Skip to main content

Home/ Politically Minded/ Group items tagged Obama

Rss Feed Group items tagged

thinkahol *

YouTube - The Obama Deception HQ Full length version - 0 views

  •  
    "The Obama Deception is a hard-hitting film that completely destroys the myth that Barack Obama is working for the best interests of the American people. The Obama phenomenon is a hoax carefully crafted by the captains of the New World Order. He is being pushed as savior in an attempt to con the American people into accepting global slavery. We have reached a critical juncture in the New World Order's plans. It's not about Left or Right: it's about a One World Government. The international banks plan to loot the people of the United States and turn them into slaves on a Global Plantation. Covered in this film: who Obama works for, what lies he has told, and his real agenda. If you want to know the facts and cut through all the hype, this is the film for you. Watch the Obama Deception and learn how: - Obama is continuing the process of transforming America into something that resembles Nazi Germany, with forced National Service, domestic civilian spies, warrantless wiretaps, the destruction of the Second Amendment, FEMA camps and Martial Law. - Obama's handlers are openly announcing the creation of a new Bank of the World that will dominate every nation on earth through carbon taxes and military force. - International bankers purposefully engineered the worldwide financial meltdown to bankrupt the nations of the planet and bring in World Government. - Obama plans to loot the middle class, destroy pensions and federalize the states so that the population is completely dependent on the Central Government. - The Elite are using Obama to pacify the public so they can usher in the North American Union by stealth, launch a new Cold War and continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan."
thinkahol *

Obama's "bad negotiating" is actually shrewd negotiating - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com - 0 views

  •  
    In December, President Obama signed legislation to extend hundreds of billions of dollars in Bush tax cuts, benefiting the wealthiest Americans. Last week, Obama agreed to billions of dollars in cuts that will impose the greatest burden on the poorest Americans. And now, virtually everyone in Washington believes, the President is about to embark on a path that will ultimately lead to some type of reductions in Social Security, Medicare and/or Medicaid benefits under the banner of "reform." Tax cuts for the rich -- budget cuts for the poor -- "reform" of the Democratic Party's signature safety net programs -- a continuation of Bush/Cheney Terrorism policies and a new Middle East war launched without Congressional approval. That's quite a legacy combination for a Democratic President. All of that has led to a spate of negotiation advice from the liberal punditocracy advising the President how he can better defend progressive policy aims -- as though the Obama White House deeply wishes for different results but just can't figure out how to achieve them. Jon Chait, Josh Marshall, and Matt Yglesias all insist that the President is "losing" on these battles because of bad negotiating strategy, and will continue to lose unless it improves. Ezra Klein says "it makes absolutely no sense" that Democrats didn't just raise the debt ceiling in December, when they had the majority and could have done it with no budget cuts. Once it became clear that the White House was not following their recommended action of demanding a "clean" vote on raising the debt ceiling -- thus ensuring there will be another, probably larger round of budget cuts -- Yglesias lamented that the White House had "flunked bargaining 101." Their assumption is that Obama loathes these outcomes but is the victim of his own weak negotiating strategy. I don't understand that assumption at all. Does anyone believe that Obama and his army of veteran Washington advisers are incapable of discovering these tactics on th
Muslim Academy

President Obama caught in tangle - 0 views

  •  
    The international media claims that the Obama administration was reckless in handling the security measures for its consulate in Benghazi. On one side, it challenged the long lasting legacy of Hilary Rodham Clinton, and on the other hand, it put Susan Rice in much trouble. But the major trouble rests on President Obama who made contradictory statements regarding the attack The U.S. consulate attack was an attack in reaction to the anti-Muslim film "innocence of the Muslims" and it was a "spontaneous" claim, but earlier the same week Obama claimed that it was an "act of terror". Looking into few statements of President Obama in leading daily papers, we can see Obama's sprawling contradiction:
Levy Rivers

Poll results for first presidential debate: Obama wins | Midwest Voices - 0 views

shared by Levy Rivers on 27 Sep 08 - Cached
  • CBS Insta Poll shows Barack Obama won 39% to John McCain's 25% with 36% saying the debate was a draw. Insider Advantage reports those polled Obama won 42% to McCain's 41% with Undecided 17% CNN reports voter opinions that Obama "did better" 51%, McCain "did better" 38% The CNN poll showed men were evenly split, but women gave Obama higher marks 59% to 41% for McCain.
    • Levy Rivers
       
      How to show that someone is cranky - Barak did it by agreeing and giving credit - McCain reinforced it by being dismissive and talking down to Barak. How to did Barak show McCain's out of touchness - by showing that that McCain's claim that Barck was stubborn by giving McCain credit when it was approprate - Being graceful does that
  • The MSNBC on-line (non-scientific) poll showed Obama winning the debate 52% to 33%. (But this is what one would expect from such a poll at MSNBC because of the nature of its viewers.)
  • women voters especially would be turned off by McCain's sarcastic tone because women do tend to be the conciliators in our society and saw Obama display those conciliatory qualities very well in the debate. Obama looked at McCain, and McCain wouldn't return the eye contact but rather glared or displayed a tight and angry expression.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Senator McNasty. I believe older voters will also be reassured that, though McCain has been around longer, Obama has a good grasp of foreign affairs and can learn quickly. He impressed as a statesmen, in marked contrast to McCain's warrior demeanor.
  • McCain's condescenion felt annoying; to the listener who might agree or disagree with Obama, Obama nevertheless was making good points, not naive ones.
Michael Haltman

Must see video: Obama's "Julia", Julia's alter-ego Julia/Julian and campaign incompetence! - 2 views

  •  
    The introduction of Julia was a classic mistake by Obama and his campaign, and the video about Julia/Julian is a fantastic rebuttal by the Right! The best hope for the Republicans in November besides the incompetence of the Obama campaign, the Obama record in office, the arrogance of Obama and his political tin ear will be the quality of the campaign run by Romney. It will hopefully be strong and direct
Omnipotent Poobah

Don't Blame Obama, America Did It To Itself - 0 views

  •  
    Obama is neither liberal nor conservative, he's a middle of the roader. It sure would've been nice if voters had noticed that before they elected him.
  •  
    I'd sure like to see Obama "kick some ass", instead of allowing the Repubs to do the same thing they've been doing for the past eight or nine years. Mainly bully and intimidate, and use scare tactics to get what they and big business want.
  •  
    Frank: The democrats have a 60 vote majority and Obama doesn't need them at all for anything. He pretty much has let them know "We Won!" He also has pretty much let them know he doesn't need them. This is a Liberal controlled White House, Senate and House. Stop the blame game. Let's put the focus exactly where everyone who is truthful, here, understands: On the Democratic controlled Administration and Congress. They have all the marbles and they don't need the Republicans' vote. The problem Obama has is that he realizes that there is going to be a bloodbath. Please, don't say otherwise - even his own people are starting to prepare the party. Why do you suppose four Democrats announced that they are retiring - they aren't even running over the next 10 1/2 months. More will reitre before election day. He has the same problem that Clinton had - he could possibly lose the House and he would then be somewhat in the same position of Clinton - who was forced to the middle because he would not be able to get anything else approved. I may be wrong, history will decide, but I think the American people no longer trust either party. Are you happy with the Democrats? We now have senators selling their vote for $300,000,000 in one instance and Sen. Nelson just got a permanent exemption for Medicaid cost that States have to pay - Forever! All 49 other states must pick up this states cost - all for one vote! Do you believe this is what the Democrats, Republicans or Independents expect or want from their government. I don't. Getting back to my point, the people of America don't trust either party, now, and want them closely divided so they don't do too much harm. Independents have swung away from Obama in a very big way. He ran more as a centrist and now people fill lied to. Seven days before he took office he said he was fundamentally going to change America. No one had heard this before - not "Fundamentally". They expected a far more bipartisan
thinkahol *

Why Obama Isn't Fighting the Budget Battle - 0 views

  •  
    In the next week the action moves from Wisconsin to Washington, where the deadline looms for a possible government shutdown over the federal budget. President Obama has to take a more direct and personal role in that budget battle - both for the economy's sake and for the sake of his re-election. But will he? Don't count on it. Worried congressional Democrats say the President needs to use his bully pulpit to counter defections in Democatic ranks, such as the ten Democrats and one allied Independent who on Wednesday voted against a Senate leadership plan to cut $6.2 billion from the federal budget over the rest of fiscal year 2011. They want Obama to grab the initiative and push a plan to eliminate tax breaks for oil companies and for companies that move manufacturing facilities out of the country, and a proposal for a surtax on millionaires. Most importantly, they're worried the President's absence from the debate will result in Republicans winning large budget cuts for the remainder of the fiscal year - large enough to imperil the fragile recovery. But Obama won't actively fight the budget battle if the current White House view of how he wins in 2012 continues to prevail. Shortly after the Democrats' "shellacking" last November, I phoned a friend in the White House who had served in the Clinton administration. "It's 1994 all over again," he said. "Now we move to the center."
Ian Schlom

Obama nominates Jacob Lew, budget-cutter and ex-banker, to head Treasury - 0 views

  •  
    in the article: US President Barack Obama announced the nomination of current White House chief of staff Jacob Lew as treasury secretary Thursday, underscoring the administration's commitment to slashing entitlements and its domination by Wall Street. Lew, a longtime Washington operative and former Wall Street executive, helped negotiate cuts to Social Security with the Reagan administration in 1983, worked to slash social spending in the Clinton administration's Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and served as the Obama administration's point-man in budget-cutting negotiations with congressional Republicans. Prior to joining the Obama administration in 2009, he earned millions of dollars as the chief operating officer of Citigroup's Alternative Investments unit, which made bets against the housing market as it collapsed. Holy shit. That's maybe all one needs to read of this article. That's pretty ridiculous.
Levy Rivers

Donklephant » Blog Archive » CBS Snap Debate Poll: Obama 39%, McCain 27% - 0 views

  • Here are the numbers from a poll of 500 uncommitted voters… How did the debate impact vote preferences? 15% say they are now committed to Obama 14% to McCain 70% are still uncommitted Would make the right decisions about the economy? McCain: 41% before the debate, 49% after Obama: 54% before the debate, 68% after Understands your needs? McCain: 35% before the debate, 46% after Obama: 60% before the debate, 80% after Prepared for the job of president? McCain: 80% before the debate, 84% after Obama: 42% before the debate, 57% after Did candidates answer the questions they were asked? 57% yes, 42% no — for both candidates Obama continues to dominate the “economic” and “understands my needs” categories.
Skeptical Debunker

Robert Reich: It's Time to Enact Health Care Reform With 51 Senate Votes - 0 views

  • Why haven't the President and Senate Democrats pulled the reconciliation trigger before now? I haven't spoken directly with the President or with Harry Reid but I've spent the last several weeks sounding out contacts on the Hill and in the White House to find an answer. Here are the theories. None of them justifies waiting any longer. Reconciliation is too extreme a measure to use on a piece of legislation so important. I hear this a lot but it's bunk. George W. Bush used reconciliation to enact his giant tax cut bill in 2003 (he garnered only 50 votes for it in the Senate, forcing Vice President Cheney to cast the deciding vote). Six years before that, Bill Clinton rounded up 51 votes to enact the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), the largest expansion of taxpayer-funded health insurance coverage for children in the U.S. since Medicaid began in the 1960s. Through reconciliation, we also got Medicare Advantage. Also through reconciliation came the COBRA act, which gives Americans a bit of healthcare protection after they lose a job ("reconciliaton is the "R" in the COBRA acronym.) These were all big, important pieces of legislation, and all were enacted by 51 votes in the Senate. Use of reconciliation would infuriate Senate Republicans. It may. So what? They haven't given Obama a single vote on any major issue since he first began wining and dining them at the White House. In fact, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and company have been doing everything in their power to undermine the President. They're using the same playbook Republicans used in the first two years of the Clinton administration, hoping to discredit the President and score large victories in the midterm elections by burying his biggest legislative initiative. Indeed, Obama could credibly argue that Senate Republicans have altered the rules of the Senate by demanding 60 votes on almost every initiative - a far more extensive use of the filibuster than at any time in modern history - so it's only right that he, the President, now resort to reconciliation. Obama needs Republican votes on military policy so he doesn't dare antagonize them on health care. I hear this from some quarters but I don't buy it. While it's true that Dems are skeptical of Obama's escalation of the war in Afghanistan and that Republicans are his major backers, it seems doubtful R's would withdraw their support if the President forced their hand on health care. Foreign policy is the one area where Republicans have offered a halfway consistent (and always bellicose) voice, and Dick Cheney et al would excoriate them if they failed to back a strong military presence in the Middle East. This is truer now than ever. Reid fears he can't even get 51 votes in the Senate now, after Scott Brown's win. Reid counts noses better than I do, but if Senate Democrats can't come up with even 51 votes for the health care reforms they enacted weeks ago they give new definition to the term "spineless." Besides, if this is the case, Obama ought to be banging Senate heads together. A president has huge bargaining leverage because he presides over an almost infinite list of future deals. Lyndon Johnson wasn't afraid to use his power to the fullest to get Medicare enacted. If Obama can't get 51 Senate votes out of 58 or 59 Dems and Independents, he definitely won't be able to get 51 Senate votes after November. Inevitably, the Senate will lose some Democrats. Now's his last opportunity. House and Senate Democrats are telling Obama they don't want to take another vote on health care or even enact it before November's midterms because they're afraid it will jeopardize their chances of being reelected and may threaten their control over the House and Senate. I hear this repeatedly but if it's true Republicans have done a far better job scaring Americans about health care reform than any pollster has been able to uncover. Most polls still show a majority of Americans still in favor of the basic tenets of reform - expanded coverage, regulations barring insurers from refusing coverage because of someone's preexisting conditions and preventing insurers from kicking someone off the rolls because they get sick, requirements that employers provide coverage or pay into a common pool, and so on. And now that many private insurers are hiking up premiums, co-pays, and deductibles, the public is even readier to embrace reform.
  •  
    This week the president is hosting a bipartisan gab-fest at the White House to try to tease out some Republican votes for health care reform. It's a total waste of time. If Obama thinks he's going to get a single Republican vote at this stage of the game, he's fooling himself (or the American people). Many months ago, you may recall, the White House and Democratic party leaders in the Senate threatened to pass health care with 51 votes -- using a process called "reconciliation" that allows tax and spending bills to be enacted without filibuster -- unless Republicans came on board. It's time to pull the trigger.
thinkahol *

