Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Our current president.........

Posted By: sm on 2009-02-10
In Reply to: Common sense needed, not book smarts - long time MT-NY

wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth. As a matter of fact, the apartment he lived in in DC until AFTER he was elected president was such a dump - his own staff lived in better neighborhoods and quarters. Michelle would NOT stay there. It wasn't until after it partially burned that the secret service adviced him STRONGLY to find a safer alternative. He's so frugal he's a cheapskate! Too bad he had to get sold out by Washington and party usual.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Just like you back the current president?
I will give him respect when and if he earns it.
If customary deference to a sitting president by president elect
for the rest of us who understand such concepts as respect and traditional protocol, it would qualify as a darned good reason.
he holds current
state of affairs in contempt, loves the country deeply enough to investigate issues and present his viewpoints.  Patriot.
Old News...Don't you have anything more current? nm
:p
Yep, that's right. I also blame THE CURRENT
nm
We can't address the current....(sm)

economic nightmare without also addressing those who are already suffering from it.  If that is not addressed while we are setting up new jobs, then we go straight into a depression.  It's a whole lot harder and longer to get out of a full-blown depression that what we have now....and right now we're on the edge.


NASA = The 50 million Obama allotted for NASA is for them to repair facilities in Houston from hurricaine Ike (which should have already been done, btw) and non-space activities.  Again, job creation.  NASA wants more, but I doubt they'll get it.


One of the current problems with that is...(sm)

this.  If homeowners were to get lump sums and they just payed off their mortgages it would go to the banks, like you said.  However, the banks are currently not extending credit.  Even after they passed the first bailout and payed out to banks, the banks that received the money actually tightened up on credit, which was the exact opposite of what they should have done.  So, if we were all to just pay off our mortgages, the bank would get the money and just sit on it just like they did with the bailout money, and that doesn't stimulate the economy. 


The main problem we have is that we've turned into a nation that relys on credit.  The banks don't want you to pay off your principal -- they want you to keep paying interest because that's where the money is for them.  Now that the credit has been frozen, people who live on credit don't have anything to spend -- thus creating the spending deficit.


sorry, but I disagree, because current
events are not always 'political.' This is the Politics Board.
Other events, not political, belong on the Gab Board.
He was sworn into his current position
using a Koran, not the Bible. He refuses to honor our flag because it is against his religion. He will ruin this country from the inside out if elected. The phrase "One nation under God" will be removed from our Pledge of Allegiance. Think about that!
I am not unhappy with current events...
I think it is a great step forward in this country that a black man is running for President. It is historical, and a wonderful, wonderful thing. But because he is black does not mean he is qualified. If he was white and saying the same things I would feel the same way. He seems like a nice guy, has a beautiful family, and has a vision for the country. I don't share that vision. Does not make me a bad person, does not make him a bad person. Just means we disagree. That is what America is all about. It is this rabid hatred of all things not Obama or all things conservative and trying to squelch any kind of opposition that is UNAmerican. It fact, it is the antithesis of the American way, and the fact that he stirs that up in people is concerning. I don't know if it is by accident or by design. No way I could know.
The last thing I watched that was current was....sm
Hustle, back in 2007. Never was into the reality shows, or any current sitcoms.


Maybe a movie on dish once or twice a year....I'm not kidding....


I work too much....big sigh.....(and no, I'm not sam...heehee)
Current Rasmussen Reports
Poll shows Obama leading 260 electoral votes to McCain 167 votes. If you take the "likely states" the votes change to Obama 300, McCain 174.

Rasmussen has lots of interesting polls on its site, for what they are worth, but it is interesting to watch them change week-to-week and some of them even day-to-day.

www.rasmussenreports.com
Current-day blacks are not slaves and never were.
nm
No he is not perfection, no human is. In the current...sm
climate, no, he probably will not be able to accomplish everything, but his is going to try to do his best, and I think that the people who elected him realize that.
Yes, he has...been very disrespectful to the office of the current
on a daily basis.
Sounds just like our current administration....

And the destruction they have wreaked on our country.......keep the mindset. The republican party will have a wretched time climbing out of the sewer from whence they came.


So, if you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country (the decider), steamrolled the constitution (the decider), and will have changed its landscape forever (the decider). If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about... Yes, GW, you will be just FINE.


It's not just our current administration and that's the problem.
There have been way too many leaders in the White House and in Congress that have been stirring up this pot of crap we're in right now for a long time. Now, I'm no fan of President Bush, but he only played a part in this whole production - there are a lot of other guilty players out there.

