Jan 5, 2009 8:25pm
One President at a Time?
President-elect Obama shot around town today, from here to there, pushing his economic stimulus plan and talking to members of Congress and his economic team.
Here’s our World News report:
President-elect Obama shot around town today, from here to there, pushing his economic stimulus plan and talking to members of Congress and his economic team.
Here’s our World News report:
What happened, did he get asked a tough question?
Posted by: BertieW | January 5, 2009, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm
When it is convenient he says one president at a time. What about Gaza?
Posted by: Ken | January 5, 2009, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm
I say “bring it on!”,
one president at a time, is right,
GWB has left the building.
Posted by: bush the usa | January 5, 2009, 8:44 pm 8:44 pm
Most of the press lets him get away with it. He should be pressed on all issues that concern the American people.
Posted by: Tina | January 5, 2009, 8:45 pm 8:45 pm
I don’t recall Republicans calling for transparency with the TARP funds both before and after their release. Might there be a double standard here?
Posted by: kat | January 5, 2009, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm
“What about Gaza?”
Gaza is a tough one for him to come down on. On one hand, the Palestinians are “Hoping” for a better future, and on the other, the Israelis want to “Change” the fact that they are getting hit by missiles. His usual compass is spinning!
So let the guy eat his waffles, there is only one President at a time.
Posted by: BertieW | January 5, 2009, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
there will be plenty of time to “press” obama after jan 20.
where is george bush?
Posted by: bush the usa | January 5, 2009, 8:50 pm 8:50 pm
“When it is convenient he says one president at a time. What about Gaza?”
Good question. Will the silence be maintained for another 15 days or so?
Posted by: kat | January 5, 2009, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
Bertie-I don’t doubt his compass is spinning between the economy and the incursion into Gaza. But what’s wrong with him making a neutral and reassuring statement of some kind?
Posted by: kat | January 5, 2009, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
Okay- it suddenly looks like the GOP is putting the squeeze on the earlier TARP bailout. Better late than never, I guess.
Posted by: kat | January 5, 2009, 9:05 pm 9:05 pm
Is Bush back from his holidays yet? I know he was on vacation through most of the initial Israeli attacks on Gaza.
Posted by: pefros | January 5, 2009, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
because even though most of us would like to forget, and hate to say it. and William F. Buckley is spinning in his grave everytime someone says it:
George W. Bush is still the president.
If obama were to say anything other than what he is saying, the press and the repubs would jump all over it.
better he continue to say “one president at a time and take some heat from people, who really want bush to be gone, than to say something, and be all wrong about it.
bush is so quiet, maybe he is sitting back and playing “chicken”
Posted by: bush the usa | January 5, 2009, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
its funny, when asked about the blago b.s and the illinois senate seat, barry says theres only one president at a time, but he sure isnt keeping to himself about the newest bailout.. this guy is too much.. lol
Posted by: tim | January 5, 2009, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
george bush to the usa and the mess he has created “so what?”
bush was and still is a blank.
i wish obama COULD step up to the plate right now.
someone needs to be minding the country’
business. bush sure is not.
Posted by: bush the usa | January 5, 2009, 9:23 pm 9:23 pm
Obama embroiled in scandal and controversy..IE: bill richardson fisaco, Blago fiasco, and now being tied to Norman Hsu,and a possible Ponzi scheme is looking for cover as the Gaza incursion grows worse.Today he appointed leon panetta as head of the Cia and ran into DEEP trouble within his party, especially with Diane Fienstein.. He just can’t seem to make the right decisions. The media will cover for him as they have the past year
Posted by: MSN exposed | January 5, 2009, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm
GWB is still President till Jan 20th.
The reason Obama is not saying anything is because his position will contradict the Bush Admin and it will not look good for America.
Obama intends to deal with the Middle East in an even-handed way like Bill Clinton did.
Let’s wait till Jan 20th and fry him if he doesn’t deliver.
For now fry George Bush. He is still the President.
Posted by: Steve_NJ | January 5, 2009, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
Hey Spammer- you dont pay attention. Rice has been working on the issue and Bush has addressed it multiple times. On his radio address on the 2nd and again today.
What we are wondering is if anyone has told Obama what his opinion is supposed to be. Kind of like when tanks were rolling in Georgia and Obama didnt know what to say.
Posted by: BertieW | January 5, 2009, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm
BertieW,
/——-
you dont pay attention. [..] What we are wondering is if anyone has told Obama what his opinion is supposed to be. Kind of like when tanks were rolling in Georgia and Obama didnt know what to say.
——-/
Ever heard the expression “walk softly and carry a big stick”? I think you’re the one not paying attention. Look at meek Israel against the bully instigator Hammas. Back down before you get smacked down is another of my favorites. On this I agree with Obama AND Bush and Clinton and Rice and so on and so on and so on.
Posted by: Common Sense | January 5, 2009, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm
>>>Obama intends to deal with the Middle East in an even-handed way like Bill Clinton did.<<<<
That's pretty funny….
Posted by: RBR | January 5, 2009, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm
PRESENT!!
Posted by: kim | January 5, 2009, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Bush has made his position pretty clear- he would like there to be a ceasefire but he doesnt prioritize that above securing Israel from Hamas rockets. Which is apparently the position of some in Europe.
Bush said days ago
“”I know people are saying: let’s have a ceasefire. (Those are) noble ambitions. But any ceasefire must have the conditions in it so that Hamas does not use Gaza as a place from which to launch rockets.”"
So for the spammer “Bush in USA” to say Bush hasnt done anything or said anything is ridiculous. He clearly has a policy that Rice is perusing.
Meanwhile Obama and Clinton have said nothing, even the usual platitudes. Since one of the benefits of the Age of Obamaquius is supposed to be that the rest of the world instantly unites behind him it would be nice if he circulated his plan so the Jews and Arabs could get his speech and then hug it out between them.
Posted by: BertieW | January 5, 2009, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm
Interesting watching all these anti-Obama propagandists trying to scratch up some dirt on Obama . … and coming up with so very little.
Propagandists.
And are you really stupid enough to think that just saying the name Blago somehow incriminates Obama? Sorry folks, it takes more than that regardless of your weak understanding of justice.
Posted by: pefros | January 5, 2009, 11:16 pm 11:16 pm
“Bush has made his position pretty clear.” I agree, though not so much with the Bush and Rice platitudes of a “durable and long lasting ceasefire, or with the statement of Gaza not being a launching pad for rockets.
His position was made clear by the invasion taking place in the first place. Don’t tell me the government isn’t concerned about when the munitions and fighter planes they sell are used in major Israeli attacks, and that there was no foreknowledge or complicity involved. His administration’s position was shown by the vetoing of a cease fire over the weekend. It’s shown by Rice’s” taking phone calls” as Sarkozy goes to Israel. Maybe she’s taking calls between shopping for shoes, like she did during Katrina.
Maybe Clinton and Obama remain silent to the public, rather than dishing out the BS, for security and regrouping reasons.
Posted by: kat | January 6, 2009, 12:05 am 12:05 am
pefros..
i for one am not trying to “scratch up some dirt on obama”. as much as i dont like his ideas, he is MY president too. but cmon, you have to admit, the democrats are REALLY starting to look like complete fools here.. lol i mean, obama hasnt even taken the oath of office yet and there is scandal after scandal. even james carville is predicting more of this throughout the next year. its disappointing, seeing that all those on the left have been talking about the last eight years has been ” you just wait till we get back in there, we’ll show em’”..lol now for the last two plus years, they have completely blown their role in congress and obamas election is obviously bringing out the worst in them. i cant stand it.. i dont know whether to laugh or cry.
Posted by: tim | January 6, 2009, 12:15 am 12:15 am
i just love how ALL you liberals can do is tea apart anything related to george bush, and spin it in favor of “what obama is going to do”… so lame. i cant wait to point all the “flip flops” that this guy is going to do from what he campaigned on. it has already started, but liberals wnt hear any of it. YOU WERE ALL FOOLED.
Posted by: tim | January 6, 2009, 12:19 am 12:19 am
“Maybe she’s taking calls between shopping for shoes, like she did during Katrina. ”
I know that now the government is supposed to be responsible for holding back weather patterns, but you are under the impression that the Secretary of State is involved in that?
Posted by: BertieW | January 6, 2009, 12:34 am 12:34 am
“obama hasnt even taken the oath of office yet and there is scandal after scandal”
Sorry tim, just stating something does not make it true. What scandal exactly have you scratched up that in any way incriminates Obama?
“Scandal after scandal” that incriminate Obama? Again, propaganda and spin that has nothing to do with reality.
Posted by: pefros | January 6, 2009, 12:41 am 12:41 am
Come on, you bitter losers. President elect Obama is not embroiled in any scandal or any controversy.
He never did get along with Gov. Blagojevich and kept him at a distance. Congressman Rush, who insists that the Illinois Senate Seat must be an African American Seat has always had disdain for Obama because Obama had the audacity to run against Rush for his Congressional Seat.
Rush won the contest but never forgave the young “upstart” for daring to challenge him. Rush did not support Obama in the Democratic Primary when he ran for the U.S. Senate.
As far as Richardson, he had the grace and decency to withdraw his nomination for Commerce Secretary, unlike the lunatic governor of Illinois.
Obama had the brains and fortitude to rise above the corruption in Illinois politics. In addition, there are some decent public servants, both Democrat and moderate Republican, in Illinois. Don’t smear mud on all of them.
Posted by: Nancy V. | January 6, 2009, 12:44 am 12:44 am
“I know that now the government is supposed to be responsible for holding back weather patterns, but you are under the impression that the Secretary of State is involved in that?”
The government is responsible for attending to national emergencies. On the day the levees broke or before, as forewarned, Bush was playing golf and Ms. Rice shopping for shoes in NY. Goodnight!
Posted by: kat | January 6, 2009, 12:49 am 12:49 am
and the Secretary of State’s job should have been what?
Posted by: BertieW | January 6, 2009, 2:21 am 2:21 am
all you tough talkers out there,
WOW!! I just read that the US used to get FREE oil from Venezuela. pathetic, pathetic, pathetic. Your country is getting charity from a South American country and you have the nerve to go on parroting nonsensical points?? WOW!! I am absolutely shocked. Time to drop the idiocy of politics and get started on discussing some IDEAS for the country that your children will need to inherit one day. You don’t want to leave them a country that is sustained on charity.
Posted by: Question | January 6, 2009, 2:49 am 2:49 am
Where is Obama’s support for Israel in their conflict with Hamas? No wonder the Israelis went into Gaza BEFORE Obama takes office!!
Posted by: Jimbo | January 6, 2009, 6:43 am 6:43 am
“and the Secretary of State’s job should have been what?”
To be redundant, responsive to national emergencies. Katrina was forecast as a Category 5 hurricane, though it’s initial impact waned, but there was also specific warnings to the outdated and worn levees not holding up. It took days for a showing of concern by the Bush administration. Maybe that could be attributed to the bubble effect of his administration.
Posted by: kat | January 6, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am
Sadly, Obama’s efforts to control the news cycle this week, as he rightly should, are drowned out by the petty politics of denying Burris his seat in the Senate.
I fear that this is just the first sign that the Democrats will lack the discipline and integrity to govern effectively. Though we love their heart, we rightly hate their ineptitude.
Reid and other IL politicos obviously want the power to give that prized seat away; no other reason could justify the refusal to seat the untainted Burris.
An IL court will force IL SOS to endorse Blago appointment (he does not have a veto power, his is a ministerial act, w/o discretion); then, Burris will be quietly seated. All of this distracting press could have been avoided. I expected Rahm to be an enforcer type that would predict and easily avoid an obvious trap like this; that he has failed to do so bodes ill.
Posted by: BB Cal | January 6, 2009, 12:05 pm 12:05 pm
why does obama need to control the news cycle this week?
that is not his job.
or do you want the news cycle controlled
as bush and co. did leading up to the war?
controlling the news is not obama job.
Posted by: bush the usa | January 6, 2009, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
Obama made a campaign promise to AIPAC that Israel is “sacrosanct”, and was conveniently bubbled up in Hawaii when the IDF assault on Gaza began.
His remarks in Israel six months ago (see December archives for Political Punchr) signalled support for Israel’s current activities in Gaza:
OBAMA: “The first job of any nation state is to protect its citizens. And so I can assure you that if — I don’t even care if I was a politician — if somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I’m going to do EVERYTHING IN MY POWER [emphasis added] to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing.”
Obama’s weeks-long silence on Gaza, more than ANYthing else, has given the IDF carte blanche to shoot fish in a barrel, and wantonly lay waste to the area (including, now, white phosphorus shells and cluster bombs).
Posted by: Belle Starr | January 6, 2009, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm
Anyone other than me think that Gaza is a smoke screen for what might be really building on a Nuclear Reactor strike in say….Iran? Before PEBO takes office?
Hummmmm?
Posted by: commrat72 | January 6, 2009, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
“Before PEBO takes office?
Hummmmm?”
WILL He take office, or — now that He’s outed as a player in what WAS “the Richardon scandal” — end up in the hoosegow with Mr. Rezko, instead … ?
That’s what the hijacked Democrats get for pretending ANY of them is morally superior to Governor Blago.
Has Rahm Emanuel re-materialized from Kenya?
Posted by: Belle Starr | January 6, 2009, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
“obama hasnt even taken the oath of office yet and there is scandal after scandal”
So … how come the hijacked Democrats won’t seat Senator Burris? Governor Blagojevich is still Governor, in exactly the same way Obama is still president-elect.
One or both of them could be removed from office from corruption … or the Democrats (along with the Republicans) could be seized as the criminal enterprises they are.
Posted by: Edgar Cayce | January 6, 2009, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
Many of us think that we haven’t even had a real president for the last 8 years. It’s about time that we’ll have one.
Posted by: Skip | January 6, 2009, 2:48 pm 2:48 pm
“Obama’s efforts to control the news cycle this week … ”
… seem to have been disrupted by the return of what was formerly the “Richardson” scandal:
“Rubin’s firm, which helps local and state governments issue bonds, is no stranger to scandal and controversy. The IRS has investigated him on suspiciously high fees and concerns about his ties to banks who his firm connects with governments to issue bonds. The Justice Department raided his offices in 2006. No charges have been brought, and Rubin has denied any wrongdoing.”
They “help” issue bonds? And then buy the politicians — like Obama — who buy the political offices (and, as Obama did, vote “bailouts” for the banks)?
The Governors — including Richardson! — might want to think about sending the National Guards to arrest … most of the Congress, for starters.
Posted by: Alice | January 6, 2009, 2:48 pm 2:48 pm
“obama hasnt even taken the oath of office yet and there is scandal after scandal”
Sorry, just stating something does not make it true. What scandal exactly have you scratched up that in any way incriminates Obama?
“Scandal after scandal” that incriminate Obama? Again, propaganda and spin that has nothing to do with reality.
Posted by: pefros | January 6, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
“Many of us think that we haven’t even had a real president for the last 8 years.”
Many MORE of us think we haven’t had a “real” president since JFK was assassinated.
Maybe Edwards would come back … whatever his zipper problems, he made his own money, instead of collecting zillions from mobsters.
Posted by: Alice | January 6, 2009, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm
“Scandal after scandal” that incriminate Obama?
BEGINNING with, conservatively speaking, Bobby Rush and Alice Palmer (the latter after The CHANGEling joined the stable of media-hustler Axelrod, who cloned attractive mobbed-up “candidates” everywhere).
The appearance of PUBLIC information linking Obama to what He presented as the “Richardson” scandal suggests that the “press” wind — and the Justice Department wind — has turned against the “Obama” organization and its associates.
Encouraging the romp in Gaza mightta done the trick. Or the good ole Jesse Jacksons, God bless ‘em. But SOMEthing has.
Posted by: Alice Palmer | January 6, 2009, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
It is amusing to see how desperately all the right-wing haters try to tie some sort of scandal to PEBO. Guess what, losers: he will be innaugurated.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | January 6, 2009, 3:08 pm 3:08 pm
I always find it interesting to see all the right wingers complain about Obama not saying anything or making a comment on an issue that he has no control over, he has not yet taken the oath of office and is trying to allow Bush to do his job (such as it is)until the day he is inaugurated. I feel this is his way of being respectful and trying to show some decorum for us around the world. Would you have him act like a spoiled child who cannot wait his turn? he is the next President of these United States and he has accepted the terms of this agreement,it begins 1-20-09. I find this to be a refreshing return to manners and in right in line with his measured and thoughtful ways so far. GW needs to take the heat for all this as he is the one and his cabinet have helped him make this country at war in several places,broke,unable to hold our heads up as a moral nation in regards to torture, illegal wiretapping, catering to the filthy rich while they cheat and lie us into a depression,no health care for millions of our own citizens and oh how I could go on. Obama should take every minute he can to go on vacation, rest, visit with his family and friends and recharge from that long campaign. He is in for a lot of hard work and he lost his grandmother toward the end of that campaign. He and his family deserve all the rest and quiet they can get.
Posted by: Liz | January 6, 2009, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm
January 6th, 2009 2103 GMT
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I agree with Mr. Obama that is not acceptable to attack with rockets his home where his daughter sleeping. (His statement when he was visiting Israel) But I was expecting from him to have the decency to coming out and make the statement that is also unacceptable to attack by airplane and helicopters and with any other means for retribution the houses of others. ISRAELI OR PALESTINIANS for that matter.
When Georgia bombed South Osetia the world condemns the Russian response like an aggression in disproportion with the size of the Georgia attack to the Osetians. Now the retaliation of the Israelis against Hamas rudimentary rockets is clearly disproportionate to the extreme. Peace in Middle East is not possible when Israel attack and kill civilians with the approval of the USA and when the Arabs use the Palestinians for political gains!
U.N Resolutions only good for the invasion of Iraq. What about numerous resolutions against Israel?
Not Nuclear weapons for Iran. What about the nuclear weapons of Israel?
Shame, Shame!
We know already Bush but we not expecting
Double standards from you to MR .OBAMA
Posted by: blood is always red | January 6, 2009, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm