The Presidential Planner

Bulletin: blacks vote overwhelmingly for Democrats.
For First Time Under Obama,
Majority Says U.S. Is on Wrong Track
Politics Daily, by Bruce Drake
Original Article
Posted By:StormCnter, 10/28/2009 4:39:12 AM
While the stock market has picked up and the country appears to be pulling out of the recession, a majority of Americans – for the first time in the Obama presidency – says the U.S. is headed down the wrong track, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll conducted Oct. 22-25. Fifty-two percent say the country is on the wrong track compared to 36 percent who say it is headed in the right direction.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 30% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -11.

Posted by: Alyson | Oct 28, 2009 10:45:28 AM
Oops, forgot to reference which poll– the NBC/WSJ poll.

According to the same poll
Posted by: Alyson | Oct 28, 2009 10:45:28 AM
I thought “we” were discounting Scott as a legitimate pollster here?

Headline: Villainous, immoral Blue Dog Democrat threatens healthcare bill in the House.
—Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) on Tuesday threatened that he may work with Republicans to torpedo healthcare reform unless he gets a vote to strip abortion-related provisions out of the House bill.
Stupak wants a floor vote on a measure that would prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for abortions. And in an interview on C-SPAN on Tuesday, he suggested if Democratic leaders don’t give him the vote, he’ll work with Republicans.
Stupak said one way or the other, there will be a vote on the abortion language, either “though a rule, or on the floor, or on a motion to recommit.”
A motion to recommit is a parliamentary tool used by the minority in the House to kill legislation. While some Democrats occasionally vote for motions to recommit, it is unusual for Democrats to strategize with Republicans on how best to use the procedural motion.—

So, even though folks think we’re on the wrong track, they sure aren’t look rightward, or at least not at the GOP, for any solutions– or a better track.
Posted by: Alyson | Oct 28, 2009 10:45:28 AM
Which says nothing for Mr. Hope & Change who was supposed to usher in a new era of politics and bring both sides together – but instead has continued politics as usual.
In spite of your quoted poll numbers, there is an overall distrust of Congress on both sides of the aisle that they are capable of solving the country’s problems and the President has done nothing to overcome that stumbling block. He should be using his many talents to knock some sense into both sides of the aisle. He’s a complete non-factor in this regard.
Of course, I knew it was all bull when he said all those things but a lot of his followers really believed him – believed he could do it and would at least try. Now all that’s left is to try to blame the GOP as the party of no. How about assigning at least SOME of the blame to your candidate? If he is THAT good, it shouldn’t be working out like this, should it?

Am I understanding corrctly that Sen. Brooke is receiving an award because his skin is black ? Wow !

Make no mistake, Alyson–I myself do not have a high opinion of the Republican party. I do not like them, but I dislike and fear the consequences of the modern Democrat much more.
On the subject of distinguished African-Americans, allow me to proffer Dr. Thomas Sowell, who has this to say today:
“Just one year ago, would you have believed that an unelected government official, not even a Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate but simply one of the many “czars” appointed by the President, could arbitrarily cut the pay of executives in private businesses by 50 percent or 90 percent?
Did you think that another “czar” would be talking about restricting talk radio? That there would be plans afloat to subsidize newspapers– that is, to create a situation where some newspapers’ survival would depend on the government liking what they publish?
Did you imagine that anyone would even be talking about having a panel of so-called “experts” deciding who could and could not get life-saving medical treatments?
Scary as that is from a medical standpoint, it is also chilling from the standpoint of freedom. If you have a mother who needs a heart operation or a child with some dire medical condition, how free would you feel to speak out against an administration that has the power to make life and death decisions about your loved ones?
Does any of this sound like America?
How about a federal agency giving school children material to enlist them on the side of the president? Merely being assigned to sing his praises in class is apparently not enough.
How much of America would be left if the federal government continued on this path? President Obama has already floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.
We already have local police forces all across the country and military forces for national defense, as well as the FBI for federal crimes and the National Guard for local emergencies. What would be the role of a national police force created by Barack Obama, with all its leaders appointed by him? It would seem more like the brown shirts of dictators than like anything American.
How far the President will go depends of course on how much resistance he meets. But the direction in which he is trying to go tells us more than all his rhetoric or media spin.
Barack Obama has not only said that he is out to “change the United States of America,” the people he has been associated with for years have expressed in words and deeds their hostility to the values, the principles and the people of this country.
Jeremiah Wright said it with words: “God damn America!” Bill Ayers said it with bombs that he planted. Community activist goons have said it with their contempt for the rights of other people.
Among the people appointed as czars by President Obama have been people who have praised enemy dictators like Mao, who have seen the public schools as places to promote sexual practices contrary to the values of most Americans, to a captive audience of children.
Those who say that the Obama administration should have investigated those people more thoroughly before appointing them are missing the point completely. Why should we assume that Barack Obama didn’t know what such people were like, when he has been associating with precisely these kinds of people for decades before he reached the White House?
Nothing is more consistent with his lifelong patterns than putting such people in government– people who reject American values, resent Americans in general and successful Americans in particular, as well as resenting America’s influence in the world.
Any miscalculation on his part would be in not thinking that others would discover what these stealth appointees were like. Had it not been for the Fox News Channel, these stealth appointees might have remained unexposed for what they are. Fox News is now high on the administration’s enemies list.
Nothing so epitomizes President Obama’s own contempt for American values and traditions like trying to ram two bills through Congress in his first year– each bill more than a thousand pages long– too fast for either of them to be read, much less discussed. That he succeeded only the first time says that some people are starting to wake up. Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question– and the biggest question for this generation.”

If he is THAT good, it shouldn’t be working out like this, should it?
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | Oct 28, 2009 11:26:58 AM
***
Seriously?
I’m not one of the instant gratification now-now-now types that believes in overnight miracles, particularly given the economy and all the hot-button items he, his admin and the Dem members of Congress are working on– health care, climate change, sending more troops into a long war. I’m a bit too pragmatic for that baloney. Given that I have cousins (and aunts and a couple in-laws) like the one I mentioned yesterday, and I remember what happened when Clinton was elected, did I expect things to be magically changed by now, or the right wing to grasp the extended hand graciously in an effort to move the country forward in a bipartisan fashion? Nope. Actually I can give you a hell no on that. LOL. Not the starry-eyed type. But I also don’t quit on people or an agenda because of a couple bumps in the road or opposition, particularly when the opposition strikes me as rather dim-witted, conspiracy-oriented and way into scaremongering geared toward people prone to falling for that kind of thing.
What I like is that the President is someone I can relate to– and not for any of the reasons Fascist Hyena mentions, which I consider as falling under the whole conspiracy theory thing I just mentioned. When the Prez talks about things I get it, and usually feel he’s representing for me. Sometimes I wish he’d be more boldly progressive but he has a strong pragmatic streak, and a moderate streak on many issues, and that’s okay. The whole bipartisan thing was never anything I was particularly into– although I hoped the Republicans would act in good faith on big issues like health care. On the economy or war, I don’t see why we’d take the current GOP seriously at all. And while some of you would like serious-indeed reform-oriented people to forget the past eight years, despite the fact that some of us spent many of those years horrified, that’s pretty ridiculous. I don’t hate Bush at all, but I think his presidency was a disaster. On my deathbed 40 or 50 or whatever years from now, I’ll likely still remember.
As for President Obama having adopted some Bush policies and not having disassembled the secret magical kingdom behind the curtain yet– I do think some of that needs to be addressed, and pressure applied.
I’ll be back later to discuss Thomas Sowell, per Fascist’s post, who tries hard not to sound like a crackpot, but more often than not does sound like one to me. Sorry. Crack. pot– albeit an intellectual one. Right off the bat we come at things differently given his laissez-faire philosophy, but lately he’s come up with some real doozies. I have to read this crazy post in full to see what I think, but off the top of my head — yowza. Too much time in a round ivory tower?

“How much of America would be left if the federal government continued on this path? President Obama has already floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.”
I expect the paranoia schtick from people like Beck but Sowel is supposedly and intellectual
I guess the crazy runs awfully deep.

Posted by: Alyson | Oct 28, 2009 1:35:17 PM
Good post. I always appreciate you speaking your mind with civility.
IMO, much of what is happening now is geared towards removing our freedoms – some more subtle than others. I look at what CA looks like today and I think God, the whole country could look like that.
The Prez is determined to right the wrongs of this country as he sees them – which includes his vision of fairness. He’s been formulating his opinions since he was a young man and they cannot be discounted. He has an agenda.
And I am concerned about fairness versus motivation and innovation. That Blackberry he is addicted to was a result of innovation and free markets. Never would have happened in Cuba, etc.
I am also concerned about his true commitment to improving the lives of the poor and disadvantaged other than keeping them addicted to handouts. Did he give them a hand UP in Chicago? I think all he did was further his career. Chicago is still bad news because we’ve gone through at least one generation of parents on entitlements not much has changed other than a lot of money has changed hands.
He has not reached across the aisle has no intention of doing it – even though he ran on it. He is not ushering in a new era of bipartisanship. This is about punishment. It’s wrong.
I won’t comment on climate change (what used to be global warming). Too many facets of that discussion. But I am in favor of pushing forward on alternative energy that rewards innovation. In some cases, I think science has yet to make discoveries that will push us over the edge (dilithium crystals maybe?).
I understand the hesitancy to rely on our own drilling giving the decision-makers the chance to procrastinate on this issue. They have already proven they will kick the can down the road. Again, the more automated cars become, the better they perform and they have made great progress with that. A lot of money has been spent on it. Unfortunately, they have also had to try to anticipate the consumer’s wants which change whenever gas prices fluctuate. The people in the country need to make a commitment as well. Many can’t think past what they want for lunch.
Hybrids, electric – all things I am in favor of if they promote innovation and free enterprise. Unfortunately, electric cars are too expensive right now and we are probably several years away from mainstreaming them. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it – but we have to be patient. Again, technological advancements and encouraging research plays a key role. I’m afraid I don’t know how much effort the Bush administration put into this. I suspect it was not enough.
On the economy, I’m tired of liberals, dems, whatever not owning up to their part in the housing mess and the subsequent financial meltdown. It’s all been well documented and discussed to death. I guess if the next 4 or 8 years work out the way I feel they will, we’ll be saying the same thing about the Dems as you are now saying about the GOP. Time will tell. After all, they can’t even agree on health care.
In the meantime, there are GOP members who have good ideas and are concerned for the welfare of this country rather than themselves. Please don’t discount them.
Re: “particularly when the opposition strikes me as rather dim-witted, conspiracy-oriented and way into scaremongering geared toward people prone to falling for that kind of thing.” I hope you feel the same way when they are on the “left”.

try? ..
Posted by: Oh Yeah | Oct 28, 2009 1:55:50 PM
The full context of what I said is that liberals are making excuses for Obama not reaching across the aisle as he said he would when he campaigned and when he gave is Inauguration speech – using the excuse that the GOP is the party of no. My comment has nothing to do with declared party affiliation.
Having said that, I understand how the game works. But running on “a new era of bipartisanship?” But Obama never should have promised something he had no intention of doing.

===despite the fact that some of us spent many of those years horrified,===
Then you should understand there are many who are as horrified of Obama as you were of Bush.

BTW where is the Republican plan for healthcare that was promised months ago?
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 28, 2009 3:44:29 PM
133 days and counting since the promise was made– and I know there were brief bills drafted but neither garnered wide ranging GOP caucus support, and those bills haven’t been announced as bills meeting the promises made, because they don’t meet the promises made

I hope you feel the same way when they are on the “left”.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | Oct 28, 2009 3:25:55 PM
***
I don’t think much of the LaRouche folks (and that’s putting it very mildly); I wrote a scathing blog about the irony of peace activists who were rather violent and unruly at “peace” protests against the Iraq war, I spoke out against Hitler signs against the previous president as well as this one, I didn’t vote for Blagojevich for governor and I think Rangel should just resign already. But we may disagree on some of the usual rightwing “targets.”

Generic Congressional Vote
Dem/Rep
51/39 Dem +12 ABC News/Wash Post
37/42 Rep +5 Rasmussen Reports*
46/33 Dem +13 CBS News
46/44 Dem +2 Gallup
45.0/39.5 Dem +5.5 RCP Average
*Not yet updated with most recent results showing 38/42/+4 Rep lead.

“BTW where is the Republican plan for healthcare that was promised months ago?”
If you’re looking for one about which debate has been permitted by Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, you will look in vain. On the other hand, if you are serious and diligent you can find a couple dozen of them online. I would do your homework for you if you weren’t such an abjectly poor student.

“I would do your homework for you if you weren’t such an abjectly poor student.”
Speaking of poor students.
If the Fordham study said 2 + 2 = 5 would you agree?
Would you tout that study?

“If you’re looking for one about which debate has been permitted by Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, you will look in vain. On the other hand, if you are serious and diligent you can find a couple dozen of them online.”
IOW they have no plan but various Republicans have put forth a basic outline of what they see as reform most of which is dismantling Medicare or handing the insurance industry everything they want.

“One should never poll adults.”
I like what someone said here a while back: Why would Rasmussen apply a likely voter screen for its health care poll? Who exactly is health care running against?

“(1)Why would Rasmussen apply a likely voter screen for its health care poll? (2)Who exactly is health care running against?”
(1) In order to determine how likely voters feel about the matter.
(2) Who exactly did the Vietnam war run against?

“Attach whatever significance you like to whatever polls you want to. ‘Let a hundred flowers bloom,’ as Anita Dunn’s philosopher hero once said. I know which ones are most significant to me.”
Obviously Rasmussen is your significant other, although there was that fling with Zogby who seduced you with a fleeting 42% Obama approval rating. “Something of a state of ecstasy,” was your description at the time.
Meanwhile, the crickets are still chirping over the question Ryan C asked you … twice now.