Yes, the republicans will have a hard time 'climbing out of the sewer', but it will happen because this country wasn't founded on just one mindset of ideas and one group having total control. It's about opposition and balance of power and that goes all the way back to the revolution. Did you know that some people in our early government were ready to make peace with George III and go back to England instead of continue the war? And after the war was won, some of them then wanted to crown George Washington King of America? See how well opposition worked even back then?

Everyone has a right to their opinions, but not all opinions are right for everyone. Even when things falter for one group for a while, they eventually come back - the democrats did after Jimmy Carter.
What! The current stimulus plan
I heard about Hollywood wanting money and I did not believe it, but furniture? You gotta be kidding me! Can I have a new couch too and a new desk for my computer?

The GOP want to get rid of:

Meanwhile, House Republican leaders put out a list of more than 30 "wasteful" provisions in the Senate version of the stimulus, including:

• A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion pictures

• $650 million for the digital television (DTV) converter box coupon program

• $248 million for furniture at the new Department of Homeland Security headquarters

• $600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees

• $1 billion for the 2010 Census
Feel sorry for the current administration
I feel the president is like the boy sticking his finger in the dyke to stop a flood, except there are too many holes and not enough fingers.  While I was glad to see Paul Volcker admit that things are worse than they expected, I really wonder if this econimic slide can be stopped not only here but worldwide.  You have to stop and ask yourself, if we were to see another depression like or worse than the Great Depression, what would you do?
UAW is definitely to blame for GMs current situation.

Where Would General Motors Be Without the United Automobile Workers Union?


Mises Daily by | Posted on 4/19/2006 12:00:00 AM



"This is a question that no one seems to be asking. And so I've asked it. And here, in essence, is what I think is the answer. (The answer, of course, applies to Ford and Chrysler, as well as to General Motors. I've singled out General Motors because it's still the largest of the three and its problems are the most pronounced.)


First, the company would be without so-called Monday-morning automobiles. That is, automobiles poorly made for no other reason than because they happened to be made on a day when too few workers showed up, or too few showed up sober, to do the jobs they were paid to do. Without the UAW, General Motors would simply have fired such workers and replaced them with ones who would do the jobs they were paid to do. And so, without the UAW, GM would have produced more reliable, higher quality cars, had a better reputation for quality, and correspondingly greater sales volume to go with it. Why didn't they do this? Because with the UAW, such action by GM would merely have provoked work stoppages and strikes, with no prospect that the UAW would be displaced or that anything would be better after the strikes. Federal Law, specifically, The National Labor Relations Act of 1935, long ago made it illegal for companies simply to get rid of unions.


Second, without the UAW, GM would have been free to produce in the most-efficient, lowest cost way and to introduce improvements in efficiency as rapidly as possible. Sometimes this would have meant simply having one or two workers on the spot do a variety of simple jobs that needed doing, without having to call in half a dozen different workers each belonging to a different union job classification and having to pay that much more to get the job done. At other times, it would have meant just going ahead and introducing an advance, such as the use of robots, without protracted negotiations with the UAW resulting in the need to create phony jobs for workers to do (and to be paid for doing) that were simply not necessary.


(Unbelievably, at its assembly plant in Oklahoma City, GM is actually obliged by its UAW contract to pay 2,300 workers full salary and benefits for doing absolutely nothing. As The New York Times describes it, "Each day, workers report for duty at the plant and pass their time reading, watching television, playing dominoes or chatting. Since G.M. shut down production there last month, these workers have entered the Jobs Bank, industry's best form of job insurance. It pays idled workers a full salary and benefits even when there is no work for them to do.")


Third, without the UAW, GM would have an average unit cost per automobile close to that of non-union Toyota. Toyota makes a profit of about $2,000 per vehicle, while GM suffers a loss of about $1,200 per vehicle, a difference of $3,200 per unit. And the far greater part of that difference is the result of nothing but GM's being forced to deal with the UAW. (Over a year ago, The Cincinnati Enquirer reported that "the United Auto Workers contract costs GM $2,500 for each car sold.")


Fourth, without the UAW, the cost of employing a GM factory worker, including wages and fringes, would not be in excess of $72 per hour, which is where it is today, according to The Post-Crescent newspaper of Appleton, Wisconsin.


Fifth, as a result of UAW coercion and extortion, GM has lost billions upon billions of dollars. For 2005 alone, it reported a loss in excess of $10 billion. Its bonds are now rated as "junk," that is, below, investment grade. Without the UAW, GM would not have lost these billions.


Sixth, without the UAW, GM would not now be in process of attempting to pay a ransom to its UAW workers of up to $140,000 per man, just to get them to quit and take their hands out of its pockets. (It believes that $140,000 is less than what they will steal if they remain.)


Seventh, without the UAW, GM would not now have healthcare obligations that account for more than $1,600 of the cost of every vehicle it produces.


Eighth, without the UAW, GM would not now have pension obligations which, if entered on its balance sheet in accordance with the rule now being proposed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, will leave it with a net worth of minus $16 billion.


What the UAW has done, on the foundation of coercive, interventionist labor legislation, is bring a once-great company to its knees. It has done this by a process of forcing one obligation after another upon the company, while at the same time, through its work rules, featherbedding practices, hostility to labor-saving advances, and outlandish pay scales, doing practically everything in its power to make it impossible for the company to meet those obligations.


Ninth, without the UAW tens of thousands of workers — its own members — would not now be faced with the loss of pension and healthcare benefits that it is impossible for GM or any of the other auto companies to provide, and never was possible for them to provide. The UAW, the whole labor-union movement, and the left-"liberal" intellectual establishment, which is their father and mother, are responsible for foisting on the public and on the average working man and woman a fantasy land of imaginary Demons (big business and the rich) and of saintly Good Fairies (politicians, government officials, and union leaders). In this fantasy-land, the Good Fairies supposedly have the power to wring unlimited free benefits from the Demons.


Tenth, Without the UAW and its fantasy-land mentality, autoworkers would have been motivated to save out of wages actually paid to them, and to provide for their future by means of by and large reasonable investments of those savings — investments with some measure of diversification. Instead, like small children, lured by the prospect of free candy from a stranger, they have been led to a very bad end. They thought they would receive endless free golden eggs from a goose they were doing everything possible to maim and finally kill, and now they're about to learn that the eggs just aren't there.


 


Here is the link for the rest of the article:  http://mises.org/story/2124


Anything to distract us from this current disaster
nm
I like it here. Besides, mostly all they discuss there is current events. Imagine that. nm

my favorite place to stay current

on the issues in politics is Media Matters America.  As the name explains, they monitor all forms of media and report on the distortions and misinformation. They give factual rebuttals. They make it a lot easier to sort fact from fiction.


 


His memory is no more 'selective' than the current Pres..
and his cronies...
Link to current law regarding foreign birth...sm
to American citizens.  http://www.aca.ch/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=80
No need to wonder...current mortgage bank crisis...
brought to you courtesy of greedy democrats on Congress and greedy Democrats at the top of Fannie Mae. The handwriting is on the wall. This one's on you. McCain saw it coming in 2005 and the dems shut him down. Well, we are reaping what they sowed. To quote Toby Keith...how do you like them now?
Mccain current campaign manager

 Seems Rick Davis was paid $30,000 a month - for five years - as president of "an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations," according to the International Herald Tribune.


 


 


Just remember, the current administration is to blame.
If that many people in your family are being laid off, you have no one to blame but the current administration. They are the ones who are interested in making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Obama has been criticized ad nauseum on this board for wanting to "spread the wealth." Now, you are accusing him of wanting to make the rich richer. You can't have it both ways!
Bush vs Obama on the current crisis
I think I cannot post the link (?) but go to Youtube and search "timeline shows Bush, McCain warn.... for a news piece aired in Canada (and certainly not in the US on the MSM).  Back in 2002 Bush and McCain both warned that Fannie and Freddie needed overhauling ,after the Clinton/dem policy that anyone who wants a mortgage should get one had us on a collision course with financial ruin. But did anyone listen?  Noooooooo!  Bawney Fwank said:  We're all just fine here.  No problem.  Nothing to look at, people.  Move along.  Chuck Schumer said:  Fannie and Freddie have been doing an outstanding job and there is no problem.  So, once again history has vindicated a republican, but we in the US are being protected from such dangerous information.  How about a REVERSE fairness doctrine?
Your description reminds me of our current lousy
nm
The current Democratic Congress has also floated the notion of.....sm
outlawing the current 401K's that most of us have with our retirement funds in them.

Why?

Probably because they know how to invest our money better than we do, and want to make us put all our extra money into government backed retirements funds.


Sounds to me like a repeat of Social Security, where they'll use our money, put an IOU in a drawer someplace, and then say oops.....sorry, your money's all gone....

If the current mortgage securities plan prevails,
come out of it all smelling like a rose. They are proposing to refinance the mortgages based on inflated appraised values that existed BEFORE the mortgage crisis, not the current lower values. In this way, the homeowners will still end up owing more on their mortgages than their homes are actually worth....they will just be paying for it for a longer term with more accumulated interest on the loan. Those terms are the ones we need to keep our eyes on and see how it plays out, but it looks to me like it is not going to make it into the next session of Congress.
In the current economic meltdown....he has to inspire confidence...
fortunately for me, I am reaping the benefits of one of his agendas. I would be absolutely THRILLED if he can accomplish it all within the time limits he has imposed upon himself - but, he has an army of congress to aid our progress - how much will the pubs obstruct? I guess we will have to wait to see. I could pisss in my cheerios and embrace your negativity but I'd rather go to bed and have fabulous sex with my husband - we have something to celebrate.
This site says "according to current polling data" ...I'll say again....
the polls are stacked to the dem side, as that is mostly who they poll.

Wait till the actual, real, election, to see who wins.


I don't believe or trust in these one-sided polls....
Poll: In current economic, social and economic

The  IDEA of:



  1. Full employment.

  2. Shorter work week.

  3. Guaranteed minimum wage income for all adults.

  4. Universal social benefits to include health care, child care, vacation time and lifelong access to education and training.

  5. Programs to ensure gender equality.

  6. Democratization of our banking and financial system, including popular election for those in charge of public sterwardship in the banking system.

  7. Employees control over their own pension assets.

  8. Alternative financial institutions controlled by local community members (similar to credit unions). 

I would if he were president now...nm
x
Why does President need help with a way out?
That's really scary. I do think if we have any troops come home, it'll be before elections - and not a minute before necessary to have the greatest impact on election results. Wallace should wonder if the families of fallen soldiers would be offended at THAT kind of rank political maneuvering. I know I am.

And what happened to SPREADING DEMOCRACY (like margarine?) in Iraq? Chalabi just appointed the head Taliban judge to office in Iraq, the one who outlawed female education in Afghanistan and sponsored public executions for not wearing burkhas. Is that what we promised the Iraqi people? The whole thing is a huge mess. All the billions and billions Congress authorized for rebuilding Iraq went into Halliburton and other crony pockets and the job was never done. We can't train more Iraqi police units because as soon as we give them guns and tanks they use them on our soldiers. That's why Bush can't tell the truth about how that's going, but that doesn't stop him from continuing to fudge the numbers.

Sadly, Bush won't take any help even if it's offered - not in his game plan apparently.



We need this man as our next president
Someone who can speak so elequently without having to read word from word from notes or prompters.

Someone who knows what the different races are about, understands, and embraces heritages of all backgrounds.

Someone who can meet with our enemies to try and stop the violence and come to agreements.

Someone who is intelligent.

Someone who isn't married to "bad baggage" that will disgrace our white house.

Someone who isn't a war mongerer or voted for the war.

Someone who is truthful to the American people and not deceiptful (sp?) trying to hide things they have done.

Someone who doesn't think they should just be annointed to the white house but actually needs to "earn" the publics vote.

Someone who doesn't believe they should win just because they are from a certain race or gender.

Someone who is calm under fire, can think and act with a clear mind, and doesn't lash out, spew racial or ethnic slurs.

Someone who wants a better country for all people and not just themselves and their close friends and family.

Someone who is relatively "new" to Washington and not the same ol "stuff".

Someone who is working towards our future and not living or trying to live in the past.

Comment: Who cares that people Obama knows (but clearly doesn't share the same viewpoint of which he has had to say over and over and over and over) throws out biggoted or hateful things. You have them on all sides. Hillary's got her people (Ferraro and others) coming out with biggoted and hateful statements and you've got John McCain's people (Cunningham and others) coming out with their biggoted and hateful statements and they too have had to distance themselves. Unfortunately they die away quickly but Obama has to keep repeating himself on the same story. I have a good relationship with my minister, but it doesn't mean I agree with everything he says and if he said terrible things just because I have a good relationship with him doesn't mean I agree with him. - Just get tired of Obama having to repeat the same things over and over. Kind of reminds me of the line in a movie I heard once. "I don't know how many different ways I can tell you the same story." - and - "Have IQ's just dropped sharply since I've been away".

It's true we are not going to be able to change a true biggot. Some people will just not vote for him because he's part black, just like some other people will also not vote for Hillary because she's a woman. I just hope there are enough good Americans to overcome that and do the right thing (at least what I believe is the right thing). But it is getting tiring listening to the opponents stir up a bunch of hateful things trying to get the people to vote against him and time and time again I read this board and will read the same comments over and over "did you hear what Obama's minister said". It's like listening to a broken record and I always think - they're not actually bring this up again???

I believe our country needs a lot of healing. We've got a long way to go on the racial issues/hatred towards one race or another. We've got to try to make amends with the people who we fear and call our enemies, when in fact the people we should be fearing is our own government. We've put years and years into believing our government is going to be truthful with us, but when you have a VP who says "so" when he is told that 2/3 of Americans don't believe in the war and feel we should have not gone to war (DH and I sat with our mouths open), those are the people I consider terro**rists by putting fear in the American people's mind where there should be no fear.

So for that and all the reasons I listed above that is why I'm voting for Obama.
He is NOT my president ...
I didn't vote for him .. Another thing, I will NOT vote for McBush (errr ... McCain).  I was a Hilary fan all the way until she couldn't get the nomination .. now I'll switch gears to Obama.  Frankly, I think I would could do a better job than Bush .. at least I'd use my common sense!!
This is who we want for President?
When you look at this video (link below), I promise  you
> will NOT BELIEVE your eyes and ears. Take a look at the You

> Tube link below and pass it on. This is a view of John

> McCain that you probably won't see on the Network news.

> If it weren't serious, it would be hilarious.

>



> p;nb sp;

Probably for the best. Once someone becomes President,
it seems like even if they are an excellent choice, they have to use far too much of their time, skill and energy just defending themselves from the other side. No one ever really wins, least of all, US.
Either way, the next president is
only in for one term. McCain will simply be too old and by then health will be a major factor. Obama, on the other hand, simply will not be able to come through with all of his promises due to the current situation with our economy. I do believe if he is elected that many who voted for him will see him for what he truly is, an inexperienced leader who has no clue. His strings are pulled by the extreme left. Either way, we are in for a rough 4 years.
next president
The question is not what the next president HAS done, the question is what he WILL do.
That's if he becomes president. He can't
veto anything as a senator. That's the prez's job.
I did nto say he should not have run for president. I said...
that all the fuel skinheads need (which I am not one of--my hair is very long) is a black man running for president. My gosh--I knew somebody would read things incorrectly. I think skin heads are horrible people. As I said, his color is not an issue for me!
He is your president too
"To those whose respect I have yet to earn." Another question might be how far to the center he will take himself. If socialism means equality and opportunity for all Americans, if it means we can now begin to heal the division that have separated us in the past and of late, if it means that American is still the place where all things are possible, if it means we rise or fall as one nation and one people, if it means this is our chance to answer our call to progress, if it means it is our time to restore prosperity and promote the call to peace, if it means we have rediscovered the fundamental truth, that out of many we are one, and if it means we have told the world we are who we say we are, then I say bring it on.

We'll just be taking this thing one step at a time. Step number one. Try a little hope in place of the fear.
He's NOT president yet
And yet here he is giving another press conference.  He has no business giving any press conferences as though he is president.  He is NOT president yet.  Yes, he will be on January 20th but that date hasn't arrived yet.  I'm sick of him sticking his face in front of the camera giving everytime he turns around.  He is commenting on issues he has no business commenting on.  These are for the President to talk about.  Yes, I know Bush is a bumbling baboon, but he is still the president until Obama is sworn in.  This guy is just plain arrogant!  If this is how the next four years are going to be I hope they do go by fast.
One President.........sm


Washington, D.C. — Over the course of the last two months President-elect Barack Obama and the Presidential Transition Team (PTT) have replaced their campaign maxim, "Change We Can Believe In," with a new mantra: "We Only Have One President at a Time."

It is a slogan that has already worn out.

Obama and the PTT have used this phrase repeatedly in response to reporters' questions on the economy, federal bailouts, foreign policy, national security, the military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, the future of "Gitmo" and the Russian decision to shut down the delivery of natural gas to Western Europe through Ukrainian pipelines.


During this week's Oval Office photo-op with President George W. Bush and former Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, and William Jefferson Blyth Clinton, Obama used the "one president at a time" dodge to avoid answering a reporter's hurled interrogatory about Israeli military operations in Gaza. The response from those in the lineup, and apparently most in the mainstream media, is to nod approvingly at Obama's sagacity every time they hear him say it.

The only trouble is — it simply isn't true.

While the current, former and future commanders-in-chief went off to snack and chat, Senator Joe Biden, the soon-to-be vice president of the United States, headed off to Andrews Air Force Base to commence a hastily convened, week-long "congressional fact finding mission" to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Absent from the secret itinerary divulged by Mr. Biden were other places with even more pressing problems: India — a U.S. ally still recovering from the brutal Mumbai terror attack and on the brink of attacking Pakistan. The Ukraine — a NATO applicant, threatened by interference from Moscow and this week's natural gas cutoff. And Israel — an American ally facing the threat of U.N. sanctions for acting in self defense to protect its citizens from Iranian-supplied rockets and mortars being fired from Gaza by Hamas, and which now faces attacks from Iranian-supported Hezbollah terror in Lebanon.

While the potentates of the press gush over the forthcoming "history-making inaugural," the Biden "Codel" — Washington-speak for "congressional delegation" — to select trouble-spots has made some little-noted history of its own. Unlike Obama, Biden did not surrender his Senate seat. This week, when Congress reconvened, Biden insisted on being sworn in as Delaware's senior senator and retaining his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Unlike Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, Dan Quayle and AL Gore — who all ascended to vice presidency of the Unites States from the Senate and did nothing to interfere in diplomatic issues between election and inaugural — Biden is now dabbling about in the affairs of state.

Biden defends his actions by pointing to the company he is keeping on this trip: fellow Senators John Kerry, D-Mass., Jack Reed, D-R.I., Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lindsay Graham, R-S.C. Earlier in the week, perhaps forgetting the post he will occupy on Jan. 20, Biden said, "I'm a still a Senate man." None of the media all-stars covering the PTT thought to ask Obama what he thought of this response. Notably, Hillary Rodham Clinton — soon to become the next secretary of state — was neither included in the CODEL nor available for comment about the propriety of such an unprecedented adventure.

None of this bodes well for the new administration or for America's interests in a very dangerous world. The situations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are certainly important. But so too are outcomes in Gaza and Lebanon, our relationship with India and the effects of an increasingly tense standoff between Russia and Ukraine. All of these places and problems matter to U.S. national security, and all are perhaps in more urgent need of attention.

Obama can't have it both ways. He cannot claim on the one hand that "we have only one president" and then dispatch his future vice president on a thinly-disguised CODEL to diddle in diplomacy without having world leaders take note of what the incoming administration considers to be important. In permitting the Biden CODEL to go forward and approving the itinerary, Obama has sent a signal — intentionally or not — to allies and adversaries alike.

From Moscow to Tehran, Caracas to Beijing, London to Delhi, in virtually every world capital, foreign leaders and their intelligence services are now making judgments about the next leader of the free world. They learned something about his wisdom, seriousness and maturity this week when he picked Leon Panetta, a man with "intelligence deficit disorder," to head the CIA. Perhaps they also had a little chuckle when he chose a TV celebrity doctor to become surgeon general to deal with bio-terrorism and possible pandemics. Hopefully the Biden CODEL trip to Southwest Asia did not lead them to conclude that Obama is not a man of his word.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,478606,00.html
Maybe because THIS president knows which
He isn't trying to clean up the mess daddy left behind when he left office.

Obama is a MUCH BETTER president in 3 months than GW Bush ever was. Period.
The president SAID
WORDS WORDS WORDS that's all he used. Smooth talking, sweet, pretty words.

Don't be fooled. What government says and what government does are two very very different things.
Sorry...but he is not MY President. He is THE President....
that little distinction is important to me, I don't much care if not important to anyone else. Yes, it would have been better if he had just said ANYthing just a wee bit strong...hey Mahmoud...couldn't you just stop beating the crap out of protestors in front of the TV cameras? Bad form old boy. Makes you look bad.

Bomb Iran? Barack Obama? If they launched a nuclear strike and obliterated Israel (sorry, palestine, collateral damage), what do you think Barack Obama would do? That is a serious question now.

My alternative would be as I stated above...say something strong or just don't say anything at all. The more he positions himself as, to use the original poster's words, a wimp...only emboldens an already dyed in the wool nutcase. "Undermine" the protestors...you mean shooting them dead and beating them senseless? They are already doing that. They don't need a hand slapping from the US as a "reason" to do so. lol. Sigh.