True but, there are things a president can do to make a situation better or worse. At the end of the day, rightly or wrongly, the president bears the blame or gets the credit. To ask people not to blame Obama for this economy now that he's had a year to fix things is like asking people not to blame Bush for the state of the nation while he was in office. Throw in partisan bickering to describe things as better or worse than they were and you can paint anyone as a devil or angel. Right now, those yelling "Devil" at Obama are being given lots of ammunition by employment numbers, the ballooning debt/deficit, and his own policy decisions/focus.
Excellent! 10 years ago, I went to work for a semiconductor company where I took over a multi-million dollar product line that, due to the previous manager's incompetence, was losing 15% per year. A word here: the words "it's not my fault" or blaming your predecessor is equivalent to admitting you're in over your head. "Blame is not a solution" was the mantra. My first week on the job, I was one of many that had to give a presentation to a room of 130 managers on the state of the product lines. Most of the 130 people didn't know me and didn't know I was new, so I was fresh meat for political infighting. As I showed them the history horrible sales figures I had inherited for my product line, my exact words were, "I didn't create these figures, but I'm now responsible for them". In an atmosphere where people were scrambling for cover and eating each other's young, I discovered something amazing - in large companies, you can get incredible respect and support for your plans if you are willing to accept all the risk and take personal responsibility for success or failure. I see no one in Washington taking responsibility for the economy. In the end, it falls to Nancy Pelosi, Charlie Rangel, and President Obama (in that order) to fix it. Blame is not a solution. (BTW, I turned the product line around in eight months) Well, it's not "you guys", it's Zibby. He doesn't understand the United States system of government, the weaknesses of the Executive Branch, or the barest basics of economics. The economy is the responsibility of the Speaker of the House!
Corwin, you have no future in politics. Give it up. You needed to blame your predecessor, promise the world, sell at the same level as your predecessor(or slightly lower) while sending any excess business to your competition in exchange for a kickback, some of which you could have used to pay off your boss and secure your employment(maybe even a raise, or expanded responsibility).
The fact is Obama (and Congress) have little to do with the operation of the market, whether the public wants to think they do or not. Most of the policies that affect the market have already been there; most of whatever role the government plays in the market is due to the system, not the temporary people who work for it. Obama does not manage the economy like you once managed a product line, that's a myth and the more it is perpetuated, the more that role will be assumed; the more presidents will manage the economy in the future to meet the expectations of you guys who believe they should be the ones shaping the market. If you're going to blame Obama for this, you need to put equal blame on Bush.
Another move back up... 54% today. He's been in the 50% to 56% range now for a long, long time. I think at this point either 57% or 49% could be significant (although not necessarily) otherwise it's pretty much the status quo as far as his approval goes. I'm hoping for a jump up because I think it could help give him the political clout he may need to help get health care reform done.
The silly flailing about of a man with no argument. Of course you'll try to pretend it was just a joke and that you were taunting. But we can all see through that. The only people trying desperately to paint him as a failure are the people embarrassed by the Bush administration. I feel really bad for you guys but don't embarrass yourself more.
Well, if you take a look at the polls, you'll see that it's the independents, and the people that voted for Obama, that are disappointed in him. Look, hopefully you voted for Obama because you wanted to see him fix the economy, right? Is that a good enough reason for you to mindlessly act like, "my President, right or wrong"?
Oh I'm not all hugs and kisses happy with him either. I think the way he's sitting on the sidelines and not pushing healthcare through isn't change I can believe in. But don't worry guys we just had a referendum on his presidency right? What does that mean? Why it means a bunch of those independents and democratic voters that are disappointed in him really stuck it to him by..... electing 2 more Democrats to the house. The only 2 national seats up for grabs this election cycle both went Democrat symbolizing the death knell for the Democrats. Wait what am I talking about that doesn't even make any sense. I should be letting the Republicans say this. Go on guys Hint: What you guys should probably do is boast about the 2 meaningless Governorships you won that aren't even in a position where they might need to make an appointment in the foreseeable future..
If Pelosi/Rangal/Obama would just fix unemployment, that's what I want. What is the published unemployment rate now - is it 10.2%? And "Real Unemployment" is actually around 17%? And now the Democrats are passing a health care bill that's going to balloon the debt and thereby give to China full ownership of the USA - because China, who now owns 24% of the US debt and will soon own more, owns a controlling interest in the USA. From the same people that brought you the Tiananmen Square massacre. As of this year, foreign governments have slowed or stopped investment in the US dollar. This is bad history in the making. Face it, we're gone back 230 years. The USA used to be a colony of Great Britain, now we're a colony of China. If this massively bloated health care bill passes, we'll soon be a country of healthy homeless people. BTW, I've heard that the scary reason why not all of the "stimulus" (ha!) money has been spent is that, so far, Obama hasn't found enough foreign governments willing to finance the debt. Back in January 2009, China warned Obama that they were unwilling to continue to finance deficit spending and that the USA needs to cut the budget. This is the next-to-last step before federal bankruptcy.
Only partially true. In order for everyone to be healthy, there would have to be enough money to pay for doctors, equipment, and drugs for everyone. Like many other countries with socialized medicine, you'll see cuts across the board on spending. After all, the tax payers are paying for it, and they want to keep costs down. It will mean less high end equipment like, PET/CT scanners, in hospitals. Since the Govt. will set doctor pay, you will see less people becoming doctors, and more headed to banking school so they can make big bucks without risk and get a Govt. handout on top. This, of course, means less doctors per patient which means longer waits. Existing Top Docs who want to keep making money will go entirely private and get paid in cash(become doctors to the rich). The C-Students of the medical industry will be left with sub standard equipment to operate on the poor and shrinking middle class, but the service will be "Free"*. Anyway, what I am getting at is that we may be a country of homeless people afterwards, but to say we will be healthy is reaching a bit. You should look at the infant mortality rate in some of the 37 countries which are rated "higher" than the U.S. by the WHO. Those statistics are a lot more telling than how people answered on a questionnaire about their "satisfaction" with their country's health care system. *Free not-withstanding raises in taxes to pay for the costs in inefficient govt. overhead in managing the whole thing.
I'm going to make it a point to look that up. BTW, I popped into my doctor's office today spent five minutes asking him about what he felt the government is doing to health care. My doc has been practicing medicine for about 30 years, and I always enjoy talking to him. He basically reaffirmed what Obamanation wrote - if health care is run by, or totally controlled by, the government, health care for the lower- and middle-class WILL become substandard. He also said that health care would become "diluted" for everyone, regardless of income.
Ah. So, are you seriously telling me that I should take your uninformed and poliitcally-biased opinion over my doctor's 30-years of medicine? Is this what gworld is telling us? That partisan politics is more important than enjoying good medicine? That doctors will no longer be graded on their medical knowledge, but instead doctors will be rated based upon their allegiance to the Democratic Party??? Is that right????? Thanks, gworld, for showing us how cold and uncompassionate you really are.
From what I can tell, having heard the opinions of a fair number of practicing and retired physicians, even they can't agree on it. So, you might want to get "a second opinion..." The current bill passed out of the House is a travesty. The insurance companies couldn't have done much better if they had written the thing themselves. As Mia pointed out, regulation of the health insurance industry is a principal piece of fixing the current broken system.
Hmm, OK I wanna be clear on this. You're saying that you want him to fix unemployment. So when unemployment drops under his presidency he can count on your support and praise here in this forum? It's his fault now, so it will be his fault when it recovers too I suppose. Please scary conservatives don't "corner me with facts" or anything. I'm tired of running away like Mia says we liberals and progressives do.
Your doctor didn't give a medical opinion, he tried to be a fortune teller and tell you what happens to medical practice standards if a new government bill passes. His fortune telling had no basis in reality and it was a typical uninformed opinion which is very common among American right wingers. Have you or your doctor ever heard about the part of the world which is called Europe?
Yes! If you look at my very first post in this thread, you'll see that I wrote "I think Obama is a good man surrounded by a corrupt party". And later, I wrote, "Although I didn't expect Obama to keep all of his campaign promises, I was still optimistic when he got elected that he would do the right things." if you othered to look, you'd see more posts by me starting in February supporting Obama. Yes! The problem you are having, GeorgeB, is that you need to be able to paint anyone that disagrees with Obama as a right-wing biased lunatic, right? You totally freak out when someone who was initially optimistic about Obama (Like Me!) starts criticizing Obama (Like Me!) because you can't handle Obama criticism from someone that refuses to belong to one of the two cults of political parties!!! Please don't call me a conservative. I know my doctor (he's a Democrat - I live in liberal Boston!). He has 30 years medical experience and I've met him face-to-face. You, gworld, are a faceless person on a web forum. For you to judge and condemn my doctor in the manner you have chosen is outrageously dishonest. It goes to prove that, for you, it's not about good medicine, is it? That partisan politics is more important to you than enjoying good medicine, right? And, you're gonna have to act like an adult and explain your comment about Europe. Yes, I've heard about Europe. If you've got a point to make, then make it instead of acting evasive. But first, did you see last night's Frontline episode on PBS where they talked about the problems with all the health-care systems of Europe? Only two countries have gotten universal health care right, and neither of them are in Europe!