European Buyer's Remorse on Obama

In the election The Economist of London endorsed Barack Obama. It's now having some serious buyer's remorse. Here below are excerpts (in boldface) its recent edition ("Learning the Hard Way") about how it sees the Obama Administration's performance. I hope you'll pass this along to other bloggers and online activists. It shows Obama's failures as seen from a European perspective.

I've been asking everyone to turn the heat way up on Barack H. Obama, who turns out to be little more than a slick talker in a $3,500 suit. He's no Sarah Palin -- and yes, she could beat him at basketball also. (Ask budding star Willow Palin, who still can't beat her mother.)

Mar 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition

Barack Obama may at last be getting a grip. But he still needs to show more leadership, at home and abroad


"HILLARY CLINTON'S most effective quip, in her long struggle with Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination last year, was that the Oval Office is no place for on-the-job training. It went to the heart of the nagging worry about the silver-tongued young senator from Illinois: that he lacked even the slightest executive experience, and that in his brief career he had never really stood up to powerful interests, whether in his home city of Chicago or in the wider world.

"Might Mrs Clinton have been right about her foe? Polls show that independent voters again prefer Republicans to Democrats, a startling reversal of fortune in just a few weeks . . . Mr Obama has seemed curiously feeble.

Empty posts, weak policies

There are two main reasons for this. The first is Mr Obama's failure to grapple as fast and as single-mindedly with the economy as he should have done. His stimulus package, though huge, was subcontracted to Congress, which did a mediocre job: . . .

"His budget, though in some ways more honest than his predecessor's, is wildly optimistic. The failure to staff the Treasury is a shocking illustration of administrative drift. There are 23 slots at the department that need confirmation by the Senate, and only two have been filled .. . Getting the Treasury team in place ought to have been his first priority.

"Second, Mr Obama has mishandled his relations with both sides in Congress. Though he campaigned as a centrist and promised an era of post-partisan government, that's not how he has behaved.

"His stimulus bill . . . if Mr Obama had done a better job of selling his package, and had worked harder at making sure that Republicans were included in drafting it, they would have found it more difficult to oppose his plans.If Mr Obama cannot work with the Republicans, he needs to be certain that he controls his own party.

"Unfortunately, he seems unable to. . . . The Democrats . . . have stuffed his stimulus package and his appropriations bill with pork, even though this damages him and his party in the eyes of the electorate. Worst of all, he is letting them get away with it.

Lead, dammit

"But the [Geithner banking] plan at least demonstrates the administration's acceptance that it must work with the bankers, instead of riding the wave of popular opinion against them, if it is to repair America's economy.

"[On overseas "leadership"]. . . Take the G20 meeting in London, to which he will head at the end of next week. The most important task for this would-be institution is to set itself firmly against protectionism at a time when most of its members are engaged in a game of creeping beggar-thy-neighbour. [But they point out, Obama is completely in bed with protectionist unions.]"

Link follows: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22The++Economist%22+%2B+%22Learning+the+Hard+Way%22&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=

Obama Lied, America Died

Specifically, Obama lied about being "post-partisan" -- he has the most partisan government in American history -- and about being "post-racial" -- he got 96% of the African-American vote in the November election. Those voters saw Obama not as a man but as nothing more than a "Black man."

He also lied about going "line-by-line" to eradicate unnecessary spending. His Stimulus bill contained more than 8,000 earmarks -- pet projects inserted by Representatives and Senators trying to buy votes with unnecessary handouts.

Moreover, he spoke falsely about his commitment to transparency, which he claimed would allow Americans four days to read proposed legislation. That didn't happen with the Stimulus Bill, the largest spending measure in our nation's history.

Yes, the America we all knew and loved has died --or, at least, "gone on life support." The America of freedom, tolerance/respect, and opportunity has now become unrecognizable. The U. S. House has turned into a lynch mob led by America's own version of Dickens' Madame De Farge. The Senate has become a collection of spineless people waving rubber stamps.

People have been asked me about my appearance on BBC Radio from London tomorrow (Sunday). It will be sometime between 1 p.m. (ET) and 1:30 p.m. The BBC has asked me to focus on Obama and the G20 Economic Summit meeting next week in London. Later today (Saturday), I'll put down (below) some of my thoughts on what I might say. (More to follow)

If you'd like to tune it, go to the following: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/schedule/2009/03/29/glance/ Click on the "listen" button up in the right corner. Hope you tune in!

Obama's Stimulus: More "Chicago Politics"

This is a guest column by Sammy Benoit "Yid with a lid," who works tirelessly to bring the truth about Obama to the American people.

http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2009/02/spend-porkulus-designed-to-keep.html

Spend-a-porkulus-->Designed to Keep the Democrats in Power for GENERATIONS

If you listen to the conservative pundits, Obama's Spend-a-porkulus, is all about transfer of the economy from the private sector to the public sector and they are correct. But there is another reason for the bill, one that makes it worthwhile to the liberals to pass a bill which, if it doesn't work, will drive their party out of power as quickly as they took over.

However, if this plan does work, it will keep the most liberal of Democrats in power for generations to come.

This plan represents the "best" of Chicago liberal politics as taught by the first Mayor Daley. Daley's chief means of attaining electoral success was his reliance on local precinct captains, who marshaled and delivered votes on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis.

Many of these precinct captains held patronage jobs with the city, mostly minor posts at low pay. Their job was to dole out favors in the name of the Mayor.

President Obama's Spend-a-porkulus bill which stands before congress will translate Mayor Daley's strategies to a national plane.

Allow me to point out two provisions:"Tax Cuts" Here Obama goes around the middle man the local precinct captains and straight to the new votes. With these tax cuts Obama will be courting favor with the poor by developing a tax cut plan which is essentially welfare. US citizens who do not pay taxes will still be receiving money back from the government.

But guess what, it goes way beyond that because ILLEGAL ALIENS will also be getting this "tax cut" rebate from the government.

ACORN.

Remember Obama's favorite community activist group ACORN? They are the ones who helped the future president "get out the votes" registering Obama voters in two or three counties, or registering fictional and/or dead people.

ACORN is under indictment in 12 states.This spending bill provides them with up to $5.2 billion dollars for their housing oriented activities. At the same time, it empowers the organization to act as President Obama's grass roots precinct captains.

Tying it together.

Now consider the above with some other administration policies. Don't forget that the Democrat's policy on immigration is to grant amnesty to the 12.5 million illegal immigrants. Those are 12.5 million new voters who just received a nice "tax break" and put on the fast track for citizenship by the Democratic Party.

Consider also that the White House will now be extra "involved" with the Census. Lets face it. Behind that announcement was to make sure that the Democratic oriented minority and low income cities/states get counted even if it is at the expense of other areas.

What you are really looking an attempt at shifting congressional seats and electoral votes to areas that may be more likely to vote Democratic. And that was before they got all of that "Free Money" from the stimulus bill.

Folks that is why you need to call your Senators and your Congressional Representative (they will have to vote on it again if it passes the Senate) to tell them to vote no on the Spend-a-porkulus. Not only will it bankrupt the country, but it will help the Democrats maintain power for generations.