Just Wondering

[Linda]

That's what they are "saying", but as I have pointed out regarding recovery.gov, it is not transparent. They are mixing and matching funding bills and there is no ability to link up legacy costs, and that's only for the stimulus anyway.

I am looking forward to seeing if the administration does establish websites for the regular twelve appropriation bills. However, even inside the funding bills themselves it often just lists what agency is getting the money and how much, not necessarily how it is being spent. Luckily for the President and Congress they have us all focused on a whopping 1% and the media is biting hook, line and sinker. This is how bureaucracy grows just a few billion at a time within the executive branch agencies while casting the spotlight on the 1%.

From what I am seeing and hearing they may be trying to get us to focus only on that 1% but it's not working. I think that more people are paying attention than you realize

 

[Andy A]

One of the things I do quite often is call Congressmen/women I see on a TV program. The other day one who had been in Congress for 30 years was spouting off about how great the stimulus package was. I called his office and issued a challenge to him to introduce a bill in Congress creating term limits since he had held office for 30 years. What ever happened to our "citizen's government" concept? If we are ever going to change anything in this government it must start with changing those in power. My suggestion is to call your Representative and other people's Representatives and issue them a challenge to introduce a term limits bill. I know it is idealistic, but at one time in this nation's history, idealism was not only accepted it was also acted upon.

 

[Winnie]

I am certainly disappointed that he's signing it - but even more disappointed in those who keep adding earmarks!

Seriously, should I be madder at the President trying to change things and loudly voicing his displeasure or the damn politicians who keep pulling the same old crap?

President Obama is one of those "d*mn politicians."
This excerpt is from Maureen Dowd's op ed in the NYT:

"Team Obama sounds hollow, chanting that ?the status quo is not acceptable,? even while conceding that the president is accepting the status quo by signing a budget festooned with pork.
Obama spinners insist it was ?a leftover budget.? But Iraq was leftover, too, and the president?s trying to end that. This is the first pork-filled budget from a new president who promised to go through the budget ?line by line? and cut pork.
On ?Face the Nation? on Sunday, Obama?s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, dismissed the bill as ?last year?s business,? because most of it was written last year.
But given how angry Americans are, watching their future go up in smoke, the bloated bill counts as this year?s business.
It includes $38.4 million of earmarks sponsored or co-sponsored by President Obama?s labor secretary, Hilda Solis; $109 million Hillary Clinton signed on to; and $31.2 million in earmarks sought by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood with colleagues.
(Even Barack Obama was listed as one of the co-sponsors of a $7.7 million pet project for Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Vocational Institutions until he got his name taken off last week.)
And then there are the 16 earmarks worth $8.5 million that Emanuel put into the bill when he was a congressman, including money for streets in Chicago suburbs and a Chicago planetarium. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04dowd.html?_r=1

 

[Linda]

Thanks Winnie - I'm happy to see that some people are demanding accountability from Obama. David Brooks also wrote this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/opinion/03brooks.html?_r=1

 

[Bobskunk]

Original Question

The original question was whether or not he would get a free pass for not honoring his campaign promise. I think the fact that he immediately hired lobbyists without causing an uproar is evidence that the media is still starstuck, and broken oaths are going to be no big deal.

I believe that some of this was unintentional, and his lack of any relevant experience caused him to promise a lot more than he could deliver.

He's not the first. George H. W. Bush never recovered from "Read my lips, no new taxes", and quickly had to backtrack on that one. Unfortunately, the media had a modicum of credibility at that point on our history.

 

[Winnie]

Thanks Winnie - I'm happy to see that some people are demanding accountability from Obama. David Brooks also wrote this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/opinion/03brooks.html?_r=1

That is a good article. I liked this part:

Those of us who consider ourselves moderates ? moderate-conservative, in my case ? are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was. His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice.

I imagine many moderates who voted for President Obama are also now a little surprised.

 

[Linda]

That is a good article. I liked this part:



I imagine many moderates who voted for President Obama are also now a little surprised.

It seems to me that those people who are now surprised really were'nt paying attention during the campaign. I wish I was surprised.

 

[scooterbug44]

I am not surprised and I am not overall UNHAPPY about what Obama has been doing!

Yes, there are things I wish he was doing differently (like selecting nominees who pay their pucking taxes), but IMO he is still doing what I want (or think needs to be done) on the important stuff - Gitmo, Iraq, Stimulus, etc.

 

[Linda]

The original question was whether or not he would get a free pass for not honoring his campaign promise. I think the fact that he immediately hired lobbyists without causing an uproar is evidence that the media is still starstuck, and broken oaths are going to be no big deal.

I believe that some of this was unintentional, and his lack of any relevant experience caused him to promise a lot more than he could deliver.
He's not the first. George H. W. Bush never recovered from "Read my lips, no new taxes", and quickly had to backtrack on that one. Unfortunately, the media had a modicum of credibility at that point on our history.

You are being very gracious by giving him the benefit of the doubt. I tend to believe that he said whatever he had to say to get elected without ever having any intention of following through on much of what he said.

 

[Winnie]

I am not surprised and I am not overall UNHAPPY about what Obama has been doing!

Yes, there are things I wish he was doing differently (like selecting nominees who pay their pucking taxes), but IMO he is still doing what I want (or think needs to be done) on the important stuff - Gitmo, Iraq, Stimulus, etc.

Good for you...I guess.

I wish I could say the same.

I'll reserve judgment about closing Gitmo for after it is actually resolved.
I'm fine with his "timeline" for Iraq, which I understand is no different than what was already in the works. I am very worried about cuts in defense funding. He plans to pay for many domestic plans with the money he will save from Iraq even though he is basically leaving 1/3 of the troops there and relocating more forces to Afghanistan.
I am completely opposed to the stimulus as passed. Too many new and expanded government programs with no plans for future funding. And far too much spending that is just spending, not stimulating.
Etc.