen. And as we said many of us took advantage of the liberal or lax regulations on getting loans and took out loans for houses we knew we couldn't afford and took advantage of the lax lending rules and got credit cards with huge limits and built up them and then can't pay them. There are some innocents out there who have just been victims of bad situations. Many in the last few months due to the bail out plan that should have never gotten through with the lack of regulations that the money was given to those folks. Again Bush had the approval over there and he shares the most blame for letting it happen but so does Congress and the elected officials there who pushed it through without putting those regulations in place. Most of America didn't want it in the first place. As I have said before I am sick and tired of all of them. And I am really sick and tired of the blame game that I even fall into from time to time. But it is all our political system has given in to these days. Instead of either of them taking responsibility for what they have done, lets just constantly pass the buck and put the blame somewhere else. And worse yet we will just say well at least I am better than Bush or as the Republicans did at least I am not Clinton. At this point I could give a flying f*uck about who is better or who is worse. All I know is we just came off of 8 years where everything was Bush's fault. And all I can say is Democrats it is your turn to sit on the firing seat. You blamed Bush for everything for 8 years, so now you might as well get ready everything that is wrong for the next 4 years (most likely 8) will be Obama's fault. It is the way our political system works. Even when a Republican does something good, it is the nature of the beast that a Democrat is not going to acknowledge it (with some exceptions) and vice versa Republican's do the same to Democrats. I just like being an independent. When I play the blame game I get to blame both of them.

I am from Tennessee so it should not be a surprise. Tennessee is one of the states where McCain won over Obama by a huge percentage. Nashville is actually the only city/county in our area where Obama got a significant percentage of the vote but everywhere else in this part of Tennessee McCain won. It has always been a Republican state but none of them has beaten the Democrat as bad as McCain did Obama here. But even with that more of it is has to do with the current Democratic Governor than it does with McCain or Obama. We have our first Democrat as Governor in a long time and overall Tennessee is disgusted with him and thus the Democratic party gets blamed. I will say this the best move that Obama ever made was passing on Bredesen as a member of his cabinet even though it would have been good for Tennessee to lose him as Governor but it sure would have been bad for the country.

I have learned that all the polls have a lot to do with which network and stuff does them. I have seen in the last few days polls where his approval ratings are slipping and some where it is up. It all boils down to who they ask and often what network or whatever is asking. Out local paper recently did one and over 70% of folks asked do not approve of what he has done so far, but I would expect that since in all the polls done during the election by the paper had McCain beating Obama by 69%.

Oh well. I don't feel any of the posts addressed what I said - maybe a little with UClan's but even with that I would love to think what he said is true but I highly have my doubts. Our accountant has never been wrong on matters like these and that has nothing to do with politics as he is a democrat himself and proudly displays the Obama coins in his office that he bought off TV. I am just dealing with things and going on. The accountant is helping me to put the final touches on closing my business and call it over and done. I'll write it all off as a loss on the tax return next year and move on. As to anything I said it had nothing to do with who is in office it was just what was on my mind. And I agree with what Michael said every administration is rocky at first even Reagans. It wasn't all peaches and cream back then. And his wife caused him more of his problems when he got in. It was the same with Jackie Kennedy. The early days of both Kennedy and Reagans administrations were filled with the press focusing on the decorating of the White House, the new china, and what both ladies were wearing. And both times Presidential advisers had to step in and get both ladies to back off what they were doing because it was bringing too much negative focus on their husbands. That is when Nancy Reagan quit talking about such things in interviews and adopted the Just Say No To Drugs campaign and that was her focus for the rest of the Reagan Presidency. I give Michelle Obama credit that her first days have been the best part of Obama's first few months as she has done nothing to bring negative publicity to her husband.

Before I get started I'm not coming in here to get started on the Republican/Democrat or Bush/Obama thing. I don't care one thing about that or repeating any of the stuff anymore or even dealing with it. I have stayed out of here for that very reason because even if you try to discuss something bothering you that is all it comes down too. I am just seeking some answers to something that I was wondering if anyone else had any info on and just to express an opinion or at least just vent about this. If you want to bring back up the other stuff or get into another debate about who is better or who's [!@#$%^&*] don't stink just please don't respond. Anyway as I have trie to say before the recession has hit me and mine very hard. Every month just finds more and more stuff we are having to cut. And if things don't get any better soon I may not even have Internet access. Each month just keeping my kids in college and stuff gets to be more and more of a burden esp. since my small business just keeps getting hit and basically at this rate is dead. All we are waiting for is the sign that says we are going out of business. Technically the last month you can say we have been out of business because we have none. Anyway I thought the stimulus plan was supposed to help but the first letters I got on it this week just leaves me with more questions. I am supposed to start a new plan for payroll which I don't have any way. Basically I am supposed to take less out on my employees so that they get more money during the year and at the end of the year there will no more tax refunds. Instead of getting a check at the end of the year now employees will have more money during the year. They are doing that from the letter I got instead of sending out stimulus checks like were given last year. Where my boyfriend works they put this into play this week with his check. They usually hold out 30 to 40 dollars per week on him for withholding. This week they only took out 5 dollars. So he ended up with 33 dollars more on his check this week than he normally does. His accountant said at this rate he definitely won't get a tax refund and most likely he will owe the government money come tax time next year. Needless to say he is not happy at all. What I don't understand is how does this help the unemployed. If they don't get a check now where is their stimulus money coming from. Plus like me the majority of my income is my social security. Last year I got a stiumulus check but with this plan I won't get any. My SS check is not increasing. So to me this plan is only helping a small portion of the population and not really helpng many that are needing help. Esp. the unemployed. I don't know I am just at the point to where any glimmer of hope that you see just gets dimmer and dimmer. I just don't have any faith that any of them are really trying to help us anymore. And what is going to be left if help doesn't come soon. My mortgage payment has doubled in the last year, and since my extra income from my business has been cut I have gotten behind on my payments. Tuition rates went up this year in Tennessee due to the fact that TN cut spending to colleges. My daughters lost their financial aid due to the cuts as well. I am closer than I have ever been to losing my home - a home that has been in my family for almost 30 years now. And my story is not even as bad as so many others out there. I don't know I had at least hoped that the stimulus money would come in a bigger lump sum that just a little more each week or something. And what good is it going to do if people end up owing at the end of the year. I'm just frustrated. Oh well I said my peace and vented. Over and out.

Michael I can't remember all the details - other than what I have put up above. You might go over to my site http://s15.zetaboards.com/SoapsWeb/site/ and go to the Memories and Questions threads to the one for The Doctors. We have a member over there who is pretty good with The Doctors memories and stuff. he may be able to help you.

Jess my use of private jet was probably wrong. But I know in Tennessee and I think most of the states are the same but the Senators either here have private jets which they fuel up at the taxpayers expense or they fly "FIRST CLASS" and bill the taxpayers for it. As to the last thing as I have said in some of these other posts I realized that Obama did not have something to do with all of this and I realized that not all of it was paid for by the taxpayers. As I have tried to explain over and over again it is the principle of the thing that when Americans are hurting it does not present a good example to see them partying and have to pay for larger expenses for security when we as a Nation can not afford and I don't care who was or is the President. The Security could be cut down by the staff not going out as much in public. If during this time they kept a lower profile the security would not be as high. But that is all beside the point. As to the other call me cynical on any of you. But after 8 years of the Republicans criticizing Clinton for everything he did. And 8 years of the Democrats criticizing the Bushs for everything they did. I can't help but know that if McCain had won and this article was about him and what he and Cindy McCain were spending and all the partying that the shoe would be different. It wouldn't be about American's being excited for change and all that mess - it would be about how much they were spending in the face of a recessive economy. And that is coming from someone who spent part of the last 8 years pointing fingers at the Bush family and their regime. All I know is that I felt down about all this before I made my post. And now that it has been turned into yet another fight between the parties and all that [!@#$%^&*], my attitude is not any better.

FYI I did not get into a snit about anything. You can think I did all you want but I didn't. I got mad because I wanted to discuss somethign that was on my mind. You turned it into a political debate about who did what. That is the reason i hardly ever come in here. I have been working ever since I came back here to avoid any thread you are in and now that I know you are in the political therads I won't come in here anymore. For that matter from here on out I have you on ignore. I hate to do that to anyone but everything you ever respond to me with is something negative and because of that I will stay away from you and ignore you.

You just proved my point about the parties. You turned this whole thing into a damn Obama thing when my whole post and point was about Politicians and not even about Obama. Don't worry I won't bother this thread again. i quit before and stayed away and I will back out again. Believe me you wont' hear me saying anything that can even slightly degrade or criticize him ever again. As to the one comment, I seem to remember the same thing being done to Bush even before he took office and I was one of them that did it. But again that is beside the point. My posts was even about Obama but about politicians. I just used the article to stem what I had hoped was a discussion. I forgot that everything comes back to the parties.

I appreciate you posting that and clearning that matter up. But with me it still doesn't matter. My disappointment is with ALL POLITICIANS. And what GWB spent or didn't spent doesn't change that fact for me. Just because so and so spent this much or didn't spend this much doesn't take away from the fact of what is going on right now. It just causes me to lose more hope in POLITICIANS. And more hope in both parties because I am so damn tired of trying to post something and discuss something that is seriously bothering you and all it can ever be turned into is a political fight between the parties. The economic crunch has hit me hard and for the first time in my 44 years of living I couldn't even buy my children Christmas gifts because everything I had went into keeping my children in college and keeping my business going. Budget cuts cost both of my children all the financial aid they were getting for college. And I am not the only one who is hurting. So many others are too. And sorry but right now it does not instill any hope in me for our country when I see the politicians dressed to the nines and partying and driving around in fancy cadillacs and the like. And I don't care which president it is or what color his skin is. And sorry but right now I couldn't give a [!@#$%^&*] about which politician spent the most on their inaugural. I am worried about now and what I see. And I don't mean that ugly - it is just the way I feel right now.

See I don't see it that way and I don't understand why we are supposed to ignore such things with Obama when things like that were not ignored with Bush, Clinton, or any of them. I judge all the presidents and the politicians by the same thing - the total picture. And Obama doesnt' get a by on any of that. And you see just by the post above by Roman it is not. You mention something that is proven by articles and they will always throw it back up with what so and so did. Just another reason I have been staying out of the any thing politics. You can't even mention anything without someone saying well look at what George W. Bush did or look at what Clinton did or look at what Reagan did - as if it makes it any better because so and so did this too. Well it doesn't. So what if GWB's alledgedly cost $140 million it doesn't take away from the anger and disappointment I feel in all politicians taht they are spending all this money right now. To me the cost of GWB's or Reagean's or whoever's is very irreleavnt right now and doesn't matter one iota right now. George W. Bush was judged by every little thing he did whether he had anything to do with it or not. And Obama will too. I know that Obama doesn't have anything to do with everything here but it is still about him and his administration. But the fact is that the cost is there and a large part of it falls on the taxpayers who are having a difficult time right now. I could have more HOPE and thoughts of a positive nature if they had scaled things back. Instead they are making it more lavish. It just doesn't seem right when the country is talking about bail outs, rising unemployment and all. It is just not a good sign and does not offer a sign of hope at all.

Direct quote from the article above and I have seen many other articles that state the same: