Althouse: Obama approval down to 45%.

September 1, 2009

Obama approval down to 45%.

170 comments:

Chennaul said...: What's worse about that is he is down to that level despite a fawning media.

And no ABC, CBS, and NBC with their network numbers aided by CNN, CNBC MSNBC, NPR ,Comedy Central, Newsweek, Time, The New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, Oprah etc-

that is not equal to some guy on a radio and FOX News.; 9/1/09, 12:53 PM
Issob Morocco said...: Can we do a Cash for Political Clunkers program?; 9/1/09, 12:56 PM
Adrian said...: Just wait until next Tuesday, when he makes his speech to every single child in America (a speech to students, broadcast straight into assemblies nationwide). Creepy, much? Chalk up yet another victory for Freeman Hunt and all the homeschoolers!; 9/1/09, 1:05 PM
Hunter McDaniel said...: Had McCain won the election, he would be down to 45% also - because the economy sucks and looks like it will continue to suck for some time.

Of course McCain would not have started at 70%, so the drop would not seem as steep. I fear he would have made many of the same bad moves as Obama (stimulus, auto bailouts) but maybe on a smaller scale.; 9/1/09, 1:06 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: It's the economy.

Come on, do you think we can lose jobs every month for a year without it affecting the poll numbers?

Obama is in Bush country, now. Let's see how he handles it.; 9/1/09, 1:06 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Who would have ever thought that proposing policies that piled up yet more debt that we will never be able to pay off would have such an effect on his poll numbers.

I mean I never saw it coming.; 9/1/09, 1:08 PM
Brian O'Connell said...: madawaskan: "that is not equal to some guy on a radio and FOX News."

Clearly this calls for more broadcast / cable regulation. I don't care for the tone of a lot of these websites either. We need some kind of panel that would kill these unfair, fact-challenged, and nonlocal programs. I don't know what name would be appropriate for such a panel though.; 9/1/09, 1:16 PM
Anonymous said...: With a 16% unemployment rate and climbing, Obama's numbers are going to head much further south.

His real problem is inside his own party. Only 30% of the respondents said they "strongly approve" of the job he is doing ... so even among ardent Democrats there is trepidation in the poll.

And understandably so. Barack Obama is handing out billions of dollars to millionaire car dealers and yet, hundreds of thousands of "regular guy" Democrats are exhausting their unemployment benefits and losing their houses at the fastest pace in our nation's history.

The Democrat Party had better get its priorities straight. They're handing out $4,500 welfare checks to Republicans like Bill Frist instead of taking care of their base.

Who among the Democrats voted for Barack Obama so that he could hand out $4,500 welfare checks to Bill Frist?; 9/1/09, 1:17 PM
Anonymous said...: He's making a speech directly into classrooms?! Will it be "get in their faces, tell them how important health care reform is"?

Keep your children home that day!; 9/1/09, 1:18 PM
Synova said...: "I don't know what name would be appropriate for such a panel though."

Pravda?; 9/1/09, 1:19 PM
Synova said...: I don't think that the media is fawning so much for a while now. You can tell they sort of *want* to, but you can't have two entities with enormous egos and expect them to remain in harmony.; 9/1/09, 1:20 PM
Roger J. said...: This is SUCH a surprise--wow, I am just shocked.; 9/1/09, 1:21 PM
Synova said...: PatCA, if a President did something like that and stayed to general topics of government... so it's an educational address that can be recycled for the next three decades without losing relevance... then great.

If he's planning to talk to children so that the kids go home and tell their parents what to do about health care... well then we're firmly in Hitler Youth territory aren't we.; 9/1/09, 1:23 PM
Synova said...: Glenn Beck!; 9/1/09, 1:24 PM
Scott M said...: If Obama were honestly concentrating on the economy and only the economy, his ratings would probably still be higher. My own 2 cents? Invest heavily in all things space and aerospace engineering. The last bout of American leadership in space pretty much led to the economic boom in the latter half of the 20th. I'm also a closet geek, so a permanent base on the moon rego's my lith.

As it stands, President Obama came to DC with a full slate of plans designed to be rammed through as quickly as possible. Instead of focusing non-stop on all things economic, he chose instead to go hell-bent for leather on his pre-planned (seemingly regardless of the economic reality on the ground) agenda.

Regardless, I don't see how things can improve much for the Dems before 2010. They can lay that squarely on his shoulders.

I would never have voted for McCain, but I would think his plate wouldn't have anything about health care on it. Unfortunately, though, a McCain presidency would have robbed the American people of a very wise Latina.

Even if he did concentrate non-stop on all things economic, his ratings would still be tanking. We're possibly on the eve of a political awakening in this country and, hopefully, a return to the sort of skepticism of government this country was founded on.; 9/1/09, 1:25 PM
Chennaul said...: Brain-

Hmm the "panel"-

The Congressional Panel/ Act on Ethics and Balance -Quality Control of the Media-

co-chaired by Al Franken and Maxine Waters.; 9/1/09, 1:27 PM
Bender said...: You can subtract another 10-15 points to get to the real approval numbers.

That 45 approval number includes a ton of people that are still emotionally invested in Obama, who don't want to admit to themselves that he is a disaster, but who will eventually turn on him.

That number also includes a fair number of partisans and sycophants who will never, ever, ever publicly express any disapproval of any kind, even if Obama were to start nuking American cities.; 9/1/09, 1:28 PM
Chennaul said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/1/09, 1:30 PM
Darcy said...: LOL. This is just getting very funny, actually. Can you imagine a Bush speech to America's children getting piped into all of the public schools?

Thanks for the head's up, Adrian. I'll want to know the exact content of the speech (requested through my son's HS) before I'll approve of my kid listening to it on that day.; 9/1/09, 1:31 PM
Chennaul said...: Are you not chanting the daily mantra at CNBC -

It's less bad!

Come on-I know you can do it!; 9/1/09, 1:31 PM
Bissage said...: It’s entirely possible a lot of people are just finding out he’s black.; 9/1/09, 1:32 PM
Scott M said...: @Scott M

Horribly disjointed comment. That must be what happens when you take five calls while trying to finish a thought.

When it comes to the debate over "fairness" on the airwaves, the question I always want to ask a proponent would be, "do you consider talk radio or education more important?" The answer, unless you're insane, is of course education.

The problem with that is that there is zero mechanisms in place to assure that college students are getting anything resembling equality of ideas. It is far from a conservative myth that faculty across the nation lean heavily to the left.; 9/1/09, 1:32 PM
Chennaul said...: Synova-

Obviously you are not tuned into the proper channels...

tsk, tsk.

Have you not been doing your daily allotment of CNN?

Have you not read the total truth about how Obama is killing more terrorists than Bush?

It's true the NSA says so and everything!!!1!; 9/1/09, 1:33 PM
AllenS said...: 45% of us are idiots.

WV: caterso

And, that's what they do!; 9/1/09, 1:34 PM
Chennaul said...: How many weenies are afraid if they say they disapprove of Obama that they-

*add Church Lady voice here*

might be a racist?; 9/1/09, 1:38 PM
Matt said...: Speaking of idiots.
Watch this video and tell me these people aren't cartoon-like morons. It will make you cringe that these people call themselves Americans.; 9/1/09, 1:40 PM
Shanna said...: Just wait until next Tuesday, when he makes his speech to every single child in America (a speech to students, broadcast straight into assemblies nationwide). Creepy, much?

Ew, hadn’t heard that. I try not to go off on weird conspiracies and such, but it is a little weird. I'm sure there will be a transcript or video-will be curious what is said.

Mostly what I don't like about Obama is that he feels the need to call people out individually who disagree with him (rather than, say, answering questions about his plans). It makes him look like a bully and a child, which is not what I especially want in a president.; 9/1/09, 1:40 PM
Shanna said...: PatCA, if a President did something like that and stayed to general topics of government... so it's an educational address that can be recycled for the next three decades without losing relevance... then great.

If he's planning to talk to children so that the kids go home and tell their parents what to do about health care... well then we're firmly in Hitler Youth territory aren't we.

Exactly. Which is it? I fear we know the answer. Next, kids, tell your teacher if your parent express anti-health care reform ideas! Geez.; 9/1/09, 1:43 PM
XWL said...: From the doc sent out to teachers[helpful annotation by me, in brackets]:

Before the Speech
Teachers can build background knowledge about the President of the United States and his speech by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama [start with that 'audacious' book of his, and really, don't bother with any others] and motivate students by asking the following questions:

Who is the President of the United States?
What do you think it takes to be President? [make sure your students understand the need for audacity, hope, and change]
To whom do you think the President is going to be speaking?
Why do you think he wants to speak to you? [get 'em while they're young!]
What do you think he will say to you?
... ...
Teachers can chart ideas about what they would say.

Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? [and by listen we mean, do what your told, and by do what your told, we mean do what your told when told to do something by fine progressive types, should some evil backward thinking GOP-type happen to hold a position of authority in your locale, then by all means, speak truth to power!]

Hope and Change!

(nothing 1984-ish at all in any of this, it's all innocent civics stuff, I'm sure, and I'm also sure all those wonderful progressive union activists instructors who often teach the K-6 level won't use this message as yet another means to indoctrinate their students); 9/1/09, 1:49 PM
Tank said...: Reasons to approve of Obama:

1. Allowed military to shoot pirates in the head.

2. Smokes an occassional cig.

3. Has the odd drink of alcohol.

4. Let's kids eat junk food sometimes.

5. Plays golf.

6. Ummmmm

And if #1 seems like a no-brainer, if Carter were still Pres, we'd be on day 89 of "American Captain held hostage."; 9/1/09, 1:50 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I suspect it is just his big blustery ego. After the speech kids will despise him too.

What kid wants to listen to another authority figure when you are in school?

wv = trists; 9/1/09, 1:52 PM
SteveR said...: Its inevitable that what it takes to be elected will lead to rude awakening. The majority of Americans don't engage in the system enough to make really informed decisions but I had hoped he would surprise me.

It turns out he is exactly what I thought all along.; 9/1/09, 1:53 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Yikes that is quite a list and homework assignment!

But I thought schools were broke and the students needed more time in the classrooms? Do they really have time to spend on this?

Obama will even lose the teacher votes now.; 9/1/09, 1:55 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: IMHO if health care reform fails, the Obama presidency is over until 2012.

It's over in the sense that the President will no longer be setting to the agenda and will be reacting to events.

Also, if health care reform fails it will be an omen that the Republicans may retake Congress.

We may see a Clintonian triangulation if that happens.; 9/1/09, 1:58 PM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: Can you imagine a Bush speech to America's children getting piped into all of the public schools?

Hi Darcy, good question. I can tell you what would happen. If this was Bush hundreds (thousands?) of teachers across the country would be proudly proclaiming how they were refusing the call to indoctrinate their students to the ravings of that awful George Bush.

But Barack is different. He's just dreamy.; 9/1/09, 2:02 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: This is not a problem for the president.

Obama’s poll numbers are like his ObamaCare.

They are deficit neutral ;); 9/1/09, 2:03 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: w.v. [Platio] termed it the shadowio on the caveio wallio. Polls, schmolls. Never put stock in polls, polling, pollsters, or poll results.

Although the White House sure does. Whoever is in it, they do live and die by it.

Opinion. Hmmm. Opinion. Nope. The older I get the less I care about other peoples' opinions.

They're such fluid things. Evanescent. POP! They change on you, like that.

My mind wanders, though. Here, have yourselves a pop-up card prototype. After I made Ann's mushroom log pop-up I got to thinking maybe my sister would like a little bird house. I don't know. Her opinions change too.; 9/1/09, 2:20 PM
Henry said...: We went to Mike's Pastry in Boston's North End yesterday, then walked by the Paul Revere House. Given a cream puff the size of his head to eat, my son's appreciation of American History was negligible.

Unless Obama shows up in person at my son's school with donuts, I'm not too worried about his nefarious influence.; 9/1/09, 2:22 PM
bagoh20 said...: I ,for one, want to thank the president. Truly, for everything he has done to educate the American people, energize them and throw himself on his sword for our liberty. Hail the uniter. Hail The One!; 9/1/09, 2:26 PM
garage mahal said...: Good thing our President doesn't govern by poll numbers, and instead does what he thinks is best for the country. It must be tough! Lonely job. Kind of like the last President remember, poll numbers DON'T MATTER!; 9/1/09, 2:28 PM
Salamandyr said...: Good thing our President doesn't govern by poll numbers, and instead does what he thinks is best for the country. It must be tough! Lonely job. Kind of like the last President remember, poll numbers DON'T MATTER!

When did you start believing this?; 9/1/09, 2:31 PM
Anonymous said...: "Good thing our President doesn't govern by poll numbers, and instead does what he thinks is best for the country. It must be tough! Lonely job. Kind of like the last President remember, poll numbers DON'T MATTER!

When did you start believing this?"

When the shoe was on the other foot.; 9/1/09, 2:32 PM
chickelit said...: Just wait until next Tuesday, when he makes his speech to every single child in America (a speech to students, broadcast straight into assemblies nationwide).

I suspect that his approval numbers are significantly higher than 48% amongst public school children, but I don't have any data to support it.; 9/1/09, 2:33 PM
KCFleming said...: Maybe he can get some of the TV union thugs to go around and punch back twice as hard at people answering the polls.; 9/1/09, 2:33 PM
Anonymous said...: The best is yet to come. BO does not handle criticism or rejection well. He has never had to deal with it.
He's always been told he's the smartest guy in the room. Look for this to have a corrosive effect on him. It will manifest itself in some mean-spirited way.; 9/1/09, 2:40 PM
The Drill SGT said...: John Lynch said...
Obama is in Bush country, now. Let's see how he handles it.

It's clear, Not Well.

So Althouse, Obama got your vote because he was better than McCain on the economy. How's that Trillion dollars of stimulus doing at holding unemployment to under 8%?

The irony is of course that in the Spring, the CBO predicted the cumulative budget deficit of 9 Trillion, and the OMB said 7 trillion.

When questioned, the OMB gave the snarky answer that it was an apples and oranges comparison because CBO didn't factor in all the mana from ecomonic heaven that would be generated by the Stimulus package.

Now that OMB has had to eat the 9 trillion dollar Sh_t sandwich of a mid year status report showing a 9 trillion dollar cum deficit, they stand exposed as one or more of:

- political hacks
- incompetents

and BTW, by their own logic the Stimulus is now estimated to produce NO STMULUS.; 9/1/09, 2:42 PM
Anonymous said...: where were all of these 55% during the primary and the general?; 9/1/09, 2:43 PM
The Drill SGT said...: garage mahal said...
Good thing our President doesn't govern by poll numbers, and instead does what he thinks is best for the country. It must be tough! Lonely job. Kind of like the last President remember, poll numbers DON'T MATTER!

I wish I believed that Obama wasn't poll driven. Like when Healthcare Reform became Health Insurance Reform?

surely that wasn't focus group driven :); 9/1/09, 2:47 PM
Matt said...: LarsPorsena

It is always funny to read people who just completely make stuff up as you are.
Just how do you conclude that Obama doesn't handle criticism well if - in fact - he has not had to deal with it?
Are you perhaps projecting your own experience because - seriously - there are no signs that show Obama somehow won't handle it well.
I would say at this point we don't know. But considering that we will get a healthcare bill passed pretty soon he will be pretty happy.; 9/1/09, 2:48 PM
Darcy said...: Hi, Bushman! Yup. :); 9/1/09, 2:48 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Let's tally the voting blocs Obama has pissed off:

Tonsil removers & leg amputators.
Most other doctors.
Cops and their families and friends.
Insurance company employees especially the ones who need to be kept honest by the public option.
Althouse hillbillies (that was too easy for him).

Next up : School teachers and school students.; 9/1/09, 2:53 PM
traditionalguy said...: Presidente Obama may need to call a referendum to extend his term for life with those election results pre-entered in the computers like his bestest friend who tried to capture the Honduran Democratic Republic that way and now enjoys all the help that Obama and Hillary can throw his way.; 9/1/09, 2:55 PM
mrs whatsit said...: AJ, add Postal Service workers to your list.

Labor Day's late this year, so schools around here aren't even scheduled to open until the day after the President's speech is scheduled. I wonder how widespread that is, and why it didn't occur to his handlers to postpone the Big Speech for a week or two. Maybe they didn't look at the calendar?; 9/1/09, 2:57 PM
Balfegor said...: You can subtract another 10-15 points to get to the real approval numbers.

That 45 approval number includes a ton of people that are still emotionally invested in Obama, who don't want to admit to themselves that he is a disaster, but who will eventually turn on him.

That may or may not be the case, but I think Rasmussen's poll is a likely voter poll (some other polls are likely voter; others are intended to cover the population). Obama is going to do worse with voters than with the population as a whole (even the voting-eligible population as a whole), simply because voters skew more conservative/Republican than the population as a whole. Even if you assume there is a huge emotional skew towards Obama, buoying up his numbers despite disapproval of his policies and the direction he is trying to (or letting Congress try to) take America, it's certainly not the case that his approval numbers are anywhere near 30% or 35%, as you suggest. He's probably just hovering around 50%, about where the average of recent polls has had him.; 9/1/09, 2:58 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Mrs Whatsit:

How the heck did I leave the post office off my list. Thanks.; 9/1/09, 3:01 PM
Matt said...: Gallup Poll has Obama favorability at 52%. Slightly higher than last week.
Polls matter in the sense that they give a snap shot of where people [or a sample of people] are at any one moment.
But Bush never worried about it and he served two terms. And no president governs based on them. They shouldn't.

Also note that some of the unfavorability is coming from the Left. They think Obama is too moderate and they don't like that he is trying to negotiate with the GOP or with Big Pharma or corporations. And this voting bloc is not going to turn into Republicans.
So the idea that somehow this is cause for alarm is humurous at best.; 9/1/09, 3:03 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Mrs. Whatsit:

I can't think of any reason the White House would think to look at a calendar. Heh.

wv = sermined= prez sermon to educ.; 9/1/09, 3:04 PM
bagoh20 said...: "where were all of these 55% during the primary and the general?"

They were warned not to try the brown acid.; 9/1/09, 3:04 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Matt:

How does it feel to be a last lonely defender for the liberal way?

Alpha and Jeremy have clammed up or maybe slit their own throats while Garage is left to do drive-by commenting.; 9/1/09, 3:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Is it just me, or do any of you get a creepy feeling from Obama?

Here are a few suggestions from Obama's Department of Education, regarding Obama's sheech to the Obamajugend...I mean the school children of America.

"Before the Speech:

....

"• Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor?

Why is what they say important?

During the Speech:
.... As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following:

What is the President trying to tell me?

What is the President asking me to do?

What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?

• Students can record important parts of the speech where the President is asking them to do something. Students might think about:

What specific job is he asking me to do?

Is he asking anything of anyone else? Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?

How do I report my parents to the government if they are upset about what the President wants me to do?

[Actually, I added the last one myself. But it does have a certain fit, don't you think?]; 9/1/09, 3:09 PM
Balfegor said...: And this voting bloc is not going to turn into Republicans.

No, what happens to disaffected partisans is that they stay home on election day.

So the idea that somehow this is cause for alarm is humurous at best.

No, the trend is cause for alarm for the devotees of the Dear Leader. People who aren't fired up to vote for their side anymore stay home on election day. It's not as bad as the two vote swing when they vote for the other side, but hey, every vote counts.; 9/1/09, 3:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Matt's argumentative techniques deconstructed:

1. Change the subject. Try to push an unrelated video.

2. Suggest that Obama's incredible swoon is humorous and no cause for alarm because it's really the left, not independents, who are not satisfied.

What's next? I predict an indictment of the Bush administration.; 9/1/09, 3:18 PM
Chase said...: So the idea that somehow this is cause for alarm is humurous at best.

Matt, you've got your facts straight but your analysis off.

No one reveling in the low Obama poll numbers believes that they mean Obama will resign or necessarily even lose in 2012. But the numbers DO give hope of seeing his policies being slowed down or prevented (unless you are one of those unhappy-with-Obama-on-the- left types. In which case you will be frustrated, yes and continue to fragment the Democrat party, which is the hope of Republicans - a sea change in Congress.

It's all about the Legislative, Baby!; 9/1/09, 3:22 PM
Larry J said...: Have you not been doing your daily allotment of CNN?

I've made several business trips this year. For some strange reason, it seems all airports tune into CNN. It's amazing - I didn't think it was physically possible for an entire network to have their heads up Obama's ass at the same time. It made me consider buying one of those universal remote controls that will turn off any make of TV. It's bad enough to get stuck with a 4 hour layover due to a maintenance issue, it's even worse when you can't escape being bombarded by CNN's propaganda. I guess it could be worse - they could be tuned into MSNBC.

As for Obama's speech to school children next week, if my kids were still in school, I'd keep them home that day.; 9/1/09, 3:22 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: MSM will treat Obama's speech as historic event of course.; 9/1/09, 3:26 PM
bagoh20 said...: "• Students can record important parts of the speech where the President is asking them to do something. Students might think about:

What specific job is he asking me to do?"

Jeez, after we push our kids on music lessons and soccer and helping the environment now the president has work for them too. Damn it sucks to be a kid without a childhood. Where is the time for catching snakes and snails and stealing dad's liquor?; 9/1/09, 3:27 PM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: Obviously Obama has spent too much time reading his own adoring reviews. He has sunk farther and faster than I would have thought. That said, there is plenty of time to turn things around. If he listens to the electorate and heads for the middle, he will be OK. If he continues down the current path, he's toast.

I still have to believe that he will eventually figure this out. It's really not that hard. Just ask Bill Clinton.; 9/1/09, 3:27 PM
Anonymous said...: What specific job is he asking me to do?

Answer: One where you have to give most of the money you make to federal, state, and local governments, under a regime that wishes to drastically reduce your economic liberty.

Let's start a movement here, if it's not already started: Keep your kids home that day.; 9/1/09, 3:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Where is the time for catching snakes and snails and stealing dad's liquor?

Looked out the window yesterday afternoon and my 8 year old daughter was petting a newly-hatched cicada.

After taking some pics & videos, she then went exploring for more. Found one attached to a tree just emerging from its skin. She took some more pics and then moved on to other activities.

Haven't found any empty liquor bottles yet, though.; 9/1/09, 3:33 PM
Alex said...: Dammit! I was hoping to see what Jeremy, hdhouse, FLS, AlphaLiberal had to say, but they were all gone! I wonder why?; 9/1/09, 3:41 PM
David said...: Down to 0% in my household, unfortunately. I would like to approve of what he is doing, really would, but he has made it extremely difficult.

The Speech to the Children is creepy, even if he just delivers pablum. We would be in boycott and constitutional crises territory with the left if Bush had decided to address the schoolchildren of the nation like this.

Nevertheless, schoolchildren are easily bored, and have a vast capacity for ridicule. This may become more apparent the deeper the President gets into his speech.; 9/1/09, 3:42 PM
Alex said...: I agree with Matt. Some of the recent disapproval is from lefties who think Obama is being too moderate and needs to show some leftist spine and sock it to the GOP.; 9/1/09, 3:43 PM
Anonymous said...: I can only guess you are being facetious, Alex. Polls show that independents are the ones leaving Obama.

Moreover, does Obama really need to "sock it to" Republicans (whatever that means)? Are they the ones holding back Obama's legislation. If you believe it is so, I can help you with simple arithmetic.

But, anyway, please tell me I didn't get the joke. Please.; 9/1/09, 3:48 PM
Anonymous said...: You were being facetious. Good.; 9/1/09, 3:49 PM
G Joubert said...: I still have to believe that he will eventually figure this out. It's really not that hard. Just ask Bill Clinton.

I thought that too. Then I remembered Clinton had Dick Morris advising him. Obama has Rahm and Axelrod. Does the word moderate even show up in their dictionary?; 9/1/09, 3:51 PM
Maxine Weiss said...: "No one wants to be a failure. But sometimes when guys know they don’t have much to offer, you can just tell by looking at them something is missing. His girlfriend may have made a joke the night before, which led to continuous thoughts of self doubt."; 9/1/09, 4:07 PM
Roger J. said...: Chase nails it--Its all about the legislative: Its one thing to oppose a strong president, but when you are first term blue dog the president's sinking poll numbers make it easier for them to stiff him and his agenda--its all about their relection. And of course the progressives on the are starting to make noises.

And the afghan situation is starting to heat up it appears.
Obama may be heading for a "QUAGMIRE" in Afgan. unless of course he opts for a SURGE. The irony is absolutely delightful.

Then of course there's the economy, the deficit and weakening dollar.

Yup--nothing but blue skys ahead.; 9/1/09, 4:12 PM
Unknown said...: A few years ago, Roger Ebert wrote about running into Rahm Emanuel at the Sundance Film Festival. Emanuel told him that George Bush would start "another war" right before the 2006 midterms.

Emanuel was implying, of course, that such a war would be a phony trumped up for political advantage. Ebert, being Ebert, of course doesn't doubt it for a moment.

Now, given the liberal propensity for projecting their heinous ideas and motives on everyone around them all day long, I can't help but wonder how long it will be before he advises Obama to start a new war somewhere in order to protect Democrat losses next year.; 9/1/09, 4:12 PM
Alex said...: Seven Machos - it makes the lefties feel better to keep going after the GOP bogeyman rather then look inward.; 9/1/09, 4:15 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Roger J:

Did even a single Dem support the surge strategy?; 9/1/09, 4:17 PM
Revenant said...: Good thing our President doesn't govern by poll numbers, and instead does what he thinks is best for the country.

There's one our hostess can file under "Obama is like Bush". :); 9/1/09, 4:20 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Did even a single Dem support the surge strategy?

Joe Lieberman did, if he still qualifies as a Dem. But I can't think of any others.; 9/1/09, 4:21 PM
holdfast said...: Also note that some of the unfavorability is coming from the Left. They think Obama is too moderate and they don't like that he is trying to negotiate with the GOP or with Big Pharma or corporations. And this voting bloc is not going to turn into Republicans.

True, but they can stay home on election day (as did much of the Republican base last fall) or they can vote for Nader or someone ever loonier and Obambi.; 9/1/09, 4:22 PM
X said...: all the blue dogs have to do is leap on that electral grenade right before the election that determines whether or not they get a pension.; 9/1/09, 4:24 PM
The Drill SGT said...: AJ Lynch said...
Roger J:

Did even a single Dem support the surge strategy?

Lieberman :)

He was clearly a Dem then.; 9/1/09, 4:26 PM
Roger J. said...: I would like to go on record as predicting a surge will not work in Afghanistan--A 1500 mile rugged border with pakistan is just too big..And we have historical experience: see how the 10th mountain division did in Italy during WWII for the effects of mountains on military operations.; 9/1/09, 4:30 PM
KCFleming said...: All Obama needs to do to get those poll numbers back up is do that old Chicago trick they do with voters that don't exist or are dead or are illegal aliens.

Just like with Kennedy, dead and nonexistent Chicagoans go big for the Democrat, every time.; 9/1/09, 4:34 PM
Anonymous said...: I hate to get off topic but I feel compelled. Listen up, people: we don't need to win in Afghanistan. That's not why we're there and, in fact, there is no victory to be had given the stateless nature of the place.

To see why we're there, look at a map. Consider that we have Iran -- our real opponent all along in this long war -- boxed in, with Iraq on one side and Afghanistan on the other. Consider that Afghanistan is next to Pakistan, a somewhat similar pseudo state with nuclear weapons.

Consider still further that it is important to have our military engaged in central Asia, where many natural resources will be exploited by us or by some other powerful state.

It would be a huge mistake to cut out of Afghanistan or Iraq for these reasons, and this is something that goes well beyond any desire to see Obama fail or succeed.; 9/1/09, 4:36 PM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: G Joubert, If Obama is really as intelligent as his fans believe, he will recognize the need to bring in fresh blood. This will necessitate a change of direction and marginalize the current Chicago clan. If he jettisoned the current baggage, he could get a fresh start. I think the instinct to survive will eventually bring him to this conclusion. Otherwise he becomes a one term wonder.; 9/1/09, 4:40 PM
kentuckyliz said...: Realizing the terrorist Eurasian invaders lost the battle, and Oceania would remain safe in the stronghold of Big Brother, Winston's last corner of resistance melted, just like his prison tormenters said it would. He dissolved into tears, took another swig of Victory Gin, and said,

"I LOVE BIG BROTHER!"; 9/1/09, 4:42 PM
Chennaul said...: AJ-

You forgot CIA officers-oh, wait that's an expendable voting bloc....

