117 Responses to “‘all of modern politics in one chart’”


  1. July 10, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    Did you guys says this story floating around last week:

    Father spoke of having Obama adopted
    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2011/07/07/father_spoke_of_having_obama_adopted/?page=1

    • July 10, 2011 at 12:25 pm

      I meant to say “see” the story.

      • July 10, 2011 at 12:50 pm

        Thank you donna. Just read it. Children sense truth. Impossible to guess the extent of PBO’s emotional suffering as a youngster. If such is possible, I love and respect him even more now.

    • July 10, 2011 at 12:38 pm

      I heard about this, but I don’t know what is true or not. The fact is she did not put him up for adoption. She loved her son, and things happen the way it was meant to happen. We elected Barack Obama as our President, and I do not have one regret about it.

    • 5 meta
      July 10, 2011 at 12:43 pm

      I saw the headline but I couldn’t bring myself to read the article. He’s been hurt enough.

      • 6 Dakota
        July 10, 2011 at 2:09 pm

        Neither could I. It’s just more dirt to throw at the President. I tend to agree that the father said that to get the heat off of him.

      • 7 Fred
        July 10, 2011 at 4:21 pm

        neither could I Meta.I think it was on Wednesday or Thursday they showed the picture of the author of the book and she quite honestly looked goofy.
        I hope they do a background check on her to see if she has no affiliation with Murdoch or the birther loonies

    • July 10, 2011 at 12:54 pm

      eh, I think the father was lying to get officials off his back.

    • 10 dotster
      July 10, 2011 at 1:12 pm

      Family and friends of Obama’s mother deny that she would ever have considered this and that they had never heard any mention of this possibility either. They said she and her parents were thrilled with Baby Barack and were devoted to him from the get-go.
      They guessed that this may have been mentioned by Barack Sr. as he was being interviewed by immigration authorities as he was trying to extend his stay another year and was being questioned about another family in Kenya and may have said something like this to ease his way.

      • July 10, 2011 at 5:20 pm

        This little bit of “news” (regardless of its level of truth) does nothing but make those of us who love Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., love him even more.

        I see absolutely nothing here that smears the junior Obama in any way or provides any new insight into the great man that young Barack would ultimately become. While I read the newspaper article about the author’s book on the reckless life of Obama Sr., I have no intention of reading the new book. IMO, President Obama knows he was loved and “wanted” by his mother and his grandparents, and I don’t think this bit of news shakes his confidence of that love in any way.

    • July 10, 2011 at 6:39 pm

      I don’t believe one iota of it. somehow, someone’s gonna remember one African immigrant from 50 years ago?

      sell me the Brooklyn Bridge, why don’t ya.

      ANYTHING to disrespect this President.

      ANYTHING.

  2. 13 desertflower
    July 10, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    Saw this chart earlier. Pretty much all you need to know:)

  3. 14 meta
    July 10, 2011 at 12:28 pm

    Republicans are virtually never bargaining in good faith.

  4. July 10, 2011 at 12:30 pm

    So if we could come up with a reasonable way of balancing the budget, paying off all debt, these Republicans will say not if we have to compromise. Do anyone see what this President have to deal with? The out right foolishness that he has to deal with, from the right and yes the left too. Please everyone continue to pray for our President.

    • July 10, 2011 at 12:54 pm

      As i said before these are the ‘meriKKKan Taliban and they want PBO to be put in his “place” and the rest of us in some form of servitude.
      It ain’t gonna happen.
      “All I have seen teaches me to trust the Creator for all I have not seen.”
      Ralph Waldo Emerson

  5. July 10, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    This is excellent. I think what we are seeing playing out are different points of view. That’s one reason I think of President Obama as such a brilliant person for this particular time. He can see those two perspectives and has his own (which we know) and he walks his own path while doing his work to empower others to change.

    I have several articles of interest about the differences in perspective. This one by Steve Benen in April 2010 seems positively psychic:

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_08/025376.php

    9quote) Paul Krugman had an item on this in April: “On the right, people are for smaller government as a matter of principle — smaller government for its own sake. And so they naturally imagine that their opponents must be their mirror image, wanting bigger government as a goal in itself. But it’s not true. I don’t know any progressives who gloat over increases in the federal payroll or the government share of GDP. Progressives have things they want the government to do — like guaranteeing health care. Size per se doesn’t matter. But people on the right apparently can’t get that.”

    No, they really don’t. The liberal worldview is not about necessarily increasing the size of government or raising taxes; those mechanisms are only valuable insofar as they reach the desired end-point. For the right, it’s the other way around — the ideological goal is the desired end-point.

    I can imagine a scenario in which the president hosts a big meeting with all the congressional leaders, and suggests it’s time to review the economic recovery efforts of the last year and a half, looking closely at what worked and what didn’t, and then working on what to do next. For Dems, the task would be fairly straightforward — let’s do more of what was the most effective, and less of what was the least effective.

    For Republicans, it doesn’t work quite that way — they have ideological ideals that outweigh evidence. GOP leaders could be shown incontrovertible evidence that the most effective methods of creating jobs and improving the economy are aid to states, infrastructure investment, unemployment insurance, and food stamps, and they’d still say tax cuts for millionaires is the better way to go. Why? Because their ideology dictates that government spending is bad, government intervention in the economy is bad, and tax cuts are good. (endquote)

    • 21 mtmarilyn
      July 10, 2011 at 2:22 pm

      Yours is a great explanation. I truly believe that most of the people that vote repub do not understand the full implication of only having a smaller government, not just a smarter government. They think all government is bad and then can’t understand why it affects there SS and Medicare. Low information voters are aided by Fox news and the msm.

  6. July 10, 2011 at 12:57 pm

    that chart explains why the left will never control the party as they wish. I have no idea how compromise became synonymous with weakness. We compromise every single day of our lives.

    • July 10, 2011 at 1:24 pm

      But Ed Schultz would call you a capitulator.

      But in all seriousness I hear you….heck we even compromise while driving on the highways.

      • 24 nospin
        July 10, 2011 at 10:04 pm

        Ed Shultz can sit down somewhere. He was recently suspended by calling a woman out her name and practically balled on national tv when giving an apology for what he said. How was that for capitulation?

    • 25 nathkatun7
      July 10, 2011 at 7:51 pm

      “We compromise every single day of our lives.” Well said gobrooklyn! I absolutely detest rigid people who are not open to reason. I particularly do not consider them strong. Rather, they are like spoiled children who expect to be given everything they want and if they don’t get everything they throw a tantrum.

  7. 26 desertflower
    July 10, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    A MUST READ today…perfection, and a call to action. http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/07/june-jobs-figures-economic-and-job.html

  8. 27 Karen Sr.
    July 10, 2011 at 1:36 pm

    I’m such a compromiser. I have to compromise my need for more sleep with my need to get to work on time. I have to compromise my desire for eating everything that is presented to me with my desire to button my pants. I have to compromise my desire for a bathroom makeover with my desire to get my mortgage paid off before I retire.

    I have to compromise my parental urge to dictate how I want my child to live her life, with my desire to keep the lines of communication open between us. I have to compromise with my co-workers when I have to put a project on hold in order to pitch in on another priority.

    I don’t believe for a second that even a tea party patriot doesn’t understand the need for and the benefits of compromise. I am, however, at this moment compromising my common sense to try to understand them.

    • 28 utaustinliberal
      July 10, 2011 at 1:57 pm

      Exactly! We compromise everyday of our lives in various scenarios. Independents and Democrats seem to grasp that fact and this makes them adults. The GOP at every level from the working man on the street to the congressman/woman are all childish. I wonder what homes and communities they grew up in that they don’t understand COMPROMISE is not a dirty word and it does not make one weak. In order to get things done and get through life in a sane manner, there are certain issues we must compromise on, or we will never be successful in ANY arena.

      • 29 desertflower
        July 10, 2011 at 2:09 pm

        My fondest wish right now, is that the President says that he won’t try and deal with domestic terrorists nor those that are supposed to be adults and doing what’s best for the country, not the party.If nearly ALL of these r’s have signed an oath to someone that was not elected to any position in govt( Grover) then they are NOT upholding the Constitutional oath they all took, they are only adhering to an ideological one. They are treasonous. EVERY.LAST.ONE.

  9. July 10, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    After Afghanistan, panetta is on his way to Iraq to discuss leaving behind a residual American force.
    The only reason is to protect Exxon employees.

    This is a mistake!

    It is politically suicide to do this, albeit logical!
    Don’t know why he is even considering it, let’s hope they decide against it.

    I will keep you posted, we should find out soon!

    • July 10, 2011 at 2:05 pm

      “It is politically suicide to do this, albeit logical!”

      Is that not a contradiction in terms Jovie??

      • July 10, 2011 at 2:12 pm

        No! A lot of mes the president had done things that is logical, tarp, stimulus, Libya, auto bailout, but it was politically dysfunctional!

        • 33 nospin
          July 10, 2011 at 10:08 pm

          Hi Jovie -

          I am not going to get into the fiscal issues you raised although I disagree with your sentiment that those actions were somehow dysfunctional.

          I am more curious to understand why you would say that saving the lives of the people of Libya was dysfunctional regardless of politics.

    • 34 desertflower
      July 10, 2011 at 2:10 pm

      He said that? “We’ll leave behind a force to protect Exxon employees?” Or is that your guess?

      • July 10, 2011 at 2:23 pm

        My guess! Bc why else are we there? So Exxon can get the oil and sell it on the open market?

        But, I just cannot see the Iraqis agreeing to this, they want us out(except for the Kurds)!

    • 36 Karen Sr.
      July 10, 2011 at 4:13 pm

      Wasn’t that the plan all along…to leave a residual force to protect the embassy staff and visiting dignitaries? I thought that was decided long ago. The number I heard was about 5,000.

      • 37 utaustinliberal
        July 10, 2011 at 4:19 pm

        Yep. You’re right. They’re not leaving behind residual forces so that Exxon can get the oil and sell it on the open market. We have residual forces in many countries. Jovie has the WRONG information.

        • July 10, 2011 at 4:29 pm

          Then why are the administration begging the Iraqi government?
          Did you read the article I gave you?

          • 39 utaustinliberal
            July 10, 2011 at 4:39 pm

            You didn’t link any article Jovie and If I were you I would be taking all this panicky “news” that you read on Iraq by so called “journalists” with a pinch of salt. This is not the Bush Administration that went into Iraq for oil. President Obama will not condone Exxon messing around in Iraq. All these speculations are crap as far as I’m concerned. Karen had it right; they already said there would be residual forces left behind to help in protecting dignitaries and embassy staff; NOT STEALING OIL. There may come a time when there won’t be residual forces but until then, this Administration is not interested in aiding any oil company forcefully take another country’s natural resource.

            • July 10, 2011 at 4:51 pm

              American citizens work for Exxon in Iraq. The article I posted down thread some suggests that it is the Iraqi government that is having trouble agreeing to this.
              Jay carney was asked if the Iraqis ask us to stay last week and he said we will consider it!

          • July 10, 2011 at 4:45 pm

            It is customary to leave a detachment of Marines to protect our Embassies. The size is usually determined by whats going on in the region and anticipated requirements in case evacuations are needed.

            • July 10, 2011 at 4:58 pm

              No the state department was going to use private contractors like blackwater:

              http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43339609

              This is an msnbc article. Can’t we discuss issues without calling each other names and insults?

              Thanks-

              Th

              • 43 utaustinliberal
                July 10, 2011 at 5:19 pm

                Jovie, I just read the article and once again you have misrepresented what the Obama Administration stands for. You even went further as to misrepresent what the article states. Nowhere did it say that residual troops are staying behind so that Exxon can take Iraq’s oil and sell it on the open market. That was just some pie in the sky baloney you pulled out of no man’s land. Panetta said he suspects that Iraqi officials will ask for residual troops but he doesn’t know exactly how many may be left behind. There was no talk of private contractors akin to Blackwater. STOP misrepresenting this administration and STOP comparing them to the despicable actions taken by the Bush Administration through Blackwater and Halliburton. If one didn’t click on the link and read the article, they would believe your ERRONEOUS statements that the Obama Administration is in collusion with Exxon to STEAL oil from Iraq. No one is insulting you, but time after time you have written short staticky, panicky statements that have no basis in TRUTH. Same thing you did with your “Bernie Sanders is looking to primary President Obama” statement. Please, I beg of you, REPORT THE CORRECT INFORMATION and don’t add to the msm rumors and vague speculations. Thank you.

              • July 10, 2011 at 5:28 pm

                Sorry Jovie. i don’t believe the State Dept is gonna deviate from their established practices to employee Blackwater. In cases of emergency, Marines have to deal with secret and top secret documents and cryptographic items that the Blackwater chaps are not qualified to handle or see.
                They may keep some BW mercenaries to guard the gate, but that’s it. Don’t ask me how i know.
                As for names and insults, if i offended you, i apologize. However, i’ve been calling ‘em the way i see ‘em for over 60 years. Unfortunately behavior modification is not one of my primary objectives.
                Be well Jovie. i wish you a peaceful voyage thru the rest of your life.

                • July 10, 2011 at 5:36 pm

                  When they say the state department will use private contractors, what do you think that means?

                  Also, I said it was my guess that the troops will be staying behind to secure American workers there, you know, from Exxon.
                  I was there, I fought in that stupid war, I know what was happening there.

                  Do you?

                  • 46 utaustinliberal
                    July 10, 2011 at 5:46 pm

                    Whatever Jovie, whatever. We’re extremely THANKFUL and APPRECIATIVE for your service, but you aren’t the only ex-soldier that visits this website. Just because the lot of us didn’t fight in a war doesn’t mean we aren’t accurately informed as to what goes on. To keep trying to rationalize with you is like beating one’s head against a rock.

                    • July 10, 2011 at 5:52 pm

                      Apparently you are misinformed. This administration is asking to leave some troops behind and it is not my fault.

                      Got it?

                    • 48 utaustinliberal
                      July 10, 2011 at 6:06 pm

                      Whatever Jovie, whatever. Your’re apparently the know it all master of everything.

                  • July 10, 2011 at 6:10 pm

                    I don’t care what “THEY” say. Suggests you read my comment again. You also implied that your participation in those hostilities gives you a leg up on how things are run.
                    i was in the Persian Gulf when Iran was one of our allies, Beirut when it was peaceful, Karachi when it was a tourist trap. i did Shore Patrol in Port Said and Suez. i was in Rome when Cassius Clay and Wilma Rudolph won gold medals(look up the year). i served on patrols off the coast of Formosa(Taiwan) and Indo-China. Ever heard of the Bay of Pigs or the Cuban Missile Crisis? How about Tet in Vietnam?
                    I guess by your standards i don’t know whats happening, i was too busy watching my back as the first AA Electronics Technician in the USN, the first AA instructor in Great Lakes of that discipline.
                    No, i don’t know what happened in your world and you don’t know what happened in mine……….BE BLESSED!

                    • 50 utaustinliberal
                      July 10, 2011 at 6:22 pm

                      Thank you sooooo much for your service Yardam. We’re EXTREMELY grateful. Love , love, love your comments. Your comment here is filled with CLARITY and NO NONSENSE CALM instead of MINDLESS PANICKING. Once again thank you for your service and I am most appreciative of the fact that YOU seem to understand that just because one did not serve in a war, doesn’t mean he/she is not INFORMED and just beacuse one did serve in a war doesn’t mean he/she is INFORMED and has a so called leg up on how things are run.

                    • July 10, 2011 at 6:32 pm

                      Now I know how askew feels! Ok, back to cheerleading.

                      No discussing any issues. Nope. Either we cheerlead or we are not welcome on the pro Obama blogs.

                      Wow!

            • 52 utaustinliberal
              July 10, 2011 at 5:05 pm

              Thank you Yardam. This is what Karen and I are trying to explain to Jovie. I love ya Jovie but you have got to CALM DOWN! You must not believe everything you read hook, line and sinker. Chipsticks has already shown us that so called journalists sprinkle misinformation amidst their so called facts. They will write ANYTHING to discredit the Obama Administration’s successful efforts in Iraq. I repeat: THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT AND WILL NOT KOWTOW TO HOSTILE DEMANDS AND THEY WILL NEVER ALLOW EXXON TO STEAL OIL; ANOTHER COUNTRY’S NATURAL RESOURCE. It might behoove you Jovie, to write complete and well thought out sentences not these short staticky bursts of panicky statements. It does no good to you or anyone else.

              • July 10, 2011 at 5:44 pm

                Jay carney was asked about this last week and he said if they ask us we will consider it!

                Now, it might not happen, but why are we pushing to have our troops stay?

                I will tell you why? Bc it is not as stable and the Iraq government is not ready to take over and they are concerned about Iran!

                Ok?

                • 54 utaustinliberal
                  July 10, 2011 at 5:50 pm

                  Well duh! You just answered your own meandering question. Of course the reason we’ll have to leave residual troops behind is so that Iran doesn’t sell nuclear weapons to our enemies and also to protect embassy staff, dignitaries and the Iraqi people; NOT and I repeat NOT SO EXXON CAN STEAL OIL! Stop your unfounded guesses and SPECULATIONS. They are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!

                  • July 10, 2011 at 5:59 pm

                    Again- state department was going robust private contractors for additional security in Iraq. Until, the Iraqi top general said they are not ready to take over and hopes that America would stay. The Iraqi top general also said we cannot secure our borders. He went onto say that they need more trainers to beef up the armed forces, even though we have trained over 650k Iraqi police and military. Still, the parlient needs 70 percent to approve a new SOFA(kind of informed aren’t I).,..
                    My question is: we should make them pay for everything if we stay?

              • July 10, 2011 at 7:01 pm

                BTW utaustinliberal i was in combat in ’67. Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club. :-)

      • 58 nospin
        July 10, 2011 at 10:09 pm

        yes it was the plan all along.

  10. July 10, 2011 at 2:10 pm

    Here’s the problem I have with that chart. It only reflects people who identify with a party. Not the independents. If we really want a clear picture of how much Americans want their Congress to compromise, then poll them, too.

  11. 61 mtmarilyn
    July 10, 2011 at 2:16 pm

    I am watching the end of the Women’s soccer team playing Brasil in the World Cup Finals. The US women just beat Brasil in overtime penalty kicks. What a game. The US women won!!!!! This is huge, totally unexpected. Yes We Can!

  12. July 10, 2011 at 2:24 pm

    I interpret this chart as showing why Republicans feel that they can set whatever terms they like and expect Democrats to do the compromising/moving in their direction. But when all respondents are considered, they align closer to Democrats leadership style. This seems to empower the Rs to make the demands. But it also empowers Ds to be both principled and govern more effectively IMO.

  13. July 10, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    Is sanders campaignig against the president? I am serious! He just released a statement that said the presidents proposal will leave 250k people impoverished.

    I think sanders is testing his support, testing the waters. He gives interviews almost daily, slamming the president.

    And then almost two weeks ago MM endorsed sanders for president!

    I hope I am wrong.

    • 65 meta
      July 10, 2011 at 2:37 pm

      Testing a 1″ kiddie pool? Fat chance.

      • 66 Dee
        July 10, 2011 at 2:42 pm

        Sanders is up fo re-election next year. He is trying to raise money and that is all. Stop panic.

      • July 10, 2011 at 2:43 pm

        I know he does not have a chance, but he is out there always critical of the president and the pl loves him.
        My guess, he is starting to believe what the msm is telling him, that he should do it!

        You follow?

        • 69 Dee
          July 10, 2011 at 2:56 pm

          He is trying to raise money for reelection. That is all. Some dems are critical of Obama and they are not think about primaying Obama. Please stop speculating.

          • July 10, 2011 at 2:59 pm

            Dee you are speculating about him raising money for re election in Vermont. Vermont? Really?
            He has that race in the bag by 25 points…

            • 71 Dee
              July 10, 2011 at 3:05 pm

              He still needs the money. He not primarying Obama .Let it go.

              • 72 utaustinliberal
                July 10, 2011 at 5:21 pm

                Thank you Dee for interjecting sense into the panicky no basis in truth statements Jovie keeps making. Please people CALM THE HECK DOWN.

          • 73 hopefruit2
            July 10, 2011 at 3:08 pm

            But who is his opponent in Vermont? Shouldn’t that be the individual that he criticizes in his attempts to raise money for reelection? Why would he be running against President Obama when he has an opponent to run against?

        • 74 hopefruit2
          July 10, 2011 at 3:00 pm

          Let him delude himself with the PL’s rantings and watch him go the way of Alan Grayson.

          • July 10, 2011 at 3:03 pm

            I agree, but he is not in a swing district like Grayson was. Vermont is the bluest state in the nation, he has the senators spot for as long as he wants it!

            • 76 hopefruit2
              July 10, 2011 at 3:16 pm

              Grayson didn’t even run again his Teabag opponent. He ran against Obama just so that the Teabagger could win. These jealous Democrats aind Independents would rather see a Republican in office than the President having the congressional support to be successful at governing this country. The fact that we do not even know who Sanders’ opponents are in Vermont is problematic. Based on what you’ve just told us Jovie, It seems like Sanders is trying to give Vermontians a reason to dislike the President even more than they dislike his opponents for senate.

              • July 10, 2011 at 3:38 pm

                You say it a lot more artfully than I do.
                What worries me is every democrat for himself routine.
                And the pl pushing sanders to do something that would embarrass him and hurt the president!

                • 78 Anonymous
                  July 10, 2011 at 4:39 pm

                  Saunders has a lot of integrity and is an old time progressive. He has often taken a progressive position, but backs the President. I don’t see him as trying to primary the President at all.

                  • 79 utaustinliberal
                    July 10, 2011 at 5:22 pm

                    Thank you Anon for interjecting SENSE and CALM amid mindless PANICKING.

                    • July 10, 2011 at 6:05 pm

                      Everybody is so hyper sensitive that you cannot bring up any issues , I believe askew said the same thing and you all ran her off the blog.

                      I still support the presudent, I am just saying there are signals that are being sent that are not ver comforting.

                      That is all-

                    • 81 utaustinliberal
                      July 10, 2011 at 6:09 pm

                      Whatever Jovie. Whatever. Apparently you are the know it all master.

                • 82 Nellcote
                  July 10, 2011 at 6:04 pm

                  Sanders isn’t a Dem. He’s a Socialist that votes with the Dems. There’s a difference.

        • July 10, 2011 at 5:53 pm

          Yes Sanders have alot of mouth, but he knows better . Don’t even go down that road.

  14. 86 dotster
    July 10, 2011 at 2:43 pm

    Interesting post on the nutty Bachmanns. Writer questions why reporters are ignoring the obvious and failing to question known facts about their lives. Me too, especially since they are all busy promoting Michelle Bachmann as a legitimate candidate for the Presidency of the United States, which a few short months ago would have been unthinkable to all and still is to the sane people.
    http://beeryblog.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/michele-bachmann-exposes-23-minors-to-possible-pedophile/

    • July 10, 2011 at 4:19 pm

      I hope they treat her with kids gloves for now, because I want her to go stealth into the primaries so that she and the liar Romeny can fight it out while tearing down the republican house of cards.

      Imo…..the longer she stays relevant, the more damage she will do in the repulican nomination process. It will be something like the Hatfields (moderate repulicans) and McCoys (The Tea Party Patriots).

  15. July 10, 2011 at 2:57 pm

    Jim Messina and Rahman Emanuel headline Obama fundraiser:

    http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/07/rahm_emanuel_headlining_obama_.html

    Sounds good!

  16. July 10, 2011 at 3:15 pm

    House Democrats:

    http://www.dems.gov/press/larson-statement-on-debt-limit-negotiations

    Larson Statement On Debt Limit Negotiations
    July 10, 2011
    HARTFORD, CT – House Democratic Caucus Chairman John B. Larson (CT) released the following statement tonight on the debt limit negotiations:

    “The American people get it. They are weary of the theater and the political drama because they understand that it is their pensions, their savings, their mortgages and their 401Ks that the Republicans are playing with. This shouldn’t be about who’s going to be the next President or who’s going to control Congress, it should be about who’s going to protect their savings, their mortgages and their 401Ks in this crisis. Republicans continue to hold in disregard Americans true needs: jobs and financial security.

    “For the sake of the nation, it’s time to forget the politics and vote a clean debt ceiling increase, as was done seven times for President Bush.”

  17. 91 halo
    July 10, 2011 at 3:36 pm

    Tim Geithner did GREAT on today’s MTP!

  18. 92 Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    Hi,

    I am jacqui from Trinidad and Tobago. I love your president very much so I lurk here every day. Sometimes I have to remind myself that I am not an American because I know more about what is going on in your politics than what is going on in my country.

    I pray for your president and his family each day. I am sure that he will get a second term

    Jacqui

    • 93 utaustinliberal
      July 10, 2011 at 3:52 pm

      Hey Jacqui thanks for visitng and thanks for your prayers and well wishess. Hope you leave more comments. :)

    • July 10, 2011 at 4:08 pm

      Hiya Jacqui, thank you for visiting! We have lots of good people from the Caribbean here, so thrilled to have another T&T visitor ;-)

    • 95 desertflower
      July 10, 2011 at 4:18 pm

      Hi Jacqui…welcome. We love our President, too….you can be an “unofficial” American! You probably know more than most Americans that are SUPPOSED to know and pay attention:) You don’t have to lurk anymore….come join the conversation. We would enjoy another perspective from outside the country, I’m sure.

    • 96 makesense4tulips
      July 10, 2011 at 4:24 pm

      HEy Jacqui from Trinidad. Welcome and stop by more often. its about to get exciting here in the states.

    • 97 Fred
      July 10, 2011 at 4:25 pm

      welcome Jacqui :)

  19. 98 GGail
    July 10, 2011 at 4:01 pm

    Saw this article over at TOAITR and found it to be amusing: Smilingl8y

    http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/07/08/it-sucks-to-be-john-boehner/

  20. 101 Me4obama
    July 10, 2011 at 4:31 pm

    ” it sucks to be Boner” Booooo, Hooooo. He deserves what is coming to him. It’s Good to be President Barack Hussein Obama, he has never bended over to please the filthy PLs and that’s the best decision he has ever made in his political life. He is a pragmatic Man who thinks on his own and makes decisions on his own whether we like it or not. He is my man. Literally.

  21. 102 Betsy
    July 10, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    Does anybody know when we will hear some news about what’s going on? President Obama is meeting with them at 6pm EST? I’m in Cali, so that’s 3pm, my time, so does anyone know if there will be a statement, and when????

    • 103 utaustinliberal
      July 10, 2011 at 4:42 pm

      The whitehouse might release a statement after the meeting has come to a conclusion. At that time they’ll let us know if both sides reached a deal, are close to reaching a deal, and the next move if no deal or compromise was agreed upon. The appointed time as to when the statement will be released, depends on what hour the meeting is concluded.

    • 104 Me4obama
      July 10, 2011 at 4:45 pm

      Betsy am not sure when we will here from the president but am pretty sure we are going to pull an all nighter here at TOD so get some snacks out, a bag of chips or popcorn and enjoy the night ride.
      OT, since you are in CA do you know if Kate and William have left the country back to Britain? I have been boycotting my Tele because Iam sick of hearing about them.

      • 105 Fred
        July 10, 2011 at 4:47 pm

        last I heard they were painting on Skid Row :roll:

      • 106 GGail
        July 10, 2011 at 7:21 pm

        I too have had my fill of this parade. I refuse to acknowledge them even though I live in the midst of this exaggerated madness. So Much Ado About NOTHING. G’bye Duke & Duchess!

    • 107 cat48
      July 10, 2011 at 4:56 pm

      He told them to “dress comfortably” so it will probably be late since Rusty/Gop pussied out on the BFD Deal heh

  22. 108 Fred
    July 10, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    Papa’s in the house! welcome back Sir :D .Stay the course.You are doing the right thing for the country and we are with you.Tell the DemoWimps to grow a spine or half a ball and stand with you

    • 110 utaustinliberal
      July 10, 2011 at 5:28 pm

      I saw that on MTP. I bet Rachel won’t call him out and say he hates gay people or wants to set them back a century. Pawlenty is a coward. He wouldn’t even call out Bachmann for saying the Obama Adminisration is a “gangsta” government. He just said he also uses flame like rhetoric. He also wouldn’t definitively call out Romney for bashing healthcare reform while passing universal healthcare in Massachusetts. After watching his interview, in my opinion, TPaw is DONE. Hopefully Bachmann gets closer to Romney in the polls so they can duke it out and air all their dirty laundry and President Obama sweeps in like the calm tide he is.

  23. 111 gd4obama
    July 10, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    Hi Jacqui welcome! You’re from T&T and I’m from Grenada, so we’re neighbors. How cool is that?

  24. July 10, 2011 at 5:50 pm

    I uses to get the same pushback at ofa, whenever somebody says that we need to discuss something that does not sit well with people, I would get attacked.

    And then we would wait awhile, it would come true and I pissed a lot of people off by saying I told you so!

    Again I am nor saying this will happen, but he has been floated by Michael Moore, then Ed shultz said to not vote for the president and the recent freakout by everyone in the pl! Some people may think that they ate setting up a primary, maybe it is what corporate msm wants!

    That is all.

    • 113 Dee
      July 10, 2011 at 6:19 pm

      Micheal Moore and Ed Shultz? LOL

      • 114 utaustinliberal
        July 10, 2011 at 7:08 pm

        I know right? The fact that the info was spread by Michael Moore and Ed Schultz and is being repeated here as empirical evidence is not only LOL. It’s freaking ridiculous.

  25. July 10, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    They told there audience to stay home in 2010 and they did!


Comments are currently closed.

@BarackObama

@WhiteHouse

@FLOTUS

@blog44

@PeteSouza

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email.

@TheObamaDiary

@NerdyWonka

@DaRiverZkind

@Lib_Librarian

@amk4obama

@zizii2

Categories

Blog Stats

  • 24,771,324 hits

Archives

WH Flickr

P041514PS-0609

P040114PS-0077

P030814PS-0009

P030314PS-0912

P030114PS-0314

P022114PS-0088

P080213PS-0002

P080513PS-0271

P080613PS-0446

P080613PS-1112

More Photos

%d bloggers like this: