[Iran Press TV] US President Barack B.O. Obama loses his cool at an election rally in Connecticut, amid reports suggesting his party is mulling whether he should serve a second term.
"Excuse me ... excuse me. You've been appearing at every rally we've been doing. And we're funding global AIDS (prevention). And the other side is not. So I don't know why you think this is a useful strategy to take," USA Today quoted Obama as saying to AIDS activists who interrupted his speech on Saturday, UPI reported.
A group of activists heckled the US president over funding for the global fight against AIDS, as he began his speech for the "Moving America Forward" rally in Bridgeport in the South Side Hyde Park neighborhood.
"We're not going to be able to do anything unless we get the economy fixed, unless we can put people back to work, unless folks feel more confident about the future," Obama finally regained control and continued with his speech.
The Democratic Party and the US incumbent president are facing heavy losses in the second mid-term elections just days away.
Most polls show Republicans are set to gain control of the House and most governorships across the United States. Republicans are expected to win over 50 seats.
Meanwhile, ...back at the ranch... public opinion polls show Obama's popularity is hitting new lows. The Democrats themselves are also divided over whether he should be challenged within the party for a second term.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I thought that was one of W's unheralded achievements - increasing aids funding? But I wouldn't expect the One who thought W was Satan to know that.
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/01/2010 6:40 Comments ||
Top||
#2
You're exactly right, Bobby. In many parts of Africa, W is considered a hero for his anti-AIDs efforts.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
11/01/2010 7:31 Comments ||
Top||
#3
W Bush drove the left into a froth for several reasons. First, he strongly increased the amount of not just money, but guidance going to Africa to fight AIDS. Second, the big principles of this guidance were an emphasis on treatment, monogamy, and religious faith. Not condoms.
And third, it apparently was successful. It resulted in a serious reduction in new infections, and got a lot more treatment to those already infected.
Then, when Bono blurted out that Bush had done more for Africa than all previous presidents combined, it sent the left into a blind, dog stroke rage. They almost destroyed Bono until he quick stepped out of that, and still savaged him long after.
#5
And one more thing, 'Moose: Bush made the money available as grants, not loans, thus making sure that the African countries weren't further impoverished. He made sure the American embassy staff monitored how and where the cash was spent, and he demanded results. Of course, he was a businessman deep down so he understood the need for these things.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/01/2010 9:25 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Obama loses his cool at an election rally in Connecticut,
BO has far too much ego and arrogance. He is becoming unraveled. Two years of trying to shove unwanted legislation off on the citizens, continually running for office, reading TOTUS speeches, empty promises, and believing your own BS, can be a little wearing and stressful. The realization of not being the "ONE" can be a let down.
[Iran Press TV] A recent survey conducted by Gallup Polls has revealed that Republicans have a four percent lead over the Democrats in the upcoming midterm election.
The survey, which was published on October 25, suggests that 48 percent of registered voters will vote for the Republican camp while 44 percent favor Democrats.
Independent voters are now substantially more likely to support the GOP candidate of their district, rather than the Democratic candidate.
Partisan loyalty has not changed substantially as over 90 percent of likely Democratic and Republican voters continue to say they will vote for their party's candidate.
Gallup estimates that the Republicans need a 52 percent share of the national House vote in order to win control of the House of Representatives.
The Republicans appear to be well on track to secure a majority as the survey suggested a 14 percent margin in favor of the Republicans in a low-turnout scenario.
Tuesday's midterm election is expected to bear a big blow to the Democratic camp as President Barack B.O. Obama's approval rating has greatly declined in recent weeks.
A survey released in mid-October by Gallup showed that 54 percent of US voters believe Obama does not deserve a second term in office while only 39 percent would support his re-election.
Obama's average approval rating has declined in each quarter since he took office last year and has established a new low in the most recent quarter.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
[Iran Press TV] US President Barack B.O. Obama has warned that if rival Republicans win in the upcoming midterm elections, the progress he made in his two years in office will go downhill.
All the progress made in the past two years "can be rolled back," if the Democratic voters do not have a considerable turnout, Obama told hundreds of campaign volunteers at Temple University in Philadelphia on Saturday.
The situation for Democrats "is difficult here in Pennsylvania, it is difficult all across the country," the News Agency that Dare Not be Named quoted him as saying.
The US president further called on Democrats to "defy the conventional wisdom" that foresees huge wins for the Grand Old Party (GOP) -- as the Republicans are traditionally known.
"There's no doubt this is a tough election, because we have been through an incredibly difficult time as a nation," Obama added.
The US president's plummeting popularity has restricted his ability to save Democratic candidates and if the Republicans take over the House they can hinder his legislative agenda, pundits say.
A recent survey conducted by AP and Knowledge Networks reported that a quarter of those who voted for Obama in 2008 are defecting to the Republican Party or considering voting against the Democrats in the upcoming elections.
US midterm elections are scheduled for November 2, as politicians compete for all the 435 seats of the House of Representatives as well as 37 Senate seats.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
To progress means to proceed in a certain direction. Despite Progressive assumptions, there is no guarantee that movement is in the correct direction.
Here in Wisconsin, Ron Johnson, a businessman who has never before run for public office, appears poised to pick up a Senate seat for Republicans, defeating Democratic legend Russell Feingold and becoming the first GOP senator elected from the state since 1986.
Johnson has been ahead of Feingold for months; the RealClearPolitics average of polls puts the margin between seven and eight percentage points. In this time of voter unhappiness with Barack B.O. Obama and the Democratic agenda, Johnson is on the leading edge of what Wisconsin state Republican chairman Reince Priebus calls "the biggest D-to-R shift of any state in the country." And he's doing it as a businessman and would-be citizen legislator running on an elegantly simple platform.
"I've got two major items in my platform," Johnson tells a group of Chamber of Commerce members gathered for lunch at the Best Western hotel here in Neenah. "I want to repeal health care [reform], and I want to bring every ounce of my accounting background, my business background, my passion, my dedication, my seriousness of purpose, to do everything I possibly can do to control federal spending and debt, to limit the size and scope of the federal government."
A lifelong Republican, Johnson was appalled by the big-spending measures Obama and Democratic leaders enacted in the spring and summer of 2009. But it was the campaign for national health care that pushed Johnson into action. As he watched Senate Democratic leaders desperately making deals with Ben Cornhusker Kickback Nelson, Mary Landrieu, and others to win support of a health care measure the public opposed, something in Johnson just snapped. "When they passed that bill on Christmas Eve, with the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase, that was the final straw," he tells the Chamber of Commerce.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Seems like this is happening in a lot of places.
#1
Read the whole thing. While the Dem is still a liberal, I'd call him a common-sense lib, and his advice should be taken by trunks, as well:
"Governing isn't as easy as you think. Many of you have taken pledges that are contradictory to balance the budget and cut taxes, for example. You must be honest about the numbers, since our annual deficit now exceeds all discretionary spending combined. If you set as your goal to roll back the size of government, you have an obligation to answer the tough questions and show real courage, not just appeal to ideology. Treat the voters like adults."
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/01/2010 6:37 Comments ||
Top||
#2
He was, indeed, a dumb-ass. He fell for the old "Sure I'll respect you in the morning" routine. This is what counts for character these days? No wonder we're in the trouble we are.
#3
The central problem here, for either party, is "party discipline".
In the W Bush term, the Republicans were savaged because he tried to go back to a 19th Century presidential philosophy of letting congress direct domestic affairs, and they ran hog wild. They had zero discipline.
Then Pelosi's problem was that she interpreted party discipline as "The dictatorship of the Pelosi". And that was ruinous. But she had it half right.
The party structure has to reach a strong consensus before it moves. Not just the whim of the leader, but the solid backing of the "structural majority", if not the actual majority. Those with chutzpah. Then once this consensus is reached, *that* is when party discipline comes into play, and deviation from the game plan is crushed.
Think of a football team. First the team knows the play, and then the quarterback calls the play. Anyone not following the play at that point needs to be benched.
#4
I'll add that there are levels of discipline. If the structural majority is unified, everybody has to follow. If some of them don't agree, then there needs to be haggling, and permitting some deviation without punishment.
And if there is no consensus, others have to be given a chance to rally their ideas in a floor vote, if for no other reason, than to show their supporters that they tried.
#5
In theory taxes can be cut and the budget kept in the black by cutting the level of spending.
Many instances, in general, the largest expense is wages. Especially with retirement benifits.
So start looking at actual wages and necessity of department and start by cutting there. It may risk a France size union pout and shutdown government for a bit...but that may be more feature than bug.
So there in outline I have cut or at least froze tax levels, balanced the budget, and reduced the size of government.
Its about getting people in office who know how things get done instead of the hand wave make it so. There are Peter Principles everywhere, but it is the liberals who seem to like to get loud about how smart they are, figure a way to get in charge, make a royal mess of things, blame somebody else and leave.
Republicans better get it together as well. They are going to find a lot of damned if do damned if don't situations, so might as well do the right thing; people are more likely to suffer some hardships if it is for a good reason and it fixes the problem.
#6
I doubt there's a single government agency that isn't duplicating the work of at least one other, and in many cases, multiple others. There needs to be a thorough review of what the government does, who does it, and how it's done, then start combining, cutting, trimming, splicing, and deleting unneeded agencies, offices, levels, and bureaucracies. If the unions raise a stink, nationalize them and make them meet military discipline. I guarantee you, 90% of them CAN'T, and four or five percent of those left over WON'T. After that, fire (as in, discharge, for unsuitability or for no need) at will. It'll take a strong, disciplined leadership, which I doubt we'll see for ten to twenty years yet, but it WILL happen. It's the only hope for our nation.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/01/2010 18:55 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