Obama bans war criminals, except our own - The Star Democrat: Opinion - 0 views

  •  
    By executive order on Aug. 4, President Barack Obama refused entry to the United States of war criminals and human-rights violators (jurist.org, Aug. 4). He ignored, as he often does, the deeply documented factual evidence of war crimes committed by the Bush-Cheney administration along with grim proof that the Obama administration also violates our anti-torture laws and the U.N. Convention Against Torture we signed. Take, for example, right now under Obama, "The CIA Secret Sites in Somalia" (the nation.com, July 12).
thinkahol *

Torture Prosecutor Tops 70,000 Questions for Obama on Change.Gov | Common Dreams - 0 views

  •  
    A whopping 70,000 questions poured into Change.gov over the past week, in response to the Obama transition team's call for citizen queries to the President-Elect. After votes from about 100,000 people, the top ranked question asks Obama whether he will appoint a special prosecutor to investigate allegations of torture and illegal surveillance by the U.S. government. I've been working with activist Bob Fertik to organize support for the question, and several progressive bloggers urged readers and Obama supporters to vote for it last week. Digby, who has written extensively about the Bush administration's abuse of the rule of law, recently reported on the progress:
thinkahol *

Progressives Vow to Challenge Obama in Democratic Primaries | Common Dreams - 0 views

  •  
    Progressive leaders led by Ralph Nader and Cornel West unveiled a proposal today to challenge President Obama in the Democratic Party's presidential primaries in 2012. The proposal, which has been endorsed by over 45 distinguished leaders, seeks to have a slate of six candidates run against President Obama, each representing a field in which Obama has never clearly staked a progressive claim or where he has drifted toward the corporatist right. "Without debates by challengers inside the Democratic Party's presidential primaries, the liberal/majoritarian agenda will be muted and ignored," said Ralph Nader.
thinkahol *

Climate of Fear: Jim Risen v. the Obama administration - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com - 0 views

  •  
    [Barring unforeseen events, I'm going to leave this post at the top of the page for today and tomorrow, as I think the events it examines, rather in detail and at length, are vitally important and merit much more attention than they've received] The Obama DOJ's effort to force New York Times investigative journalist Jim Risen to testify in a whistleblower prosecution and reveal his source is really remarkable and revealing in several ways; it should be receiving much more attention than it is.  On its own, the whistleblower prosecution and accompanying targeting of Risen are pernicious, but more importantly, it underscores the menacing attempt by the Obama administration -- as Risen yesterday pointed out -- to threaten and intimidate whistleblowers, journalists and activists who meaningfully challenge what the government does in secret. The subpoena to Risen was originally issued but then abandoned by the Bush administration, and then revitalized by Obama lawyers.  It is part of the prosecution of Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA agent whom the DOJ accuses of leaking to Risen the story of a severely botched agency plot -- from 11 years ago -- to infiltrate Iran's nuclear program, a story Risen wrote about six years after the fact in his 2006 best-selling book, State of War.  The DOJ wants to force Risen to testify under oath about whether Sterling was his source.
Joe La Fleur

Obama admin to use $8.3 billion "slush fund" to fake out seniors? Update: GAO... - 0 views

  •  
    Democrats gutted Medicare to find money for Obama Care. Seniors would have lost All Medicare bennefits before the election. With this slush money Seniors will lose All Medicare bennefits after the election if Obama is reelected!
thinkahol *

The Democratic Party and Blanche Lincoln - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com - 0 views

  •  
    The run-off between Democratic Senate incumbent Blanche Lincoln and challenger Bill Halter, which culminated on Tuesday night in Lincoln's narrow victory, brightly illuminates what the Democratic Party establishment is. Lincoln is supposedly one of those "centrist"/conservative/corporatist Senators who thwarts the good-hearted progressive agenda of the President and the Party. She repeatedly joined with Republicans to support the extremist Bush/Cheney Terrorism agenda (from the the Protect America Act to the Iraq War and virtually everything in between), serves the corporate interests that run Washington as loyally as any member of Congress, and even threatened to join the GOP in filibustering health care reform if it contained the public option which Obama claimed he wanted. Obama loyalists constantly point to the Blanche Lincolns of the world to justify why the Party scorns the values of their voters: Obama can't do anything about these bad Democratic Senators; it's not his fault if he doesn't have the votes, they insist.
Levy Rivers

Black Power Brokers Ready to Rise In Tandem With New President - WSJ.com - 0 views

  • Seated in his office recently, Mr. Johnson casually pulled out a list that's been circulating over the Internet of rumored Obama cabinet picks. Next to his name was the title secretary of labor. "I was flattered," said Mr. Johnson, before dismissing the speculative document with a laugh. "I am part of the Obama team and I'd want that to continue -- if asked."
  • Being known as a top fund-raiser or adviser to Mr. Obama has given African-Americans "the opportunity to build wonderful relationships," says John Rogers, the 50-year-old founder of Chicago-based Ariel Capital Management who has known the president-elect for years.
  • Of those hoping for access and government stints, some may be disappointed. Loyalties aside, Mr. Obama, according to people familiar with his thinking, may be constrained in the number of blacks he appoints to avoid any charges of favoring African-Americans.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • "There is no one who represents the black inner city, who is rooted in the black community," says the Rev. Eugene Rivers, an influential black Boston minister. "It's the whole black Brahmin thing: Vote for us because we're better than you."
  • But now, the spotlight has shifted to a new cadre of African-Americans in their 40s and 50s. Their growing visibility is already changing the tone of Washington and creating new power matrixes. For example, Eric Holder -- who helped conduct Mr. Obama's search for a vice president and is considered by people close to the campaign as a candidate for attorney general
  • When Mr. Obama first ran for office in Chicago, campaign workers recall, he took out his copy of the Harvard Law School alumni directory and began dialing to solicit donations. In this campaign cycle, Mr. Obama has raised more than $500,000 from Harvard faculty and staff -- not including alumni -- making the school the third-largest contributor among employers.
  • Some blacks believe that a larger ripple effect is under way -- that Mr. Obama's ascendancy is affecting, for instance, things like the number of black commentators appearing on cable-TV news shows. Says Ms. Butts: "You will see changes in Washington, D.C., where people are making decisions about who is running a news bureau, who is heading up a lobbying shop," bringing in more blacks to top positions.
Michael Haltman

The Political Commentator: Note to Obama: If you want to be treated like a superpower t... - 3 views

  •  
    Presidential impotence! The implementation of a no-fly zone over Libya represents one more pathetic national security performance by the Obama administration. Letting the U.N. Security Council do the decision making for him after weeks of inaction, the Obama administration was upset at the French for acting too aggressively. Once more it was the French acting too aggressively. If we want the United States to be considered the world superpower, we need a president who will act as if he wants and believes that to be the case.
thinkahol *

Obama v. Obama - 0 views

  •  
    US military action against Libya absent imminent threat or Congressional approval is outside the legal scope of the Presidency. Senator Barack Obama, December 20, 2007: "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today released the following statement and letter to Congressional leaders after the President announced that the United States will support a United Nations-approved attack on Libya:
thinkahol *

A surprising war on leaks under Obama - Philly.com - 0 views

  •  
    When President Obama took office, federal employees who had exposed wrongdoing or were considering doing so had reason for hope. Eight years of the Bush administration's relentless retaliation against whistle-blowers had ended, and Obama spoke encouragingly of transparency and due process. Since then, the administration has taken some positive steps for whistle-blowers, most notably in (unsuccessfully) advocating legislation to protect them and in loosening the government's grip on public information. However, its treatment of national-security and intelligence whistle-blowers - arguably the ones we need most - has been brutal. It has pursued multiple prosecutions of such whistle-blowers on espionage charges.
1 - 20 of 1046 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page