Oh and this is for the Liberal Flank-

I'll see your Gallup and raise you that Conservative pollster-

Zogby- {yes, I'm being ironic}

President Barack Obama's job approval rating is down to 42%

Oh and Quinnipiac had him down to percentages similar to those of Rasmussen about a month ago-brace yourselves for their next round.; 9/1/09, 4:43 PM
traditionalguy said...: Seven...That map has been there like that for 6 years. Only we kept out of Indian country and didn't stock the tribal mountains with sitting duck targets until Obama took over. So why not carry on with the pre-Obama plan? I remember that Gen. Sherman wasn't cutting and running when he finally decided to out flank Kennesaw Mountain north of Atlanta during the Atlanta campaign. He weighed destroying his Army with a bad plan against using a good plan to cut the Railroad at Jonesboro south of Atlanta instead. Destroying Al Queda anywhere first requires not being destroyed in the effort by an insane plan.; 9/1/09, 4:50 PM
Patm said...: Amen to all who say that the teachers would be (quite rightly) vociferously objecting to this Big Brother In Your Schools moment, had Bush tried it.

Bush never would have tried it, though, because his instincts were not to tyranny but to human liberty, which is all he worked for and talked about.

Obama's instincts seem to be about nothing but acquiring power and obedience.

I say this as someone who did not vote for him but who also was mildly hopeful about his presidency. He has fully lost my trust. And we have three and a half years to go.; 9/1/09, 4:53 PM
g2loq said...: Obama will be gone one day.
His voters will remain among us ...; 9/1/09, 4:55 PM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: Actually, the best thing that could happen to Obama is the Dems getting trounced in 2010.; 9/1/09, 4:57 PM
Patm said...: "Had McCain won the election, he would be down to 45% also - because the economy sucks and looks like it will continue to suck for some time."

Well, perhaps if Obama hadn't passed an 800billion dollar stimulus that had no stimulus programs in it, things would be better. I think McCain would have gone the REAL stimulus plus tax holiday route, and we'd be in much better shape now, so, again, Obama is a terribly president. Incompetent.; 9/1/09, 4:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Trad -- No argument there. The point is that we should stay. That's the big decision.

G2 -- Interesting that you say that. Both sides should stop seeking a messiah. What this country needs is a good president. Not a great one. Just be good. Be moderate. Be reasonable.; 9/1/09, 4:58 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Thanks for the Lieberman tidbit. I forgot about him.; 9/1/09, 4:58 PM
Alex said...: Seven Machos - interesting that you insist we stay in Afghanistan. Maybe you should get up from your keyboard and join up the military? Put your ass on the line instead of sending 18 year old Johnnies to front line!; 9/1/09, 4:59 PM
Anonymous said...: If you can only want to stay in Afghanistan if you are or were in the military then, yes, obviously, Obama has no choice but to cut and run.; 9/1/09, 5:01 PM
chickelit said...: Actually, the best thing that could happen to Obama is the Dems getting trounced in 2010.

I'll second that, Bushman; 9/1/09, 5:06 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: Chase nails it--Its all about the legislative: Its one thing to oppose a strong president, but when you are first term blue dog the president's sinking poll numbers make it easier for them to stiff him and his agenda--its all about their relection. And of course the progressives on the are starting to make noises.

What has to be kept in mind is that starting for the 2006 elections, the Democrats recruited a lot of fairly conservative Democrats to run in Republican districts, and over the last two elections, that strategy paid off, giving the Democrats first control of the House, and then a big majority. But most of those new Representatives are from districts that had Republicans just three years ago. Many have Republican voting edges, and most went for Bush in 2004, and many even went for McCain in 2008.

The Democratic leadership is trying to force these "Blue Dog" Democrats into voting for a lot of legislation that their constituents do not like. At all. And hence all the Town Hall meetings, protests, etc. Voters making this clear to their elected representatives.

So, they are caught between a rock and a hard place. Either vote according to Pelosi, et al. and give up any hope of being reelected. Or vote the way their constituents want, and torpedo Obama's (and Pelosi's, Reid's, etc.) legislative agenda, giving up any hope for decent committee assignments, pork, etc.

We shall see how this plays out. I would suggest that it is really too late for a lot of these Democrats, since they voted for the "Stimulus" package, the bloated spending bill with the 8,000 earmarks, and Cap and Trade. Even if they vote against their leadership on health care, their Congressional careers are toast.; 9/1/09, 5:17 PM
Alex said...: Why do I keep hearing on some leftie blogs that if a public-option passes, Obama will become a new FDR-type figure? Why?; 9/1/09, 5:19 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: Actually, the best thing that could happen to Obama is the Dems getting trounced in 2010.

I don't see any real likelihood of this not happening. The question really is whether the Democratic losses are going to be great enough to lose the House. The Senate is a lot safer, due to the rotating terms there and that they don't have that much vulnerability this next time (though Harry Reid is running behind one of his challengers all ready).; 9/1/09, 5:20 PM
Alex said...: Bruce Hayden - in addition the GOP is in such disarray they can hardly take advantage of Dem disarray. It doesn't help that the lunatic fringe of the GOP seems to be sucking up all the oxygen these days.; 9/1/09, 5:21 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: Why do I keep hearing on some leftie blogs that if a public-option passes, Obama will become a new FDR-type figure? Why?

Wishful thinking?; 9/1/09, 5:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Yeah, the lunatic fringe that doesn't want government to take over the economy. Crazy motherfuckers.; 9/1/09, 5:23 PM
Alex said...: Seven - I'm talking about:

* birthers
* death-panelers
* "let's murder abortion doctors" types
* creationists, fundies
* Ron Paul-ites

no matter what you think they are the lunatic, bat crazy shit insane fringe.; 9/1/09, 5:25 PM
Prosqtor said...: Yes, Alex, and largely a figment of the Kos crowd's imagination. Though the "death panel" concept is only a small exaggeration.

The "tea party" anger is mostly about big government and fiscal irresponsibility.; 9/1/09, 5:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Alex --

* birthers. No one on the right pays any attention to these people. It's certainly not an issue that will affect the 2010 election.

* death-panelers. Death panel was the most brilliant metaphor of the century thus far. Nothing wacky about it.

* "let's murder abortion doctors" types. Please let us know the next time you see them in the news, or being taken seriously on the right.

* creationists, fundies. What current political issue on the federal level does this have anything to do with? Furthermore, a majority of Americans (probably a vast majority) believes that there is a God who created the world in some way. Not exactly a radical position.

* Ron Paul-ites These people are not serious. To wit: I recently read a naive leftist on this very site claim that you cannot be a libertarian and believe in free trade. Apparently, all this person knows of libertarianism, she learned from Ron Paul. Which is to say, less than nothing.

The left has its share of nuts. Communists. Socialists. People who want the government to take over health care. People who want to gut the military. People who want to prevent the CIA from using certain reasonable techniques to obtain information from terrorists. People who want to force you to ride public transportation. People who want to force you to recycle. People who want to raise your taxes to high heaven. Shall I go on?; 9/1/09, 5:35 PM
Alex said...: Seven Machos - I have no doubt that the leftist lunatic fringe is as bad as the righties. However the MSM controls the message and all we see are the righties night after night.; 9/1/09, 5:37 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: Alex-

That argument is undemocratic.

If only people who served can be President (war can happen at any time, and Presidents are war leaders), or even have opinions about wars, then how can we have a democracy?

The whole point of democracy is to take away control of government from warrior aristocrats. So, yes, it's perfectly OK for civilians to have opinions about the war, for or against. Civilians SHOULD control the military. Democracy SHOULD have open debate. The military SERVES civilians, and has to do whatever the elected representatives of the people direct. The opinion of civilians is MORE IMPORTANT than that of service members, because the military is not in charge. The alternative leads to banana republicanism.

So, next time you want to make a snark about military service, ask yourself why things were so much better before the people got to vote and why you want the military to run things.

In addition, most people who join the services are pretty conservative and voted for Bush and McCain, a fact ignored when chickenshits make chickenhawk arguments.

--CTR3 Lynch, SPC Lynch

Have a nice day.; 9/1/09, 5:38 PM
Roger J. said...: wow--alex deploys the chickenhawk argument! Impressive with a dem as CINC; 9/1/09, 5:38 PM
Prosqtor said...: Heh, SM, I gave the "Reader's Digest" version first.; 9/1/09, 5:38 PM
Roger J. said...: wow--alex deploys the chickenhawk argument! Impressive with a dem as CINC; 9/1/09, 5:38 PM
Roger J. said...: Seven--you make a good geostrategic case and I cant argue with it--only hope the Obama administration is thinking strategically

Bruce: your argument is also good--will have to see how this plays out; 9/1/09, 5:40 PM
Alex said...: I'm just parroting garage, Alpha, Michael and the others when I bring up the chickenhawk canard.; 9/1/09, 5:41 PM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: Seven, nice job cutting through the BS.; 9/1/09, 5:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Alex -- Do you have any idea how few people watch television for their news? Much less than 1994.

Not sure which side you are on today, but don't worry about the media. Obama's media love is vastly overrated. McCain's and the Republicans' (of 2008) general ineptitude and schmuckiness is vastly underrated.; 9/1/09, 5:43 PM
Alex said...: Besides - the real battle is being waged on the university age and under - for their minds. Guess who's winning in the last 30 years? I can bet it isn't pro-capitalism, pro-freedom ideology.; 9/1/09, 5:43 PM
Alex said...: Seven - who cares about the TV? Most young people get their news and analysis on the internet. That's where all the action is. Besides just compare the top 10 leftist blog sites vs top 10 rightie blogs for traffic. I bet it's 5:1 in favor of the left. The left is winning the hearts/minds battle big-time with the younger demo.; 9/1/09, 5:45 PM
Roy Lofquist said...: The Drill Sergeant - instead of s**t sandwich try "fipple stew". Instant Googlelanch.

Alex - I didn't spend any time in Afghanistan but I did touch down in some interesting places - Pakistan, Libya, Turkey, Lebanon, Persian Gulf, Tehran. You really shouldn't try that chicken hawk stuff unless you know who you're talking to.; 9/1/09, 5:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Alex --

1. The younger demo doesn't vote. Apparently, it didn't even come out for Obama. Big study recently. Perhaps you missed it.

2. The younger demo is always further left. It's a cliche at this point. Then, as life happens, they turn more conservative. 'Twas always thus and thus 'twill always be.; 9/1/09, 5:49 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: Adrian: Just wait until next Tuesday, when he makes his speech to every single child in America (a speech to students, broadcast straight into assemblies nationwide).

Nothing pisses parents off more than interfering with their children. Unless it's "wash your hands to prevent the spread of colds" I don't see how it will be received well, even by students. Speaking to kids from pre-kindergarten to high school he is bound to sound either patronizing or confusing.; 9/1/09, 5:53 PM
bagoh20 said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/1/09, 5:58 PM
bagoh20 said...: "Put your ass on the line instead of sending 18 year old Johnnies to front line!"

Nobody wants to fight. The purpose of being there is to prevent the need for more battles later.

I would change places with any of those men. I would not because I pity them, but because I envy them. I envy their bravery, their honor, and what they are accomplishing, which is more than most of the rest of us ever will.; 9/1/09, 5:59 PM
Prosqtor said...: You mean like when I discovered that my son's social studies teacher had shown Farenheit 9/11 to the class, heheheh? As a factual documentary, you understand. Not as part of a discussion of political propaganda.; 9/1/09, 5:59 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Will the Obama girls be embarrassed that it is their Dad lecturing to kids?; 9/1/09, 6:01 PM
bagoh20 said...: "I can bet it isn't pro-capitalism, pro-freedom ideology."

Then pro-communism, anti-freedom ideology. Is it really still the Triassic on campus. When is that extinction thing gonna hit those dinosaurs?

Ann is always exempt from my criticism of faculty.; 9/1/09, 6:05 PM
Penny said...: I was at a store today where one of those pretty tabletop Obama books was on the clearance shelf.; 9/1/09, 6:20 PM
former law student said...: Ann is always exempt from my criticism of faculty.

I'm torn here. I want to believe that government-provided health care will be at least as good as government-provided legal education -- surely if the professor felt she could get a better deal she would move to a private school, and surely she is working just as hard as if she were on a private payroll. (And if Republicans in Congress really believed government-provided health care was inferior, they would repudiate the benefit that comes with the job, in favor of paying cash out of their pockets.)

But then I realize that some 85% of the tax protestors were educated in government schools. And I am torn.; 9/1/09, 6:41 PM
former law student said...: "Obama approval down to 45%."

Consider that those who disapprove of his performance comprise those who think he's not going far enough as well as those who think he's going too far.; 9/1/09, 6:44 PM
The Drill SGT said...: "Put your ass on the line instead of sending 18 year old Johnnies to front line!"

My home can still hang its blue star flag (only 1 now instead of 2) in the window with pride.; 9/1/09, 6:45 PM
Balfegor said...: (And if Republicans in Congress really believed government-provided health care was inferior, they would repudiate the benefit that comes with the job, in favor of paying cash out of their pockets.)

I don't think there's any contradiction in Republicans recognising that those in government do a bang-up job of providing exorbitant benefits to themselves, at taxpayer expense, but will do a rather crappier job providing those benefits to other people. Isn't that kind of at the root of Republican disgust with public sector unions bleeding the treasury dry with pensions, etc. etc.?; 9/1/09, 6:47 PM
Cedarford said...: Roger J - Good comment on referencing the 10th Mountain Div's struggles in Italy (also the Brits, free Poles) on the supreme difficulty of conquering mountainous regions or simply just dislodging enemy.

Historically, there is a good reason that Vietnam, Tibet, Korea were not assimilated into the Han Borg collective.
Why Spain developed differently than the N European Plain nations.
Why Greece held off vastly greater numerical force invaders.

Mountains. Lots of mountains, All mountainous regions.

Afghanistan the most mountainous of all.

Nephew who was in Afghanistan in 2004, raised in Colorado, Rockies backslope:

"I thought I was used to mountains. Afghanistan makes Colorado look like hilly W Virginia. You could take all of Ft Ord, hide it in one of 500 mountain valleys, never know it was there..."; 9/1/09, 7:50 PM
Synova said...: FLS- "I'm torn here. I want to believe that government-provided health care will be at least as good as government-provided legal education -- surely if the professor felt she could get a better deal she would move to a private school, and surely she is working just as hard as if she were on a private payroll."

And professors of every type are constantly on about their academic integrity and independence.

If it wasn't an issue, would they be?

I doubt that the consequences of "who pays the piper calls the tune" is lost to them and the need to push back is continual.

"(And if Republicans in Congress really believed government-provided health care was inferior, they would repudiate the benefit that comes with the job, in favor of paying cash out of their pockets.)"

Ah, straw man!

We expect our employment to include health insurance benefits. And even if it would ultimately be better to separate employment from health insurance that is *not* what the opponents of the current health reform efforts are trying to do. It's not even what the proponents are trying to do.

But *really* are you trying to make a point by inadvertently reminding us that the health care we'd all get isn't anything at all like what Congress gets? Or do you really think that the "government option" will provide that level of coverage, choice, and gold star treatment?; 9/1/09, 7:51 PM
The Drill SGT said...: C4 said...Mountains. Lots of mountains, All mountainous regions.

I prefer to call it the General Theorem of Sheep.

It states that the nastiest, meanest fighters in the world are sheep herders. From marginalized peoples, stuck up on rocky hills, fit only to graze sheep.

With time on their hands to plink at targets and dream of raiding down into the low lands and stealing those fat cows and fatter women.

Scots
Balkan peoples
Afghans
Nepalese
Kurds
Greeks
Basques

Ungovernable Raiders from the night; 9/1/09, 8:09 PM
Synova said...: Some time ago there were some truly incredible photos of Afghanistan posted at Blackfive and I simply can not find them.

Something about vertical is aesthetically appealing. If that is an evolutionary adaptation to prefer land with sides rather than flat expanses, I wonder why.; 9/1/09, 8:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Isn't the geography the reason there won't be a functioning state there.

To paraphrase Sam Kinison: We have crazy vertical mountain ranges in the United States, too. We just don't fucking live in them.

He would advise that we bring our army back and send the Afghan people UHauls.; 9/1/09, 8:23 PM
bagoh20 said...: Scots
Balkan peoples
Afghans
Nepalese
Kurds
Greeks
Basques

Granted all tough peoples. I'm no expert, but haven't they also all been conquered at various times almost always by technologically superior forces? Of course, many superior forces have been sent home unsuccessful as well. History is an unreliable teacher. We should be careful, not timid, but smart. This is one area where our President has my unconditioned support.; 9/1/09, 8:37 PM
The Drill SGT said...: bagoh20 said...
Granted all tough peoples. I'm no expert, but haven't they also all been conquered at various times almost always by technologically superior forces?

beaten, marginalized, pushed up into the hills yes. Conquered? They would say no.

Just licking their wounds, plotting revenge and plinking at targets till they can slit some lowlander throats.; 9/1/09, 8:46 PM
Daryl said...: Down to 45%?

You Americans sure are stupid!

Stupid stupid stupid.

Get with the program, people. We have to support the President. If you don't support Obama, you hate America.

You stupid Americans just don't get it.; 9/1/09, 8:56 PM
JAL said...: Alex: I can bet it isn't pro-capitalism, pro-freedom ideology.

So is that supposed to be taken as a good or bad thing?; 9/1/09, 9:12 PM
miller said...: I have to laugh. Seriously.

"Educated in government schools" because the alternatives are discouraged mightily.

The government sucks all the space up and makes it very hard to set up alternatives.

Ha. It would be interesting to look at outcomes for the money spent on public schools vs. alternatives & see which is better.

The government is good at spending money - lots of money - on a solution, but not so good on getting a good value for the money.

But yeah, that government education is the best in the world. That's why our education scores are #1 in the world, especially in math and science.

WV: hythne, as in "hythne with your best shot, fire away."; 9/1/09, 9:17 PM
Cedarford said...: I think Obama's poll numbers can get substantially worse. I also don't think there is anything he can do to raise them.

Anyone think he will "capture bin Laden in his War of Necessity and bring him to court with his ACLU lawyers?

Be seen as the guy who led us to new great health care, or how cap&trade actually did create great new jobs without jacking rates 30% and losing 2.4 industrial jobs for every menial green job made?

I see big minefields.

1st, the big stench of failure, being seen as a poor leader who was promoted as a black frontman by media and Chicago interests from his stunning ability to read well off a TelePrompter - who blew big program after program and deferred to whacky Nancy Pelosi as the Nation's Leader.

2nd, China says no. No more China treasure given them from idiot Reaganomics, free market policies given back to America at a pittance to fuel it beyond it's means.
Dollar plunges, stock market plunges, high interest rates, huge new debt numbers as Obama refuses to back off all the bennies he promised.

3rd, Obama has built his Afghanistan as the Good War, and "war crimes justice for torturers" minefields..now he has to walk in them.

And at anytime a mine or two could go off and The One will be waving his bloody stumps.

Saying that he is not LBJ and begging for yet more troops to "find bin Laden".

Or saying that he really never intended to let a special prosecutor loose on CIA agents now showing up in their dress Marine reservist uniforms to hear a hate-filled ACLU lawyer scream at them..or he had no idea why the FBI hestitated to question the Islamoid caught with 80 kilos of C-4 and credit card purchases for 3 zodiac boats, days before his associates blew up a BP supertanker off LA.; 9/1/09, 9:20 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Look Obama can turn his fortunes around but he'd have to go against his dye-in-the wool wealth redistributing heart and soul.

In his first big test, the Stimulus, he failed big big time!

There was no excuse for that abortion unless you disdain proven econ theory and truly believe it is all about graft and rewarding your pals and your lame, unmotivated constituency.

This guy, Obama hired, Van Cox, to work in the White House is a reparations radical and they hired him to lead green jobs!!??; 9/1/09, 9:42 PM
Anonymous said...: "Why do I keep hearing on some leftie blogs that if a public-option passes, Obama will become a new FDR-type figure? Why?"

FDR was a power hungry meglomaniac who expanded government and government dependance to an unimaginable degree, and gave the appearance of action while, if anything, worsening our nation's problems. What good lefty wouldn't want the same for Obama?; 9/1/09, 9:52 PM
Synova said...: Scots
Balkan peoples
Afghans
Nepalese
Kurds
Greeks
Basques

Norway is rather vertical as well... but the Scandi's looked out at the Ocean and said, "Wow, that's flat. Let's go."; 9/1/09, 10:29 PM
JAL said...: Why? Because my father was correct in disliking FDR. He tried (unsuccessfully) to pack the Supreme Court in a most amazing show of chutzspah.

The Forgotten Man by Amity Schlaes; 9/1/09, 10:30 PM
hombre said...: That's why our education scores are #1 in the world, especially in math and science.

That would be a little joke, right?; 9/1/09, 10:38 PM
Gina said...: it's even worse when you can't escape being bombarded by CNN's propaganda. I guess it could be worse - they could be tuned into MSNBC.

*sigh* This is my gym in a nutshell. I'm sure if I requested that one of the screens be devoted to Fox News, some of the little treadmill hamsters' heads would explode.

I get my revenge by listening to Dennis Miller on the MP3.; 9/1/09, 10:47 PM
traditionalguy said...: Synova ... The Norwegians you cite were the 200+ year Viking scourge. Yes, they sailed away and did their killing and looting across the north sea. Today's Scandinavians have been too Christian/Lutheran tamed to go raiding anymore.; 9/1/09, 10:50 PM
former law student said...: Because my father was correct in disliking FDR. He tried (unsuccessfully) to pack the Supreme Court in a most amazing show of chutzspah.

FDR feared the situation we've had in recent years -- incredibly old justices, selected decades previously, who refuse to retire. There's nothing sacred about nine justices. We started with six, later went up to ten.

Chutzpah is redefining torture so that you can blandly smile and say you never tortured your captives.; 9/1/09, 11:22 PM
Alex said...: Chutzpah is redefining torture so that you can blandly smile and say you never tortured your captives.

You can't call it torture if we didn't pull out fingernails or extract eyeballs. You are dumbing down the definition of torture you fucking idiot.; 9/1/09, 11:29 PM
miller said...: Well, yeah, I was kidding.

Add up the cost per student for education from K-12 at ~$10k/y (it's about that here in Seattle).

Are you getting $120k worth of education? I mean, it IS gubmint education, so it's free, but is it WORTH it?

Maybe not so much.

WF: sprofi, as in "I think Obamacare is giving my scalp sprofi"; 9/2/09, 12:16 AM
miller said...: But can't wait to see what Ear Leader will do for education in this country.

WV: resse, Jesse Jackson's brother.; 9/2/09, 12:19 AM
Mark said...: "Its one thing to oppose a strong president, but when you are first term blue dog the president's sinking poll numbers make it easier for them to stiff him and his agenda--its all about their relection."

For a bit of less-generic tea-leave reading, please note that Chris Dodd, long-term Senator (Plutocrat) of Connecticut, recently called out Obama re: leadership.

I think Dodd just became the stool pigeon in the coal mine for Obama.; 9/2/09, 12:46 AM
bagoh20 said...: "You can't call it torture if we didn't pull out fingernails or extract eyeballs."

Well that's super uber torture. We did scare them really bad, not "Halloween I" / Exorcist scared, but still pretty scary. And, and, they, they got really wet too. I'm sure they bear the scars from those terrible times to this very day. So yea it's torture too. And it's not like fingernails won't grow back, but that eyeball thing that's pretty un-nice, so it's torture too. Torture, torture, torture, Bush, Bush.; 9/2/09, 12:47 AM
Anonymous said...: My prediction that Ann will only link to Rasmussen polls for the remainder of Obama's presidency still stands.

Gallup still has his approval at 52-42 - better than his election results.; 9/2/09, 10:06 AM
AC245 said...: Zogby:

Released: August 21, 2009

Zogby Interactive Poll: Obama's Job Approval Sinks to Record Low 45%

UTICA, New York - President Barack Obama's job approval rating has sunk to a record low of just 45%, the latest Zogby Interactive poll shows. Fifty-one percent of likely voters now say they disapprove of the President's job performance.; 9/2/09, 10:32 AM
former law student said...: You can't call it torture if we didn't pull out fingernails or extract eyeballs. You are dumbing down the definition of torture you fucking idiot.

Always nice to see commenters (hi 7M!) with international law expertise on this blog. The US had a consistent definition of torture for decades -- documented in the Army Field Manual -- until the Bush administration decided to redefine it.; 9/2/09, 10:46 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: If he's planning to talk to children so that the kids go home and tell their parents what to do about health care... well then we're firmly in Hitler Youth territory aren't we.

And have been for some time. The overall plan was always to subvert the children through indoctrination in the State Controlled School System.

Obama's Youth Corps (I wonder if they will be wearing armbands with the Obama trademark logo)and his Civilian National Service were announced before the dupes elected him and the plan is to create his personal brownshirt corps (except the color of the shirts will probably be blue)

a commission will be set up to investigate, “Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

Mandatory service with the youth reporting "fishy" ideas that their parents stubbornly cling to, along with their religion and guns, most likely.

These evil people can't disappear soon enough.; 9/2/09, 11:02 AM
Automatic_Wing said...: The US had a consistent definition of torture for decades -- documented in the Army Field Manual -- until the Bush administration decided to redefine it.

Since when has the CIA been bound by the Army Field Manual? Oh, that's right, never. The CIA has had its own interrogation manuals for decades:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Army_and_CIA_interrogation_manuals#CIA_manuals

But hey, why bother yourself with facts when you can just blame everything on Booosh? Makes your little universe more orderly, I guess.; 9/2/09, 2:04 PM
Jason said...: This clinging to the Army field manual on interrogation is more utter stupidity.

The Army Field Manual, by necessity, is designed to guide an E-6 interrogation specialist through the process with a legal combatant. Legal combatants generally remain within the purview of Armed Forces custody, and receive very specific protections under the Geneva and Hague conventions.

A number of these protections do not, have not and should not adhere to illegal combatants and terrorists, such as Al Qaeda operatives such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

To cling to the Army Field Manual regardless of the legal status of the detainee is just nuts.; 9/2/09, 3:29 PM
former law student said...: A number of these protections do not, have not and should not adhere to illegal combatants and terrorists, such as Al Qaeda operatives such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Under the Geneva Conventions everyone is either a combatant or a civilian. If you want to discuss the "haves" and "shoulds," read this for a start:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=897591; 9/2/09, 7:58 PM
former law student said...: Since when has the CIA been bound by the Army Field Manual?

Who knows what a secret intelligence agency does? If they want to avoid torture, they should follow the procedures in the Army Field Manual.

At some level, I don't care if the US tortures people or not. But if they choose to do so, they should kindly not try to blow smoke up my ass.; 9/2/09, 8:02 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Who knows what a secret intelligence agency does? If they want to avoid torture, they should follow the procedures in the Army Field Manual.

Ha ha, I just told you what they do, they follow the procedures in their own Manual (which does discuss EITs), not the Army one (which doesn't).

Right or wrong, they've been doing business this way for a long time, since at least 1963.

For you to pretend that they were happily using the Army Manual until evil Bush authorized EITs is dishonest and stupid.; 9/2/09, 8:15 PM
former law student said...: For you to pretend that they were happily using the Army Manual until evil Bush authorized EITs is dishonest and stupid.

I never said squat about the CIA. I said the Bush administration redefined torture -- which they did.; 9/2/09, 8:59 PM
Synova said...: What Bush seems to have done is actually tried to make sure that what was done was not secret, illegal, black as midnight and unknown, but legal and supervised and faced bravely.

For shame.

People would actually rather not know what happens in those dark places. See no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil.

But depend on it.; 9/2/09, 9:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Under the Geneva Conventions everyone is either a combatant or a civilian.

This simply is not true. However, if you wish to view the Convention that way, then the people at issue are obviously combatants. So what's your point?; 9/2/09, 9:45 PM