LETTER: Wake up to angry Obama

I pray that more people are waking up to the president of the United States. Americans are losing their jobs and lifestyle. However,
Sandusky Register Staff
May 13, 2010

I pray that more people are waking up to the president of the United States. Americans are losing their jobs and lifestyle. However, our president is content to travel the world, have parties at the taxpayers' expense and continue to campaign. He also is wonderful at blaming everyone else for his continued failure. This person was elected to be president of the United States. As president, he has been placed in a position that requires leadership. Leaders accept responsibility and losers loathe responsibility

With total control of Congress, he has failed to accomplish anything. The only thing consistent with him is his continuous blaming of George Bush. President Bush was not perfect. However, he did not continually place blame on President Clinton. I know of no past presidents (Democrat or Republican) who blamed the previous administration.

Americans need to stop watching reality television and wake up to the reality of their life under this individual. He is an angry man. All you need is to start paying attention to the look on his face when he does not get his way.

Dan Carroll

Sandusky

Comments

gene44870

I agree with the things that are being said in the story and I for one didnt vote at all , cause i didnt trust obama or the republician party due to the lack of doing not what he wanted , but what was in the best intrest of the country , and making the unenployemnt what it is , is not the answer
All our goverment is doing is pushing the u.s debt to a all time high . Instead of feeding the unemployment , put them to work . if you put them to work you are not adding to the problem , you are solving it .
Comeon Goverment , lets get back to the tables and this time , lets get it right , and stop the waste and place the u.s tax dollars into helping americans get back to work.
I am so tired of goverment waste and I hate to say this , But as far as i can see it , Obama is not much better then Bush and in some cases they are just alike . they both make promises that they arent going to live up too .the only thing is that if Obama was really intrested in gettting this country back up and running , he would stop the senseless killing over seas and invest that money on Americans
Hey President Obama , what is the price tag up too now ? I bet its not going down any , as a matter of fact its going up , . You need to stop this stupid war that is never going to end , cause no one wants to admit they may or may not win , . how many more or our children have to die before someone stops it .
This is one of the most costly things that we have on our plate , not health care not anything else , just the wars that we got tripped into

Duhast

Neither party wants to take the steps to fix the budget. The difference between what is popular and what is needed. No republican that wants re-elected would EVER suggest raising taxes even if they knew it was the correct thing to do. And no Democrat would EVER suggest cutting entitlement spending even if they knew it was the right thing to do.

It’s time to elect intelligent and qualified people for congress. Just because they like the same beer as you do or can field dress a moose is not reason to vote for them. Maybe we should pass a constitutional amendment that at least 1/3 of congress is required to hold at minimum a masters in economics.

brutus smith

It's up to the President to develop the budget. Congress funds the budget, which is why it is changed from it's original form.

Duhast

It is. In a perfect world, budgets will be bipartisan and for the good of the country. As you well know (to state the obvious), budgets are usually filled with the ruling party’s priorities. Hnece the need for a commission. Clinton’s balanced budget was a good example of checks and balances.

wetsu

Not to overstate the obvious, but it's both sets of cowards playing politics in the case of the budget commission.

Explain the need for the commission, please. I thought that one of the primary functions of the House and Senate was to develop a federal budget.

Duhast

Obama suggested a bi-partisan budget commission. The Senate rejected it. WTF?? Why would you oppose this?

http://www.politico.com/news/sto...

brutus smith

PNAC role in promoting invasion of Iraq

Commentators from divergent parts of the political spectrum––such as Democracy Now! and American Free Press, including Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Jody Williams and former Republican Congressmen Pete McCloskey and Paul Findley––voiced their concerns about the influence of the PNAC on the decision by President George W. Bush to invade Iraq.[37][47] Some have regarded the PNAC's January 16, 1998 letter to President Clinton, which urged him to embrace a plan for "the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power,"[10] and the large number of members of PNAC appointed to the Bush administration as evidence that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a foregone conclusion. [39][43][48]

The television program Frontline, broadcast on PBS, presented the PNAC's letter to President Clinton as a notable event in the leadup to the Iraq war.[49]

Media commentators have found it significant that signatories to the PNAC's January 16, 1998 letter to President Clinton (and some of its other position papers, letters, and reports) included such Bush administration officials as Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, John Bolton, Richard Armitage, and Elliott Abrams

6079 Smith W

@ duhast:

As has been said: Politics make strange bedfellow.

You're undoubtedly aware that both Paul and Sanders agree for a need to audit the Fed. Reserve?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/22/...

H*ll! I think that the Government Accounting Office (GAO) should audit every d*mn Federal department, agency and office!

According to forecasts of the U.S. Census, Ohio will lose two seats in Congress and Texas will gain three.

-----------

I found the book:

'Five Days in London: May 1940':

http://www.amazon.com/Five-Days-...

Duhast

I find Ron Paul very entertaining. Especially with main stream republican’s reactions to him. I think he has a snowball’s chance at ever getting elected president. Same with Kucinich. I like Kucinich, but he had that whole weenie persona. Someone like him could have gotten elected before televised media, but not after.

6079 Smith W

duhast wrote on Feb 16, 2010 8:33 AM:

‘Most of congress were too scared of being painted as unpatriotic and voted for the war.’

If they were indeed fearful, and voted against their true convictions, then they were/are gutless and need to be voted out!!!!

Ron Paul vote against it! The man voted his politics and conscious – I admire that.

Monday morning quarterbacking is for the amateurs who never take the field.

6079 Smith W

@ duhast:

‘Think’ you had cereal??? :)

Mostly coffee for me – breakfast of champions!

The problem with history for most Americans is that they approach it with a sense of recency – what their mindset and attitude is today.

How do we know with any metaphysical 100% certainty, beyond the shadow of a doubt how Clinton would have reacted if 9-11 had occurred on his watch? We don’t!

IMO, the only way to view history is to attempt to put oneself in the mindset of the people at the time with the amount of knowledge and lack thereof that they processed at the time.

IMO, an understanding of most history should be approached with a deep sense of humility toward most of the players, unless of course they are blatantly malicious.

Last yr, I started, but never finished a book about how the British govt. was in utter chaos in how they should respond after France fell in 1940 and Dunkirk was unfolding.

Attempting to discern correct actions while the clouds of war are gathering is extremely difficult.

I like to ask questions, using somewhat of a Socratic method and feel that attempts at mind reading should for the most part be left to the charlatans and scam artists.

Duhast

Winston,
Most of congress were too scared of being painted as unpatriotic and voted for the war. You could see it. Even Hillary was running scared. It was like the red scare of the 50’s. If you didn’t wear your flag pin and vote for the war, patriot act, etc., you were un-American. People were scared @#%less by 9/11, to the point of knee jerk reactions. Bush, Cheney, and the republicans capitalized on this. Don’t talk about short memories. Your were there.

6079 Smith W

Digger Nick wrote on Feb 16, 2010 8:13 AM:

‘I'm pretty sure they will do a great job with our health care, though.’

When one thinks that one may be confronting a scam, what is one of the first phrases that should come to mind?

If is sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Right?

Politicians and scam artists – the difference?

Duhast

Winston,
I think I had cereal…. Yes, my memory was a bit muddled. Those horrific 8 years just blended together. You have jogged my memory though. It was the “Axis of Evil speech”. I told her he would invade so he could get re-elected. Hardly matters when I said it to my wife, it happened, didn’t it?

Even if regime change was the declared US goal, there is a difference between surgery with a scalpel and an axe. If Clinton’s intention was to invade and take over the whole country, I think he would have done it. Shock and awe indeed…

6079 Smith W

82 Dem. Congressional Reps and 29 Dem Senators (111 Dems total) voted for the 'Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aut...

Either they believed in what they voted for at the time, or they were stupid and outsmarted by the Bush administration.

At the time, approx. 70% of the U.S. population supported the invasion.

Where is the news media’s outrage and the massive liberal street protests against Obama’s Afghanistan surge?

If this does not prove that the news media is the back pocket of the Democratic Party what does?

digger nick

Cash for Clunkers, hmmmm, let me see......

Oilfield Math

Think of it this way:

A clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons
of gas a year.

A vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons a year.

So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce US gasoline
consumption by 320 gallons per year.

They claim 700,000 vehicles so that's 224 million gallons saved per year.

That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.

5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption.

More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs
about $350 million dollars

So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.

We spent $8.57 for every dollar we saved.

I'm pretty sure they will do a great job with our health care, though.

Be afraid, be VERY afraid.

6079 Smith W

Correction: '1988' s/b '1992'.

6079 Smith W

@ citizen:

1. During the election of 1988, Dems like Clinton and Gore excoriated GHW Bush for not ‘finishing the job’ during the Gulf War.

2. Regime change in Iraq became official U.S. policy under Clinton:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira...

IMO, for the overwhelming majority of Americans, their knowledge of 'history' goes back to whether or not they ate breakfast this morning.

Oliver Hardy

Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak - Cicero

The man who loves other countries as much as his own stands on a level with the man who loves other women as much as he loves his own wife. - Theodore Roosevelt

citizen

Duhast...you are a joke. You said, "Bush had his mind made up to invade when he took office and the American people and Congress were blind to this. When he was re-elected, I turned to my wife and said, “watch him invade Iraq”. Well, wouldn’t you know it… "

Hello? Bush gave the orders to invade Iraq in 2003. He wasn't re-elected until Nov. of 2004. So when, exactly, did you turn to your wife and say that? Your credibility just went out the window.

Kimo

This looks like a room full of the
"nattering nabobs of negativism".

Dan Carrol
Is this the car salesman?

SamAdams

Those who suggest that both parties tend to blame the other are absolutely right. But what no one is saying is that both of them DESERVE to be blamed!

You can criticize George W. Bush all you like for the USA PATRIOT Act (and please believe me, I was criticizing, and loudly!), but not without jumping up and down over Obama's "you can't expect privacy on a cell phone!" desire to go after such calls without a warrant. You can whine all you want about George W. Bush going on vacation, but you'd better recognize that Obama's lunatic "date nights" are at least as expensive and don't accomplish anything but, perhaps, appeasing his wife. You can, like Obama did, complain bitterly about Bush's executive orders and signing statements. But if you don't lament the fact Obama is doing the same, you're as much of a hypocrite as he is.

Where are the people who think the government should do no more than it was constitutionally established to do? Where are all of you who understand that both freedom and prosperity tend to grow when the government gets the he11 out of the way rather than stands IN the way? Where are the complainers when it comes time to stand up and accept personal responsibility and condemn entitlement programs of ALL stripes?

Yeah, I thought so. Which makes a whole lot of us as much to blame as the politicians who are blaming each other, doesn't it... And until we're willing to stop complaining and start doing something about it (that does NOT include demanding government steal from some to give to others as an all too temporary solution), we're going to keep living in some freedom-stealing version of where we're at now.

John Adams once said that if people valued safety and comfort more than freedom, he hoped that we'd forget he was ever our countryman. I sure wish some of you would remember that he was once OURS!

brwright

So much partisanship going on. I can remember very clearly President Bush blaming President Clinton for the down turn in the economy after he took office.
Why can't we come together to solve this Countries problems instead of tearing down this President because we did not vote for him!
It's quite evident Mr. Carroll is disgruntled because his man did not win!
President Obama has his work cut out for him, and he will not solve all the problems in one year of office . Presient Bush took many trips while he was in office, and spent much of his time at his Ranch in Texas instead of the White House as I can recall.
Where was Mr. Carroll's indignation then? Not to mention all the debt that was compiled on our Country while Mr.Bush was in office?

Duhast

They can have their civil war for all I care. The problem was the Janjaweed rape squads attacking and murdering civilians. The UN wouldn’t send troops. They finally left it up to the African Union who were as disorganized and undersupplied as the Keystone Kops. We should have sent military to protect and help evacuate the refugees. Instead, we left them to fend for themselves.

Goofus,
You SHOULD worry about what the middle east thinks of us. Until they feel that we are no longer imperialist invaders, they will produce an unending supply of suicide bombers. PR is just as, if not more important than, military action in the middle east. It’s a good thing you aren’t in charge.

How would you feel if Canada accidently bombed your house and family when they shot a missile over the lake to hit a Quebec separatist maple syrup smuggler?? Would you be happy that they got the bad guy or would you shout “Death to Canada!”??

goofus

Seems like the last "civil war" we got involved in the left wing whackos had a field day. Remember Vietnam. Although not a civil war, just don't tell the left.

tiredoftheb.s.

It is convenient for the Republicans to blame the Democrats. It is equally as convenient for the Democrats to blame the Republicans. But the truth is that both the Republicans and Democrats are selling America down the river. Dan Carroll has fell into this trap. While in this mindstate people have selective memories. Dan says Bush don't blame Clinton, but that is not true the whole Republican party blamed Clinton (i.e. no offshore drilling,for cutting the military) and I could go on. But the Dems do the same. The problem is the Republicans and Democrats are on the same team. Example: the Republican say they don't want abortion, but when Bush and the republicans controlled the house, senate and the white house they never outlawed abortion. I wonder why.Its because They really don't care about abortion. Just like the Dems; they controlled everything, but we are still in two wars and they are even trying to start a third war, but I thought stopping the wars was why OBAMA was running. NO, that is just what they tell us to get power. Both major parties never can agree, but some how they still pass laws. And every law they pass costs America money, jobs and freedom. And that is their goal. Its easy to see; just look at the end outcome.

tiredoftheb.s.

It is convenient for the Republicans to blame the Democrats. It is equally as convenient for the Democrats to blame the Republicans. But the truth is that both the Republicans and Democrats are selling America down the river. Dan Carroll has fell into this trap. While in this mindstate people have selective memories. Dan says Bush don't blame Clinton, but that is not true the whole Republican party blamed Clinton (i.e. no offshore drilling,for cutting the military) and I could go on. But the Dems do the same. The problem is the Republicans and Democrats are on the same team. Example: the Republican say they don't want abortion, but when Bush and the republicans controlled the house, senate and the white house they never outlawed abortion. I wonder why.Its because They really don't care about abortion. Just like the Dems; the controlled everything, but we are still in two wars and they are even trying to start a third war, but I thought stopping the wars was why OBAMA was running. NO, that is just what they tell us to get power. Both major parties never can agree, but some how they still pass laws. And every law they pass costs America money, jobs and freedom. And that is their goal. Its easy to see; just look at the end outcome.

goofus

Who cares what the middle east thinks of us. The Kurds and most of Iraq love us, why do you think we are leaving. The marines have already left. It's always that muslim thing with you Duhast. At least we might be safer when we fly, the will soon be a fatwa telling muslims not to enter body scanners.

Richard Bebb

When did America get involved in wwII, after the German expansion into Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Netherlands, and England. Then of course the bombing of Pearl Harbour. The German expansion and eradication began 2 years prior to America declaring war on Germany so what are we talking about. German expansion was a civil war????? Read a history book.

And its not my argument that we should not be involved in the atrocities that are occurring in Darfur, its the left's, due to the fact that their talking point is that we shouldn't be getting involved in civil wars as they claim the conflict in Iraq was. Again the left changes the argument to fit their agenda, sorry for calling you out on it.

goofus

http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geni... Try this post about the left's savior of the World the United Nations. Their peacekeepers lead the way in sex abuse among children.

Pages