Mar 11, 2009 8:24pm
President Obama & Earmarks
President Obama acknowledged today that he signed an "imperfect omnibus bill" but told Congress to clean up its act when it comes to pork-barrel projects that don’t go through the better known as earmarks.
Read more HERE and watch our World News with Charles Gibson report here:
-jpt

Email
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
Obama could have simply vetoed the bill and told Congress to remove the pork. But he didn’t. Because he’s a puppet and a liar. Pelosi and Reid run the show, not Obama. I think that much is clear. Next up, a SECOND stimulus bill, again courtesy of Pelosi/Reid, even before the first one can take effect. More payoffs to Democratic supporters and special interests, while American families are crushed by more and more federal debt. Can we say catastrophic economic collapse? Yes we can!
Posted by: Stacey | March 11, 2009, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm
Do as I say, not as I do.
Posted by: Sigmonde | March 11, 2009, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm
So after 14 years of Republican control of Congress and 8 years of Republican control of the WH, there’s finally somebody in office who’s taking charge.
And still McCain keeps whining and whining and whining. Anybody still wonder why that man lost?
He had his entire campaign built around this issue, which accounts for less than 1% of the entire *annual* budget.
Not addressed is also that eliminating spending does NOT lower the budget. What eliminating earmarks does is giving the *total* budget to anonymous and unelected bureaucrats behind a desk in Washington D.C.
In my view, elected officials should have MORE power and influence over the budget to direct money to projects in their own district. Good representatives of their districts *should* know better what needs to be addressed than anonymous buraucrats. With enough transparency, voters in that district are perfectly capable of assessing the representative’s priorities and if it constitutes wasteful spending or not. Their opponents in the primary and/or election will make sure his or her spending priorities will be highlighted and voters will use their power accordingly.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | March 11, 2009, 8:45 pm 8:45 pm
All the earmarks went to the cry baby republicans.
Posted by: Demo RED and BLUE | March 11, 2009, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm
So Concerned, Sigmonde and Stacey are all on record as having more trust in anonymous bureaucrats instead of elected officials?
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | March 11, 2009, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm
Earmarks will never go away – and most American don’t want them to or simply don;t care. This is a bipartisan “problem” that has gone on as long as Congress has existed. Everyone wants a project – or twenty – to tout to their eager constituents.
Posted by: matt | March 11, 2009, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm
Correction: “Not addressed is also that eliminating EARMARK spending …”
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | March 11, 2009, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
How much did the Republicans slam into this.
Posted by: Demo RED and BLUE | March 11, 2009, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
Senator Thad Cochran (R-Hypocrite) is this budget’s earmark king.
Posted by: Mysterious Traveller | March 11, 2009, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm
Obama lied about FISA, he lied about earmarks, he lied about signing statements, he’s lied and lied and lied throughout his ‘career’. And the MSM couldn’t give the smallest damn. Why?
Posted by: Kat5 | March 11, 2009, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
Did you hear that the stock market went up 2 days in a row. Obama has a great working plan.
Posted by: reder blue | March 11, 2009, 9:08 pm 9:08 pm
I’ve watched McCain tweet on twitter all week about each of the “pork portions” he felt needed to be brought to attention. Never once did he clarify whether they were Dem or Repub. Both parties are guilty of loading this with pork, they always are. My feeling is that Mr. Obama just didn’t want the fight this time and will start fresh with the Congress when he brings his budget before them. Then it’ll be time to own up to not doing “pork” and learning a new way to do things. If they can. Pleasing your home constituency by “bringing home the bacon” is a tried and true form of staying in your office, whichever one it may be.
We’ll see what happens.But I’d venture to say that Mr. Obama and the Dems aren’t any worse than the Repubs have been for the last years that they’ve been in power. We need to give this new administration and ourselves a chance to rise to be better people.
Posted by: Diane | March 11, 2009, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
The Repubs lost the elections for mis-handling the budgets, broken promises and ignoring facts…WHAT makes you think the Dems won’t lose future elections for the very same thing??? The people are already looking forward to 2010 elections.
Posted by: Parallax View | March 11, 2009, 9:24 pm 9:24 pm
Why didn’t Obama sign the Omnibus Bill in public? And why did he exercise a “signing statement” after the fact?
This is not transparency.
Posted by: Sigmonde | March 11, 2009, 9:35 pm 9:35 pm
Do as I say, not as I do.
**************************************
So that is what the GOP is telling Obama.
Posted by: Thinking | March 11, 2009, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm
This was a leftover from the Bush era – and it was only 2 percent earmarks, 40 percent of which was from Republicans!
Posted by: Matt | March 11, 2009, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm
Shame on Obama! Shame Shame!
Posted by: jess | March 11, 2009, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm
Willem, McCain was railing against government waste, pork barrel spending, and earmarks long before he ran for president. It is not whining for a Senator to stand up for his principles and to try to influence the outcome of events. It’s called leadership. And he hardly built his entire campaign around this single issue. He built his campaign around service, leadership, and experience. His record of reform and opposition to government waste and corruption was, of course, part of that.
And be sure to put me on that list of folks down with letting the bureaucrats divvy up the money. You see, Willem, some of us are idealistic enough to believe that our representatives are sent to Washington to represent us, but not in order to see how much moolah they can bring back to our district but to do what is right for the whole country. Am I to think better of my legislator because she got a million dollar earmark steering funds to our district for some vanity program rather than allowing an administrator who is serving the interests of the entire nation to allocate the million dollars where it is needed most, in his or her trained and educated assessment? Sorry, your boogie men– “anonymous bureaucrats”– do not scare me any more than Congress does.
Posted by: moderate | March 11, 2009, 10:42 pm 10:42 pm
Obama is also a liar. He made “no earmarks” a hallmark of his campaign promises.. and on January 6, 2009 on CNN politics Obama said: “We are going to ban all earmarks” (he lied) and today he’s signed a bill including nearly 9,000 earmarks, including his OWN earmarks and Biden’s earmarks stuffed into the bloated bill last year. Disgusting hypocrite!
Kudos to Sen. Russ Feingold, Sen. Evan Bayh and Sen. John McCain who stood strong against earmarks. They always do. McCain has NEVER taken any earmarks in ALL of his years in the Senate. Wow. Too few in Congress of either can claim that. McCain and Feingold have both fought for reigning in campaign spending as well. Remember the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Bill? Obama lied about that too, promising to take public financing of his campaign, he did not and spent nearly a billion dollars on his campaign, ruining any chance anytime soon of campaign finance reform. Shame on him and the DNC for allowing it.
That’s why this Hillary supporting Democrat voted for John McCain. At least you can respect the man. I am one very disappointed centrist Democrat. Obama is leading us down a very dangerous spending path burdening our children with massive debt. It’s outrageously unfair.
Wake up America! Despite what Newsweek mag rag claims, socialism is very bad for America. Capitalism is what made America great! Let’s fight to keep it!
(The author of the Newsweek rag cover story on socialism is Evan Thomas, grandson of 6 time National Socialist Party candidate for President of the U.S., from 1928-1948 none other than Norman Thomas!) Surprised? Sickened? You should be!
Learn history. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past.
Anyone care to join me for a tea party? Why can’t Obama hire anyone who pays their damn taxes?
Posted by: T | March 11, 2009, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm
Two sides, one mouth. A typical, liberal Chicago pol… nothing more, nothing less.
Posted by: Thank God for Karma | March 11, 2009, 11:29 pm 11:29 pm
Finally Obama tells both sides enough is enough. I love hearing Republicans with the message of ‘do as I say, but don’t do as I do’.
was it 38 republicans that put ear marks in the Bill and then voted against it? MSNBC and CNN are the real whistle blowers on this one.
Posted by: traveler | March 11, 2009, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm
T
I agree I did the same and the administration needs to show us some results not the endless cocktail parties and announcing somethign new everyday that we are going to ask China and Japan to foot the bill for! Can you just imagine the conversations behind closed doors of these people! Nancy Pelosi is a good indication because she just doesnt speak well!
Posted by: JG | March 11, 2009, 11:53 pm 11:53 pm
Traveler
the President needs to be tough with both Democrats and republicans.. the speaker seems to think shes shadow president and thats not the way it works venting frustration after not being able to do anything for 8 yrs is not the way to go! there is a thing called class that the Sec of State has which your kind does not!
Posted by: JG | March 11, 2009, 11:55 pm 11:55 pm
Seems like he said he would take each item line by line on earmarks, and delete was does not work. Mitch McConnell in Ky a Republican Minority Leader has his hand in this and will be a leader of the pack for hand out money. I am curious if Obama will take out his earmarks. I doubt it, a trade off for something down the road. If Mitch free money is not vetoed. Then politic’s as usual.
Posted by: Mike in KY | March 12, 2009, 12:25 am 12:25 am
He still signed the pork ridden monster. Impeach the socialist idiot Obama now
Posted by: Sluggo | March 12, 2009, 12:40 am 12:40 am
hes going down a road that mirrors George W sortof through the looking glass
Posted by: JG | March 12, 2009, 12:46 am 12:46 am
Obama does not have line item veto authority. The problem is most members of Congress want the earmarks, which would have resulted in enough votes to override Obama’s veto.
Contact the members of Congress for your state – tell them to not ask for money that would go to your state.
Posted by: Julie | March 12, 2009, 2:00 am 2:00 am
Julie&Hannah
yea, all those rubes that thought organizing and sending out a few emails and blogging was going to change a 230 yr old system of govt are crazy… they didnt know much if anything of the history of it from the get go! What the president and his people want is to have their cake and eat it too .. sounds a little too familiar with 18th century France!
Posted by: JG | March 12, 2009, 2:21 am 2:21 am
Obama signs a pork-laden bill and promises it to be a point of departure is akin to a smoker lights up a cigarette while promises it a last one before quitting. Let’s continue to dream!
Posted by: Obama-Yah-Wright | March 12, 2009, 2:23 am 2:23 am
One of the ‘earmarks’ was by good old Nancy Pelosi who got 30 million for her home base of Frisco for the study of mice. Is that insane or not? There is a big difference between earmarks and pork. Massachusetts got millions which they will be using to build memorials to the Kennedy clan. I’m an independent but I’m sick of hearing about what Bush did or didn’t do—don’t try to justify Obama’s ineptness by diverting to Bush–that’s an old liberal ploy that’s been worn out like the phrases racist, homophobe, religious right, etc.
Posted by: Ron Powell | March 12, 2009, 4:18 am 4:18 am
Just curious Obama supporters….this man has LIED, LIED, LIED to you again, and again, and again. It has been proven, it is obvious, there is no doubt. He does it again with this bill, filled with earmarks, when he promised that he would decrease earmarks.
so, I just want to know, do you normally stay loyal to someone in your life after they lie to you? Do you vigorously continue to defend them, as if they were a messiah, at all costs, even when they have betrayed your trust, again, and again?
I always wondered where they got the guests on Jerry Springer, crazy women who literally fight for men who have lied to them, cheated them, betrayed them. I didn’t think it was real.
But it is. Those are Obama supporters.
Posted by: decentAmerican | March 12, 2009, 5:19 am 5:19 am
“—don’t try to justify Obama’s ineptness by diverting to Bush–that’s an old liberal ploy that’s been worn out…”
Well you see we don’t think Obama is inept. And how that happens is that when right-wingers who claim to be independents say that Obama is inept we think: -inept compared to whom? That’s when one of the most inept presidents in history just jumps into our minds [Bush] and Obama doesn’t seem very inept at all in comparison -so you might as well get used to it because for us, its never going to wear out.
Posted by: Skip | March 12, 2009, 5:32 am 5:32 am
I just want to know, do you normally stay loyal to someone in your life after they lie to you? Do you vigorously continue to defend them, as if they were a messiah, at all costs, even when they have betrayed your trust, again, and again?
****************************************
Well I guess it is a matter of expectations. You see you wing nuts did the labeling but the rest of us did the voting. IT seems you wanted a Messiah, but we wanted an intelligent, and active President.
He has not betrayed my trust, there are limits to what he can do, and there are certainly battles to be fought, but priorities do rule.
AS for my self much of what you wing nuts complain about the rest opf us do not care about. So did he betray you? NO you didn’t vote for him. Did he betray me? No; I didn’t vote for him for the same reason you seem to think I did. The Change I wanted was for the GOP to be defeated; I got that.
Posted by: Thinking | March 12, 2009, 6:26 am 6:26 am
SO MANY CRY BABIES. No matter what Obama does, you will find fault. This recession will not/cannot be cleared up in a month, two months.
This recession started 18 months ago, and nothing was done. But you expect Obama to clear it up in two months. Why didn’t Bush start working on this when he was in office and this was starting?????????
Let’s give our President some support and give it time.
Posted by: smt | March 12, 2009, 7:06 am 7:06 am
I guess we’ll give him a bye on this one..he’s right..this is old news. I think he has really upped the bar for future bills…maybe not a smooth tactical move. Mr. Line by Line..will have to muster up … next time.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | March 12, 2009, 7:50 am 7:50 am
And then he went behind close doors, away from cameras, to sign the pork-filled spending bill.
Ah, yes, transparency in government.
And he signed the bill, “Barack H. Obama”.
“H” as in Hypocrite.
Posted by: Sally J. | March 12, 2009, 8:02 am 8:02 am
Let’s give our President some support and give it time.
~~~~~
I will give him at least twice as much as the left gave President Bush – which will amount to a big fat zero.
Posted by: Plumber | March 12, 2009, 8:08 am 8:08 am
I sincerely doubt anyone voted for Obama based on the earmarks thing. Most people voted for him to clean up W’s mess, and earmarks predate W.
Posted by: ben | March 12, 2009, 8:21 am 8:21 am
Just to let smt know, I join plumber in saying I will give the president just as much support and just as much patience as the democrats gave bush– that is, nada. bush did work to deal with the recession and you blasted him for it. Remember tarp I? and earlier, remember the rebate checks that michelle made fun of on the campaign trail? i do not expect obama to fix everything in the first 50 days, but i do expect him to make progress and to lay out an intelligent and intelligible plan and to focus on this problem.
Posted by: GetReal | March 12, 2009, 8:42 am 8:42 am
Anyone notice that Obama is doing everything BUT fix the problems with the economy?
Government takeover of health care, huge energy taxes and reduction of energy supplies, universal everything, tax, tax, tax.
But fix the banks and stabilize real estate?
Feh.
Posted by: drjohn | March 12, 2009, 9:03 am 9:03 am
Posted by: smt | Mar 12, 2009 7:06:08 AM
We expect the President to fix the problem, NOT jam a million of his and Oelosi’s pet projects down our throats.
Posted by: drjohn | March 12, 2009, 9:04 am 9:04 am
From NRO:
Look, When I Said ‘Line by Line,’ I Didn’t Mean ‘Line by Line’
The RNC is coming close to emulating my
“All statements from Barack Obama come with an expiration date” mantra:
During The Campaign, President Obama Pledged To “Go Line By Line” And “Eliminate Programs That Don’t Work.”
Obama: “I want to go line by line through every item in the Federal budget and eliminate programs that don’t work, and make sure that those that do work work better and cheaper.” (Sen. Barack Obama, NBC Presidential Debate, Nashville, TN, 10/7/08)
Today, Robert Gibbs Said
“The president has not gone through each and every item in the legislation.”
Gibbs: “I think it’s reasonable to assume that the president has not gone through each and every item in the legislation. This is necessary to continue funding government. It represents last year’s business, although it’s not perfect. The president will sign the legislation, but demonstrate for all involved rules moving forward that he thinks can make this process work a little bit better.” (Robert Gibbs, White House Briefing, 3/10/09)
Of course, this isn’t really the expiration of a statement; more of an assertion that a promise hasn’t kicked in yet.
Posted by: drjohn | March 12, 2009, 9:22 am 9:22 am
Of the top 10 Senators who requested the most money in earmarks, six are Republican.
Of the top 10 Senators who requested the highest number of individual earmarks, five of them are Republican and they proudly hold spots 1-4 on the list.
Never mind, there are 1 1/2 times more Dems in Congress.
ONLY Republican Senators Coburn, DeMint & McCain are free of earmarks with Feingold & McCaskill on Democrat side joining them.
So if Republicans want to cry foul over earmarks they can start by pointing the finger looking in the mirror……
Posted by: Ranger | March 12, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am
“So if Republicans want to cry foul over earmarks they can start by pointing the finger looking in the mirror……” – Ranger, nobody will ever get anything changed if we continue the “yea, my side is better” mentality. Can’t you all see that ALL politicians are the same when it comes to taking care of themselves first and our country second??
Posted by: Randy the A/C guy | March 12, 2009, 10:16 am 10:16 am
“Can’t you all see that ALL politicians are the same when it comes to taking care of themselves first and our country second??”
Read some of the ridiculous post (if you can stomach them) before mine and you’ll know why I posted that. Conspiracy theories and any lack of reality rule the day.
No, I don’t think all politicians are that way, but unfortunately many of them are.
Posted by: Ranger | March 12, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am
I agree that there are some good politicians. I’m just frustrated that we seem to be stuck in being governed by the extreme fringes of the two political parties instead of getting more of a centrist choice. That is where the majority of Americans actually are with their values.
Posted by: Randy the A/C guy | March 12, 2009, 10:33 am 10:33 am
Posted by: Ranger | Mar 12, 2009 9:25:57 AM
Moral equivalence.
Obama promised to go through line and by line and change the earmark environment. He has failed.
Posted by: drjohn | March 12, 2009, 10:43 am 10:43 am
By the way, Ryan, Carville DID hope that BUsh would fail.
Posted by: drjohn | March 12, 2009, 10:55 am 10:55 am
drjohn- I can attempt a debate with you the earmarks on this bill, when this bill was put forth in legislation, how it came to pass, how bills get passed, parties responsible (partially Obama- but the jury is still out on this topic) etc – but it would just be a waste of time.
Everyone in this forum is aware that it does not matter what Obama does good, bad or indifferent – you will never give him the benefit of the doubt and in your eyes he has will always “fail”.
A true shame.
Posted by: Ranger | March 12, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am
“”We are going to ban all earmarks”
That was specifically in reference to the stimulus package. That bill contained NO earmarks. This was an omnibus appropriations bill left over from 2009. Also, in the clip of Obama from Jake’s piece talking about going through the budget “line by line”. This was not a budget bill. And it was not Obama’s bill. He recently made his budget proposal and Congress is now in the process of drafting it. Hold his feet to the fire when that one comes up to the vote because it’s on the budget that he promised to go through line by line and cut wasteful spending.
In the clip, Obama was quoted as saying that he’d slash earmarks in half. In 2005, there were over 15,000 earmarks. This year it was under 9,000. Hum, that’s pretty close to half if you ask me. And who was running both Congress and the White House in 2005?
28 of the 35 Senators who voted “nay” on the spending bill had earmarks included in the bill. It’s the typical, “my earmarks are good, all others are bad”, hypocrisy.
“I sincerely doubt anyone voted for Obama based on the earmarks thing.”
100% correct. If earmarks were the most pressing issue in our country, if they were the top concern of American voters, McCain would have won with 75% of the vote since earmarks were a signature of his campaign and most of his political career. (a position that emerged after his shady dealings with Charles Keating were revealed)
“One of the ‘earmarks’ was by good old Nancy Pelosi who got 30 million for her home base of Frisco for the study of mice. Is that insane or not?”
First of all, that story was related to the stimulus package. Second, it was a LIE
Finally, Obama never said he “opposed” earmarks entirely. He believes the process needs to be reformed, but he never said he wants or expects to see them completely eliminated. (plus, that’s not his decision – only Congress can reform and/or eliminate the earmark process)
Earmarks are an easy story for lazy journalists to cover. They’re also easy for politician to rail against – it’s a no risk proposition. I mean, the political risk is so low that even members of congress who insert earmarks into spending bills themselves rant about the evils of earmarks and vote against bills that contain their earmarks. At the end of the day, though, earmarks are a very small problem compared to all the other crises we face…and for most voters, they just aren’t a concern.
And I have to pose a question to the person who made this comment:
“Impeach the socialist idiot Obama now.”
Impeach him for what?
Posted by: OGLiberal | March 12, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am
Ranger, I can’t follow your logic. The A/C guy challenged you when you wrote that Republicans against earmarks should look in the mirror, and you talked about how a higher percentage of Republicans are in the top ten earmarkers, etc. A/C suggested that all politicians are the same and you don’t get anywhere by playing the “the other side is the evil one” card. To explain your reasoning, you then wrote, “Read some of the ridiculous post (if you can stomach them) before mine and you’ll know why I posted that. Conspiracy theories and any lack of reality rule the day.” So I read all the posts, and I don’t see a connection. I see only one post that singled out Democrats as earmarkers– someone who talked about Pelosi and the Kennedy worshippers in Mass. I saw lots of name-calling from both sides (for the record, I am a republican but I am not a wing-nut *G*) I saw lots of complaints about Obama’s inconsistency on earmarks and a percieved lack of leadership on this issue. I saw lots of complaints about earmarks.
So when you make a point of blaming the Republicans and then saying, in so many words, since Republicans have done this, no republicans can complain about this. Horse hockey. I have never made an earmark in my life. I can complain about the system if I want. That does not make me a hypocrite.
Posted by: moderate | March 12, 2009, 11:43 am 11:43 am
“I will give him at least twice as much as the left gave President Bush – which will amount to a big fat zero.”
“They did it first”
Thank you for a great demonstration of the maturity of the right wing.
Posted by: Ryan C | March 12, 2009, 11:58 am 11:58 am
Mr. Blame Game continues! It wasn’t me, I was busy partying in the WH.
Posted by: Mo | March 12, 2009, 12:19 pm 12:19 pm
Moderate – btw – what do you have against facts?
Posted by: Ranger | March 12, 2009, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
OGLiberal @11:28 — Thanks for the great posting.
Posted by: kat the real one | March 12, 2009, 12:49 pm 12:49 pm
Great Post OGLIBREAL
That is the TRUTH!
Posted by: ANGIE IN PA | March 12, 2009, 12:57 pm 12:57 pm
In my earlier post, I noted the claim GOPers have made about $30M being included in the stimulus package for studying field mice in Nancy Pelosi’s district. I stated that it was a lie. I put a link to the evidence against the claim from Politifact but I guess this site strips out links. For those interested, go to Google and search on the terms “politifact mice pelosi”. The link to the story should be the first one in the results.
Posted by: OGLiberal | March 12, 2009, 1:25 pm 1:25 pm
This was a leftover from the Bush era – and it was only 2 percent earmarks, 40 percent of which was from Republican
Posted by: Matt | Mar 11, 2009 9:56:52 PM
Bush did not sign it and send it back to Congress. This is now Pres. Obamas bill he could have send it back to, but did not. He signed it. So you can’t blame Bush for this one.
Posted by: Lizzie | March 12, 2009, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm
i do recall NanFran Pelosi cheerfully saying “thank god BUSH is gone,i got tired of him vetoing everything!” now with a democrat majority they are spending like drunken sailors. Pelosi is already talking about a 2nd stimulus! they were in a rush to fill up the 1st w/their goodies. remember it started at 50 billion last may and grew to 800 something billion when OBAMA won, before finalizing at 748 billion in 1 month, Obama is currently the 1st president to increase the national debt in 1 month since taking over as president.
Posted by: jaj | March 12, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
“So when you make a point of blaming the Republicans and then saying, in so many words, since Republicans have done this, no republicans can complain about this. Horse hockey. I have never made an earmark in my life. I can complain about the system if I want. That does not make me a hypocrite.”
It does if you blame the administration or just Democrats as so many in this forum did. You really need to get off your high horse – you may get hurt up there. OGLiberal has a great post of just some of the “conspiracy theories” that keep coming up. I’m sorry you are unable to follow the facts and accurately read all the post. It really would have been beneficial.
Posted by: Ranger | March 12, 2009, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
I, for one, have had enough of all the petty bickering between “left” and “right” over Obama. The Republicans are ALWAYS going to find fault with our president and the Democrats are ALWAYS going to defend him tooth and nail.
Give the man a break. He is NOT an omnipresent being who will save mankind from its own self-destruction. Mistakes will be made. We just hope *they* are able to learn from them and not do it again. I challenge any one of you out there to try to do his job. Then I would be more willing to listen to your critiques.
Instead of spending so much energy on finger-pointing and mud slinging from both sides of the fence, it would be more beneficial as a country if we could find answers to these problems as a whole, rather than apart. Splitting up the country will not solve anything.
A lot has happened during the last (almost) 30 years in our government. It is going to take time–trial and error–to resolve the problems we are facing today. Have patience.
Posted by: Heather | March 14, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am