Obama Presidency Watch/post election & first 100 days

reply to post by xpert11

I have a question for you. Just what exactly do you think Obama should treat as a threat to either a threat to the US or global security and what constitutes such threats? Cheers xpert11.

Earlier, I gave an abbreviated response to your more difficult to answer enquiry. I offered the following as items from which Obama could choose:
1) International drug trafficking
2) Proliferation of nuclear weapons
3) Global warming or accelerated climate change.
4) Poverty.
5) Unsustainable population growth around the planet
6) Over-catching of ocean fish resources.
7) Failure of IMF, WB and WTO in third world countries
8) Israel’s encroachment on Arab’s land
9) Wasteful use of scarce potable water
10) Easy acceptance of murder and killing as normal.
I expect others could find more pressing issues to add to this short list.

I’m sorry if I forgot the War on Terror. That fiasco so much favored by the Neo Cons. If we do the first 10 items above, there will be no need for a war on terror. If we refuse or neglect to do those things then VP Cheney’s angry prediction of a “perpetual” war or Big John McCain’s offer to have a war in Iraq for “100 years” will be fulfilled. In the end of it all if either man proves right, then we up here will all work for Halliburton ot Blackwater! Ugh! Shades of Smaug, JRR Tolkien's vile dragon! (No, I cannot pronounce it).

On drug trafficking. 8,000 people have been murdered in Mexico by gangs engaged in territorial drug wars over the past 2 years, ‘07 and ‘08. Mexican authorities complain 80% of the heavy guns used by the gangs are imported from the United States. Yet we Americans continue to regard that territorial dispute as essentially a Mexican problem. Come Quick Sweet Jesus! Take your people home while their self-inflicted innocence yet obtains.

Sharks native to the Gulf of Baja formerly ignored the presence of tourists swimming along the beautiful beaches. Over the past 2 years that live and let live relationship has changed. More than 3,000 human bodies have been thrown into the Gulf by the warring drug gangsters. How many were alive at the time is anybody's guess. The sharks have not surprisingly acquired a taste for humans. A legitimate and lucrative tourist industry is now put in jeopardy.

Not so long ago Fortune Magazine which annually publishes a list of the 1000 richest people in the world - an honor roll of the rich and famous - added a drug cartel murdering gangster to their list of achievers as evidenced by his acquiring a billion dollars. Had their list existed in the early 1940s, I’m sure they would have put Adolph Hitler down as exemplary of an efficient railroad transporter for having hauled 6 million Jews to the Holocaust. Have you no sense of decency, no sense of propriety, Fortune Magazine?

I can’t go on today explaining my hypothesis, Mr X11, but I attribute this downfall in national morality say purpose to the LOW INCOME TAX RATES imposed from Reagan onward. (Reagan cut the 50% rate of Carter to 28%). A country that pays no taxes is worthless to anyone including itself. Paying taxes is the one thing both rich and poor can do, hopefully in graduated rates recognizing the lesser incomes and resources of the poor.

Taxes are the great equalizer. And the great unite-er to misquote a semi-literate former president.

[edit on 6/15/2009 by donwhite]

Terrorism per say has never actually been a serious threat to U.S. security... that is not to discount the damage they can do but they are more like fleas or horseflies... a nuciance and occassionally dangerous but not an actual threat... not like another country is... that is for sure.

In my opinion North Korea is the biggest threat... not because what they themselves might do but because of their lack of scruples in regards to selling their technology. Same is true of Pakistan.

Iran is only a potential threat that can be managed and possibly defused if handled properly...

But in retrospect really after North Korea... the biggest danger is the black market in leftovers from the Soviet Union... nuclear, biological or chemical.

reply to post by grover

In my opinion North Korea is the biggest threat. .. not because what they themselves might do but because of their lack of scruples in regards to selling their technology. Same is true of Pakistan. Iran is only a potential threat that can be managed and possibly defused if handled properly. .. But in retrospect really after North Korea. .. the biggest danger is the black market in leftovers from the Soviet Union. .. nuclear, biological or chemical.

I have asked my friends WHAT is it the North Koreans WANT that we WON’T give to them? Sweet Jesus, we spend 10 X what they want in BS jaunts across the Pacific every other year.

China “likes” the NK because they agitate the US and keep the issues of South Korea, Japan and Taiwan on the front burner. Aside: Can you recall when China last invaded another country?

We - the US - show next to no interest in those issues you raise over WMDs. Maybe this is the time to make George Bush Czar of WMDs with plenipotentiary powers?

[edit on 6/15/2009 by donwhite]

Oh they are fully aware of the threat the black market in former Soviet technology poses and have been so since Clinton.

As for China invading... well lets see... Tibet... they fought a war with India in the 50's and of course Korea and they were in Vietnam as well.

They are very active in both politics and military in the nations surrounding them but they really don't seem too aggressive these days except economically... which is battleground of "civilized" states these days.

reply to post by grover

As for China invading. .. well lets see. .. Tibet. .. they fought a war with India in the 50's and of course Korea and they were in Vietnam as well. They are very active in both politics and military in the nations surrounding them but they really don't seem too aggressive these days except economically. .. which is battleground of "civilized" states these days.

I’m more generous to the Chinese than you, Mr G. Tibet was historically a suzerainty state of the old China empires. For millennia. The Tibetans have a small number of followers of a variation of Buddhism which features a divine being known as the Delhi Llama. Unfortunately for all of them, the CiA corrupted the Tibetans in the late 1940s to spy on the Chinese which gave the Chinese the causa bella excuse to take closer control of Tibet. I’m not willing to say that was an invasion.

The war with India was not an invasion. It was like the ones fought with the USSR, a border dispute. Keep in mind that the British drew the boundaries of India without consultation with China or anyone living there. No invasion. Same with Vietnam. That was a border dispute. In Vietnam's case the lines were drawn by the French in Paris. No local consult.

Korea was slightly different. The US was China’s enemy. In December, 1949 the US aided Chiang Kia Chek remove his Nationalist Army to old Formosa now called Taiwan. Actually it was Taiwan before it was called Formosa, which is Portugese for 'island of flowers.' In November, 1950, the US, chasing the North Koreans was fast approaching the Yalu River, the boundary between China and Korea.

Douglas MacArthur let it be known that he wanted to engage China in a war to restore Chiang to power in China. He did not rule out the use lof nuclear weapons. It was this dispute that caused Truman to fire him. China warned the US many times not to approach the Yalu closer than 50 km. (30 mi). There are pictures showing US soldiers urinating into the Yalu River. Too close.

To avoid a wider war, the Chinese sent what they called Volunteers into Korea. When the Chinese pushed us back to the 38th parallel, they stopped their drive. The Chinese did not invade Korea. IMO.

reply to post by grover

Oh they [China] are fully aware of the threat the black market in former Soviet technology poses and have been so since Clinton.

Black market? Hmm. Who do you think is in the “market” for nuclear bomb technology not to mention the makings of a bomb? Black or white market.

First, it is generally conceded that the Russian Mafia OWNS 20% of the whole dam Russian Federation. Lock, stock and barrel. Further, it is admitted that the KGB “RUNS” the country. And you know who the Man from the KGB is? The very same man George Bush looked into his EYES and saw a friend there! A man you can trust! A man he could do business with. Can I say “A fellow traveler?” Sweet Jesus, I wish we could arrange for George Bush to look straight into the eyes of Osama bin Laden! There is no telling what we might learn! But alas, Amendment 26 has forever deprived of his insights!

Back to my original Q. I raised the above to back my assertion that if OBL had ever wanted an A-bomb, he - OBL - with Persian Gulf money - could have bought one (or two) a LONG time ago! Instead of taking down the WTC he could have obliterated W-DC. So why did he not do that? Ain't no guy holed up in a cave in far off Afghan going to do that without consuliting with his HIGHER UPS. Do you not think it likely he consulted with older, wiser heads before the Nine Eleven Event? That the Saudi Royal Family could approve the WTC thing but would not approve the W-DC tihing. Risk beenfit ratio analysis! IMO.

Forbes Magazine just named one of the Columbian drug cartel an OUTSTANDING CITIZEN of the world by adding him to their list of BILLIONAIRES. (Most of them are crooks, IMO). Shucks, North Korea does not have a billion dollars of anything except hungry people. It’s my opinion if I was a gangster and I wanted an a-bomb, and I had 1 billion tax free dollars laundered in Cayman Islands, the Isle of Wight and so on, I could buy one. Or two. That I do believe. But what would I do with it? A-bombs like a tall green eye red head double Ds have high upkeep.

Surely it must be obvious to any sane observer, that the US with its 8,000 deliverable A bombs, the RF with its 6,000 deliverable A bombs and the French - with 50-60 - and the English with 20-50 - and the Chinese with 50 -100 - and the Israeli - with 50-200 - Pakistani - with 60-70 - Indians - with 50-60 - have seen over and over again that POSSESSING A-BOMBS DOES NOT MAKE YOU SECURE. They have proved to be a rather costly STATUS symbol. South Africa, Brazil and Argentina have given up on their plans for nuclear weapons. Publicly. Are they not as SAFE as we? Or maybe even SAFER?

They [China] are very active in both politics and military in the nations surrounding them but they [China] really don't seem too aggressive these days except economically. .. which is battleground of "civilized" states these days.

You mean like the United States of America? Like we had 200,000 Guatemalans killed for wanting to take over unused United Fruit Company land to distribute to the poor? Or we had Pres. Allende of Chile killed for wanting to take back Chile’s copper mines? Or we supervised the killing of 10,000 El Salvadorans, 5,000-10,000 Nicaraguans? Or invaded Haiti 7 or 8 times and stayed there once from 1918 to 1933. What is our fascination with Haiti anyway? Is the CFR into voodoo?

So why are we being so hard on China? When was the last time we invaded Mexico? Was It not 1916 under Gen. “Black Jack” Perishing? So known by the nickname he got when, fresh out of West Point, he led a black cavalry unit.

[edit on 6/18/2009 by donwhite]

I have not been in this thread in a while but I will like to express my concerns about how the Obama administration has been falling from grace, at least in my views.

The man that gave so much hope to everybody in this nation that voted for him, has taken an above face and now is just like his predecessor nothing more and a scam behind the charismatic smile and goo looks.

1.8 trillion dollars in debt since he is been in office, 1 trillion more to launch a health care reform that has nothing do even emulate the one run in other nations.

I think Obama has lost his marbles in the white house already.

reply to post by marg6043

The man that gave so much hope to everybody in this nation that voted for him, has taken an above face and now is just like his predecessor nothing more and a scam behind the charismatic smile and goo looks.

1.8 trillion dollars in debt since he is been in office, 1 trillion more to launch a health care reform that has nothing do even emulate the one run in other nations. I think Obama has lost his marbles in the white house already

Patience. Obama has to overcome institutional inertia. Since Ronnie Reagan beat Jimmy Carter the Dems have had only TWO years In power before Newt Gingrich rampaged his Contract with America and took over Congress that lasted until 2007.

On the economy. I think most people agree that de-regulation and the general abandonment of “sound business practices” since the 1980s is the largest contributor to the economic melt down of ‘07, and ‘08.

Yes, anyone who thinks a CDS is an “investment” is partly to blame. Credit Default Swaps. In other words, the hustle is “If what I sell you goes sour, I’ll give you a good one in its place.” You cannot lose!

Then AIG gets the bright idea to offer INSURANCE against the CDS going south! Insurance and underwriting are the two sides of one coin. To underwrite means to PREDICT. To make predictions requires experience. AIG was offering to insure the OUTCOME of an open market which no one had any prior experience. It could not be underwritten. Or predicted! But AIG did it anyway. Or tried.

If money is the first requisite for investing, then confidence is the second essential to make it happen. By propping up institutions DESPITE their active participation in the meltdown like Goldman Sachs, people with money began to come back into the buying and selling of securities. Why? Because they had CONFIDENCE. There is no trading without the Rich and Famous. Poor people do not buy stocks and bonds. Although you know that given the opportunity I’d lead the rich straight to the guillotine, the simple fact is we poor people NEED them. Without good banks there can be no country.

On health care. Any serious observer knows that only a single payer - like Medicare - will ultimately work to deliver needed health care at a price we can afford to pay. But Obama knows politics is the art of the possible. That single payer option is not possible in 2009. IF Obama can get some reform - any reform - then that institutional DAM will be broken and NEXT time - say 2011 - we can look to act smart instead of acting cowed.

[edit on 6/19/2009 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


This time I can no buy into "is necessary rhetoric" you know I always agree with you, but the trend our government is following it will only bring this nation to its economic downfall.

Regardless of billions been dumped to the markets so the rich and famous can keep their living standards jobs are been lost at an alarming rate and is not end to it without a building base.

As for the insurance reform is nothing than another big scam and the well being of the "people" is the last thing in the mind of our politicians.

Big insurance are too big to fail Obama is not going to got for one payer and his bill is modeled from Kennedy and what ever name the co-sponsor name is, this just to give big insurance power over business to forced them into giving insurance to their employees.

Still this will not address the poor that can not afford insurance to begin with and those that doesn't work.

In a nation that is aging with the baby boomer's demand for health care will become a burden to the tax payer and government even if is free due to the present economic crisis that obviously has not end yet.

reply to post by marg6043

This time I can no buy into "is necessary rhetoric" you know I always agree with you, but the trend our government is following it will only bring this nation to its economic downfall. Regardless of billions been dumped to the markets so the rich and famous can keep their living standards jobs are been lost at an alarming rate and is not end to it without a building base.

All the facts you recite are true. The future outcomes however are really beyond anyone’s depth of field. We are in unchartered territory, financially speaking. Even with people who disagree on what action to take or not to take, everyone I hear agrees that restoring confidence in the public in the FUTURE of the country is the most important thing that can be done presently.

Recriminations are worthless but I cannot avoid making one. If the Clinton tax rates had remained in effect, we would be about $6-$8 t. ahead of where we are today. I find it disingenuous for people who sat by while the SURPLUS was given away almost before the echo of the oath-taking had died away, and the regular running of half trillion dollar deficits became the order of the day for Republicans. Methinks they cry crocodile tears today. They had 5 years doing it their way and look where it got us. I don’t think the Republicans have any reputation for fiscal responsibility in any event.

As for the insurance reform is nothing than another big scam and the well being of the "people" is the last thing in the mind of our politicians. Big insurance are too big to fail Obama is not going to got for one payer and his bill is modeled from Kennedy and what ever name the co-sponsor name is, this just to give big insurance power over business to forced them into giving insurance to their employees. Still this will not address the poor that can not afford insurance to begin with and those that doesn't work. In a nation that is aging with the baby boomer's demand for health care will become a burden to the tax payer and government even if is free due to the present economic crisis that obviously has not end yet.

You are right on target again, M43. But I repeat, it is a HIGH hurdle to get ANY reform passed this year. It must be done this year as no one in Congress will vote for anything serious in an election year, 2010. That’s why I said get ANYTHING going this year, and then FIX it in 2011. That’s the best you can do in a country where 41 Republican senators can STOP any action. Democracy at its worse, or at its best, your choice.

Glad to hear from you Marg. Did you notice that PR’s delegate to Congress now has nearly the same full vote of any other elected representative? See Note 1. That added 6 delegates to the 435 making 441 now member of the House. At least I think that is the case. Added was the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas to the already existing Puerto Rico, District of Columbia, Guam,, the American Virgin Islands and American Samoa.


Note 1. Democrats GOOD, Republicans BAD. In January 2007, it was proposed by Democrats in the House that the 1993–1995 (Democratic Congress under Clinton) procedure be revived. (Ruined by Republican Newt Gingrich in 1996.) The House approved the proposal with the adoption of H.Res. 78 by a vote of 226–191. Party Line Vote! Dems Yea, Republicans Nay! Puerto Ricans ought not to forget who butters their bread.

The new current practice not only grants delegates votes in the standing committees, but also in the powerful conference committees (see House Rule III, 3[B]). Conference committees include representatives from both the House and Senate. These committees work to compromise and reconcile conflicts between House and Senate bills. Conferees often have great influence on the specifics of new federal laws.


[edit on 6/22/2009 by donwhite]

Personally I am beginning to think that a total economic collapse is the only way to move forward... the beasts of predatory capitalism are so entrenched that they will never allow the government to make any serious reforms regarding them or anything else for that matter.

Let it all fail and start from scratch... with vise grip regulations in place.

After all the bastards deserve it.

reply to post by donwhite


Thanks for backing me up, as usual you are a true patriot just like Grover.



The health care reform is now up to 1. something trillion dollars more than the procrastination of 1 trillion and I bet that by the time the government have this bill on the table and ready to be sign is going to reach well over 2 trillion and I am been shy here.

Now, Grover yes you are right nothing short of a revolution will help fix the damage done to this nation.

Many people knew that Obama was going to be meet by many problems from the previews president.

But Obama has chosen to follow his predecessor, all the reforms for the banking system, the insurance industry (health care) and the financial with the credit crisis has been nothing but a scam, all the corruption is sweep under the rug and probably forgotten in no time.

Leaving the old crocks to devise again more ways to feed their greed and bring this nation down.

While Americans wanted the man of hope to bring change, all we have gotten is a massive deficit, more bigger government, reforms, executive orders anything to keep an economic system that is dying.

Lobbyist from all those groups are the ones that has dictated the regulations and policies that they will follow and this has nothing to do with the people just personal interest.

So actually all Obama has done for the first 6 months is cater to private interest, regardless of what many calls socialist agendas.

All the money wasted on bailouts, on financial reforms has done nothing to address the nations problems we are not better today that we did one year ago.

Thing is Marg all presidents follow their predecessors up to a point... its called contunity if we didn't have it we would have wild swings in policy with each new president or congress... its bad enough now but it would be far worse.

I am sure the Obama presidency will be far different a year from now as they start building upon what they were left... that is when it will be interesting.

reply to post by grover


That if. . . if is something left to build anyway. . . time will tell, but I wouldn't' put my hopes in it anymore, the way Obama is increasing government and deficit he is going to brake a record.

A lot of people put an amazing amount of emotional energy into getting Obama elected for a variety of reasons. I hadn't seen anything like that since the McGovern campaign in 1972... and the truth be told they were just setting themselves up for a let down.

I had no illusions... while I voted for him and hoped his rhetoric was more than just that but I didn't bank my heart on it... he is a politician period with what all that means and implies both good and bad.

Still all that being said... given the choice between Obama and McCain/Palin I am glad we have Obama...

McCain is a tired old man with no real ideas and I shudder to imagine that bimbo anywhere near real power and if the GOP does go with her in 2012 they are fools... same with newt the gingrich.

Everyone who gets elected president has an on the job learning period where they carry on their predecessors policies while they craft their own...

I would be really surprised if Guither is still on board by autumn... he is the dead weight of the administration and his polices are part of the failed GOP economic policies... if Obama is as smart as he seems he will realize that and sack the man.

reply to post by grover

I voted for him and hoped his rhetoric was more than just that but I didn't bank my heart on it... he is a politician period with what all that means and implies both good and bad. Still all that being said... given the choice between Obama and McCain/Palin I am glad we have Obama... McCain is a tired old man with no real ideas . . I shudder to imagine that bimbo anywhere near real power and if the GOP does go with her in 2012 they are fools... same with Newt the Gingrich.

Newt hasn’t had a new idea since he divorced his hospitalized first wife. After having to return the $4.7 million bribe from Rupert Murdoch, life has never been the same.

I call it the Palin/Limbaugh Axis of Ignorance. Here’s Republicans who presided over increasing the public debt from just under ONE Trillion Dollars - 1981 - to just over 10 TRILLION dollars, 2009. And not one of them ever said anything about it!

Now the Dems are trying to save the economy wrecked by the Reagan-ism of “Get the government off your backs” which followed on his other slogan, “Government is the problem not the solution.” And Ronnie is hailed as a political GENIUS! Yeah, him and Bernie Madoff.

The self blinded followers of Ronnie and Pope John Paul 2 each claim to have defeated the Soviet Union single-handed! Hmm? How can 2 guys claim to have done it all by themselves? One of them must be lying? Or both?

We criticize the Vatican Curia for giving us an ex-German soldier for Pope, but his predecessor never gave a satisfactory story about his own role in the Holocaust. It is not often mentioned but yes, the Germans killed 50% of all the Jews in Poland, but it was the Poles who killed the other 50%!

reply to post by donwhite

How did we get on a tirade about the pope?

Since this look like an official "presidency Watch" page, I wanted to log something I never thought I'd see...

www.americanthinker.com...

They aren't just snubbing Obama here. They're snubbing every single one of us...

EDIT: They say he was just introducing memebers now but I dont think that started till after the last put down, you could see him a little miffed and change his maind (I think). You be the judge.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by TreadUpon]

reply to post by TreadUpon

If you go back to the site via the link you gave they provide a correction. It seems that Obama was introducing the US delegation not reaching out for a hand shake and getting snubbed.

Feedback please...what do you think of the various health care proposals?

No political trolling please.