Obama campaign office staff lacks diversity

I've thought this is as well and if the Republicans had a moderate that had the interest of the people at heart I'd vote for them because unfortunately the racism in this country is deep that people would rather starve and see all opportunity leave this country than let a black man save it. I agree that every president suffers opposition but not such clear unreasonable and racially motivated discontent. They just say no without any viable options, even if gives them what they want its never enough.
This country would have been better served by John Edwards but we allow sex scandals to ruin our perceptions of how well a person does their job.

 

Edwards has no one to blame but himself. He was cheating on his wife that was dying of cancer for Christ sakes.

 

Probably more than 2 percent lol.

 

Bush was perfectly faithful and Clinton cheated on his wife multiple times what's your point?
If you right wingers are indeed concerned with how this country is ran you wouldn't be hung up on this trivial nonsense. Be concerned with who is best for the job and will do the best job not just someone who panders to outdated religious ideology. I could care less if he put her out on the street when she had cancer. That's not my concern, I want a president who serves the interest of the country.

 

by serving the interest of the country, you are also serving the interest of the people that reside in it

maybe it's time for you to put on a uniform and learn a thing or two

 

as long the imperative is to go to elaborate lengths to prove that Mr. Obama is not a "black racist"/militant or afrocentric "quota" man, you will see this.. it's stupid, and ridiculous, and largely panders to the reactionary impulses of the (largely conservative leaning "independent") middle and the heavily-conservative right..

..we already saw in the Van Jones and Shirley Sherrod case what happens when black department workers are targeted.. no support..

 

Oh ya I remember that. Obama and the NAACP threw her ass under the bus with the quickness and wound up with egg on their faces. They looked even dumber when Glen Beck of all people spoke up in her defense on his crazy ass show (not out of the goodness of his heart I know).

 

Just like Arsenio Hall

When Arsenio Hall had his show, his staff was made up of all white women. He wanted his own personal white women harem. No black people allowed.

 

Elaborate Broad st Muscle head. My bad I meant Mr Pettyofficer lol

 

Actually Obama only has three African Americans in his cabinet- Eric Holder, Susan Rice, and Ron Kirk. Over four years and 24 appointments, President Bush named to his Cabinet five women, four African-Americans, three Hispanics and two Asian-Americans. Republicans have historically been less focused on diversity, but in the past decade they have been leading the way. Obama doesn't need to focus on African Americans because he knows he already has you wrapped around his finger.

http://blackagendareport.com/content/black-politics-atrophies-under-obama

 

I completely agree. Government is a far cry from what it was when this nation was founded. It would be great if both sides of the aisle could come together, but I feel Americans have a way of pulling themselves up regardless of politics. The GOP definitely makes it hard for Obama, but conversely I believe the Dems will do the same to Romney if he gets elected. It's just the way things operate. So if they can do 10-20% of the things they said on the campaign trail while in office...consider it a success.

 

The Dems wouldnt sacrafice the country to make a point

 

The Dems haven't been anywhere near as obstructionist or singleminded as the Republicans have been since 2009.

Dubya was able to bring along Dems on all of his major pieces of legislation. Even Clinton didn't have it this bad.

If Romney is elected, I think we're going to see a tipping point within the GOP. Outside players like Grover Norquist view a Republican POTUS as a figurehead whose primary responsibility is to sign their economic agenda into federal law. No president with two balls is going to be led around by his own Congress through a ring in his nose.

If Romney pushes back against the Tea Party core in Congress and they stonewall and try to freeze Romney out, a de facto vote of 'no confidence' in their party's own POTUS, there could be a political bloodletting with entire blocks of Republican Senators and congressmen facing primary challengers in 2014.

Effective democratic government is about compromise. Government with the absence of compromise is called a tyranny.

 

You seem to be operating under the assumption that BHO wants to continue spending and that he was happy about the spending the FED said was necessary to pull us out of the worst economic crisis since the great depression.

Below is the stated goals of this administration, the first one wont be met, but clearly it is a high priority now that the economy is somewhat stabilizing.
Restoring Fiscal Discipline

The Administration took the initial steps to restore fiscal discipline by signing into law an economic recovery bill that is free of all earmarks and by launching Recovery.gov – an unprecedented effort to allow the public to track how and where recovery funds are actually used. To continue this progress, the Administration will:

• Cut the deficit in half by the end of the President’s first term. On January 20, 2009, the President inherited a $1.3 trillion budget deficit. The President has put forth a budget that will halve this deficit by the end of his first term, bring non-defense discretionary spending to its lowest level as a share of GDP since 1962.
• Review the budget line-by-line for waste. We should be investing taxpayer dollars in efforts and programs with proven records of success and reallocating or cutting programs that do not work or whose benefits are not worth their cost. The Department of Defense unveiled an unprecedented effort to reform defense contracting, and the President has launched a line-by-line review of the federal budget to pinpoint what programs works and what needs to be terminated or reduced in scope.
• Return to honest budgeting. Too often in the past several years, budget tricks were used to make the government’s books seem stronger than they actually were. The President put forward a budget that rejects many of these gimmicks, most notably, the exclusion of war costs.

Progress

• Vice President Biden announced over $2 billion in savings from anti-waste measures at the first Cabinet waste reduction meeting on September 14, 2011. He also revealed that the Medicare Recovery Audit Contractor program has recovered nearly $670 million to date in 2011 – increasing the taxpayer dollars recovered by nearly 800% compared to 2010.
• On August 23, 2011 federal agencies released their final regulatory reform plans, which include hundreds of initiatives that will reduce costs, simplify the system and eliminate redundancy and inconsistency. These rules are expected to save more than $4 billion over the next five years.
• On July 20, 2011 as part of the President’s Campaign to Cut Waste, the Office of Management and Budget announced that in 2012, they will shut down 178 data centers, bringing us to a total of 373 data centers that will be shut down by the end of 2012. This represents substantial progress towards their goal of shutting down more than 800 data centers by 2015, which is expected to save taxpayers more than $3 billion.
• President Obama and Vice President Biden launch the Campaign to Cut Waste, which will hunt down and eliminate misspent tax dollars in every agency and department across the Federal Government.
• The President signed an Executive Order on government contracting to fight waste and abuse.
• The President launched Recovery.gov to track spending from the Recovery Act, an unprecedented step to provide transparency and accountability through technology.
• The President wrote to the congressional leadership calling on them to pass statutory Pay-As-You-Go rules so that any new non-emergency tax cut or entitlement expansion offset in the budget.
• The President signed the Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act to stop fraud and wasteful spending in the defense procurement and contracting system.
• President Obama signed an executive order that will cut waste and promote more efficient spending across the federal government.

 

Again, its not about "making a point". Dems and Republicans fundamentally disagree on policies. So Republicans are not going to just accept Obama's agenda. If he wants to introduce new taxes or raise taxes, he needs to give the Republicans dramatic spending cuts. Clinton did and it worked great. But Obama wants to have his cake and eat it too.

 

Clinton and George W. were both hated by their party for making concessions to get things done. But they both realized they were not going to win any popularity contests and just went with what they felt was right. Clinton gave massive spending cuts to the Republicans to get his economic agenda passed. Bush abandoned his fiscal policies from his first term and gave the Dems increases in spending in his second term. In order to further your agenda, you have to compromise and that will ruffle some feathers in your own party. Obama wants to increase taxes but doesn't want to give up spending. That's why he gets so much opposition.

 

There is a big difference between saying I want a balanced budget and working to achieve it. Obama puts forth no effort to make concessions to make that possible. Example:

If suddenly you have to take on $20K in debt I left you. How would get out of debt?

Most people would say make more money and spend way less. But Obama is saying make more money and spend more money.

 

James can you detail these supposed tax increases? I have posted numerous links proving he has cut taxes on numerous fronts, and wants to curtail spending on numerous fronts. There are many that criticize Obama for bending far too much in making concessions to the repubs on many issues (i.e. Bill Maher) yet you are claiming he does not make any concessions, can you post an example of an issue where he has been intractable?

 

Are you blaming Dubya's massive spending on the Dems???
The Dems gave Bush his tax cut for the rich and re-authorization for more war spending on two wars they were against.

Obama wants to increase spending on those earning $250k and up and let the Bush tax cuts expire.
The debt can't be reduced by cutting spending to social programs alone.
Why won't the GOP agree to end subsidies for the oil industry??

Cutting taxes and cutting federal spending does nothing for the long term debt. The only way the federal government can bring down the debt is to raise revenues. The question is where do you cut that causes the least harm to those most in need??

 

-The majority of Bush's spending was on the war. Bush's tax cuts were actually successful in his first term. GDP growth from 2000-2003 never saw two consecutive negative quarters. The problem for Bush happened in the second term when he refused to veto spending bills which started our deep deficits. So when Dems say Bush left us this problem, it was because he abandoned his principles and sucked up to the Dems.

-In my opinion, Greenspan was a good Fed Chairman but was unable to see the greedy nature of people abusing the system. In 2004 he lowered interest rates to 1%, enabling banks to borrow money for free, adjusted for inflation. Naturally, the banks wanted to borrow as much as they possibly could, then lend it out, earning nice profits. The situation led the banks to lend to unfit borrowers. He trusted the market to weed out bad credit risks. That added to the spiral.

-I agree that cutting social programs won't help. We need fundamental reform to Social Security and Medicare. They are the behemoths dragging us down. The Social Security Administration says they will run out of money by 2030.

-The idea behind cutting taxes and cutting spending revolves entirely around consumption. If people make more money they can do three things with it: save, spend, or invest. All three help the economy. This increased consumption stimulates growth in the business sector of the economy, increasing business profits, allowing businesses to hire more employees, etc. and the economy grows. Economic growth then leads to more tax revenues for the government, even though taxes have been reduced.

-I agree on social funding. I'm not aggressive on cost cutting like some Republicans. I believe that some social programs serve a very important function and we need to look out for our kids and the disenfranchised. I would cut NASA and use that money elsewhere, there is no need to spend $20 billion on space exploration while we have major problems here on Earth