Why are they so much against Obama Plans? By JOHN HENDRENWASHINGTON, Feb. 22, 2009

Louisiana's Bobby Jindal, Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty and South Carolina's Mark Sanford all deny that they're actively planning a run in 2012. But each seemed to leave the door to the White House at least slightly ajar. These are President Obama's harshest critics Who many feel is preparing for 2012. As the Republican party struggles to find its voice in the age of Obama, several GOP governors seem to be using the stimulus as an early audition for the 2012 presidential race.
"They're trying to keep their options open for running for president in 2012 and they understand that this vote could define them," Stuart Rothenberg, editor of The Rothenberg Political Report, told ABC News.
The stimulus could also define President Obama, who has said if it doesn't work to turn the economy around, "then I'll be a one-term president." This is why the above governor's are hoping he fail if fail that opens the door for them in 2012 giving them a better chance at the white house.

He is there biggest challenge and they know that. There is no way he can fix this disaster he was left with in one term if fails in the beginning he may not have a chance to redeem himself.

Then there are the Republicans who are betting the stimulus will fail. Jindal and Sanford have said they will reject added unemployment benefits that come with federal strings. Is this the right thing to do at this point all suggestion counts should they all be taken into consideration.I'll take it," California Republian Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger told ABC's George Stephanopoulos on "This Week." "I'll take his money too."
Some potential 2012 GOP candidates are hedging their bets. Pawlenty calls the stimulus extravagantly wasteful. But he says he'll take the money because it will bring jobs to Minnesota. Is it wasteful if its helpful? If it will help in any way to promote employment which will lead to a better economy then what is the problem.

Many of Obama's critics hope he was lying when he made his promised in his campaign it turned out his only sin is keeping his promises he is doing what he said he was going to do maybe not as fast as people are expecting but at least he is doing some thing. Why are people so hard on him give him a chance look at what he was given to work with. Other than the perpetually aggrieved paranoid cranks on the far right -- FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, James Dobson etc., -- most Americans (no matter who they voted for) are just glad that someone brimming with confidence, intelligence and good will is in charge of our rescue, at last! Watching President Obama's recent press conferences, one could hear a collective sigh of relief from sea to shining sea. Nevertheless, a few critics from the left are now demanding progressive purity from President Obama that is not in keeping with his clearly stated campaign promise to bring all Americans together, and to put governance and competence ahead of ideology. In that sense they are working against the aims of his presidency." This has been so far the worse economic down fall i can remember there was never a tome when i was so fearful of the future yes we have made History we have elected the first African American President. Why did they believe that they elected a miracle worker. How can he fix this mess in such a short time if prevent is better than having to cure why wasn't all this prevented everyone sat around and let the prior president dug our country in a ditch then they expect Obama to dig us out in one day. As President-elect Obama prepares to take office, Democratic partisans are battling over a crucial issue: is the United States a "center-right" or "center-left" nation? If the country is in fact tilted to the right, then Obama risks reviving Republican prospects should his legislative initiatives be perceived as too liberal. Conversely, if the U.S is a center-left nation, the adoption of major public works programs, comprehensive health care, and aggressive tax and spending programs to reduce income- and wealth-inequality may help forge a durable majority for Obama and the Democratic Party. There should not be any separation when it comes to whats best for the country. "Together we stand divided we will fall" This can be done he cannot do it on his own both Reps. and Dems. have to put aside there childish squabbles and figure out whats best for the country and work from there whether its a black president, white, or Hispanics or any other nationality the country's best interest is priority.

How is President Obama doing so far? Has he even shown any sign that he can help to bring the Economical crisis to an end or at least try?

It is now day 54 and what has he done so far Lets take a look at where we are now.

This is US President Barack Obama, accompanied by Economic Recovery Advisory Board Chairman Paul Volcker, makes remarks in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, March 13, 2009. [Agencies] This is an article from the China daily news paper.

In this interview the President stated that "his administration is working to create a "post-bubble" model for solid economic growth once the recession ends." This will put an end to the the escalating credit card interest rates and the disastrous housing market. This all sounds good but when will this take place There are people losing homes everyday there are people losing there jobs everyday. There is a glimmer of hope a this they based on the 4 days of of modest growth on wall street . This is a sign of stability in economic spending this is after the disaster over he holiday season. Though the White House is optimistic There is still no end in sight to this disaster the US has lost 4 million Jobs The prices of homes dropped dramatically foreclosures are soaring there is no sign of any jobs been created everyday this are getting worse instead of better I believe things will get worse before they get better.

The president is also taking into consideration his foreign relations. The president plan to make public his plans for Afghanistan next week. The president is set on ridding these countries of the terrorists ties and will also make sure that the countries who harbour's these terrorist will also be held accountable. "The White House objectives were expected to roughly parallel 15 goals contained in a 20-page classified report to the White House from the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Among them were getting rid of terrorist safe havens in Pakistan and adopting a regional approach to reducing the threat of terrorism and extremism in both countries".
In an article By ANNE GEARAN and ANNE FLAHERTY The Associated Press Friday, March 13, 2009; 2:22 AM "Turkey has become so pivotal to U.S. goals in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East that President Barack Obama included it on his first overseas tour," AP writes. "But relations between the countries could be at risk unless Obama is willing to break a campaign promise to describe as 'genocide' the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks almost a century ago. Such a declaration would infuriate Turkey, which could complicate U.S. military operations in the region by withholding cooperation. This is not an obscure historical debate that Obama can avoid easily." Is he really pushing human rights on the back burner. I feel that there is too much pressure on him he has to take all into consideration but this i believe needs more time people need to give him a chance to take care of this countries economic problems the best way he can step by step in order of importance take care of everything else. He also have to be very prudent when it come to foreign Relations and policies.

Is there any End in sight?

Recession on track to be longest in postwar period
Story By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer

As the unemployment rate increases day after day we see the lines at the soup kitchen the unployment offices and the lines for the job fairs get longer and longer thousands of people applying for only a few positions. It was the 1981-82 recession, that was widely considered America's worst but this one seems to be heading for the spot . It was during the Reagan years we thought this was the worse but as we see in recent months we are heading down those path again and with no end in sight if his continues for another 2 months this will be the longest recession since the post war. The country today is in a worse state than it was in 1982. The president is doing what he believe is best to bring the country back from the brink of disaster but he is facing some oppositon from the other leaders. " Mr. McCain, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” echoed that sentiment without identifying any banks. Mr. McCain, who lost the presidential election last November, also accused the Treasury Department of avoiding the “hard decision” to let “these banks fail.” “Close them down, get them out of business,” Mr. Shelby, the senior Republican on the Banking Committee, told ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos.” “If they’re dead, they ought to be buried How can we expect Obamas plan to work these are two of the top Republican leaders they are the ones who should be setting the stage for he other's to follow if they feel this way will they steer the ohter'd in there direction or will they hopefully follow a path of there own and try to see where this all goes.

The biggest worry for most is how long will this last The whole word is affected by this crisis if we fail they will fail. Many of these countries look to the US for aid if we can't help ourselves how then can we help others. How soon can we see a shift in the right direction "The Treasury department made its own news on Sunday, filling three of the top positions under Secretary Timothy F. Geithner. Alan B. Krueger was named as assistant secretary for economic policy; Davis S. Cohen was chosen as assistant secretary in the office of terrorism and financial intelligence, and Kim N. Wallace was named assistant secretary for legislative affairs. The announcements addressed growing concerns that even as the Treasury Department has worked furiously to craft bank bailouts over its first six weeks, the department still had left key positions unfilled. The withdrawal last week of Annette Nazareth, Mr. Geithner’s prospective deputy and a former commissioner at the Securities and Exchange Commission, touched off questions about whether staffing problems might be slowing the administration’s response to the economic crisis. The position of deputy treasurer remains open.
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, played down the personnel matter.
“We have tremendous confidence in Secretary Geithner,” he said at a news conference on Thursday, “and we are working with the committees of jurisdiction in order to get nominees both up to Capitol Hill and through the process of getting them into government.” No pressure on Mr. Geitner. As the energy prices plunges we see the economy deteriorates "Sam Fletcher Senior Writer
"HOUSTON, Mar. 3 -- Energy prices fell sharply Mar. 2 with crude dipping below the psychological barrier of $40/bbl in intraday trading on the New York market amid signs that the recession is deepening in the world's major energy-consuming countries with no improvement in sight." Olivier Jakob at Petromatrix, Zug, Switzerland, said, "Another wave of deleveraging hit the investment spectrum, and when losses are so abrupt across asset classes it is difficult to come with a single justification for each asset." He noted, "Even gold did not manage to hold its head above waters, leaving the dollar as the only place of refuge." What should we do in the mean time invest and hope for the best or sit on our money and hope for the best. We know our individual selves we must do whatever we feel is the right thing to do listen to the economist but we still need to follow our own judgement.

Are The Republicans trying to sink the country into a worse state than we are already in or are they on the right track

Chris Kleponis/Bloomberg News

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Republicans are saying that we should allow the banks to fail. Why should they let them fail and start from scratch why not save these banks and build on the foundation that's already existing. In an article in today's New York Times by By J. DAVID GOODMAN and BRIAN KNOWLTON two high profile Republican John McCain and Richard C. Shelby claim that it is best that they allow the big banks to fail "Close them down, get them out of business,” Mr. Shelby, the senior Republican on the Banking Committee, told ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos.” “If they’re dead, they ought to be buried.”
While the Alabama senator did not say which banks to shutter, he suggested that Citigroup might be on that list, saying the bank has “always been a problem child.”
Mr. McCain, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” echoed that sentiment without identifying any banks. Mr. McCain, who lost the presidential election last November, also accused the Treasury Department of avoiding the “hard decision” to let “these banks fail.” Like with AIG if they Bail these banks out do they have to continue bailing them out Who got AIG's bailout billions? "By Toni Reinhold Toni Reinhold – Sun Mar 8, 8:30 am ET NEW YORK (Reuters) – Where, oh where, did AIG's bailout billions go? That question may reverberate even louder through the halls of government in the week ahead now that a partial list of beneficiaries has been published.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that about $50 billion of more than $173 billion that the U.S. government has poured into American International Group Inc since last fall has been paid to at least two dozen U.S. and foreign financial institutions.
The newspaper reported that some of the banks paid by AIG since the insurer started getting taxpayer funds were: Goldman Sachs Group Inc, Deutsche Bank AG, Merrill Lynch, Societe Generale, Calyon, Barclays Plc, Rabobank, Danske, HSBC, Royal Bank of Scotland, Banco Santander, Morgan Stanley, Wachovia, Bank of America, and Lloyds Banking Group.
Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs declined to comment when contacted by Reuters. Bank of America, Calyon, and Wells Fargo, which has absorbed Wachovia, could not be reached for comment.
The U.S. Federal Reserve has refused to publicize a list of AIG's derivative counter parties and what they have been paid since the bailout, riling the U.S. Senate Banking Committee." Citigroup is in dire need of a bailout or buyout Citigroup shares, for example, closed at $1.03 on Friday; two years ago, the stock was trading at $55 a share. This is keeping investors at bay. I will literally cry if they go under i wont say why. As the new appointees took over there post one can't help but to wonder if its too late. Secretary Geithner stated that due to a lack of staffing the process in attempting to rebuilding the economy is slowed down. this id sue to the rigorous background checks that they have to go through. They need to give them some time for the whole process to take effect. This economic down fall did not not happen overnight its been brewing for many years how can they expect it to be fixed overnight. The whole world is suffering i believe things will only get worse before they get better McCain ad your republican Party you did this now that the Democrats are trying to fix your mess you are trying to derail them how can this country get better when out elected officials cannot come together, and come to a consensus for he sake of the people. This is President Obamas statement Mr. Obama made clear in an interview published Sunday in The New York Times that he did not want any of the biggest banks to fail, saying his administration “would take more significant action to deal with those institutions.” “But the point is that our commitment is to make sure that any actions we take to maintain stability in the system, begin to loosen up credit and lending once again so that businesses and consumers can borrow,” he said. “And if they can, then you’re going to start seeing businesses invest once again and you’re going to see people hired once again, but it’s going to take some time.” I said give the man a chance.

Will the Republicans and the Democrats ever get along

(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

In an attempt to bring the both parties together The President Obama hosts congressional leaders for dinner.

In an article written by PHILIP ELLIOTT of the Associated Press The president invited both parties to dinner. in an attempt to show the Republicans that they share many the same interest. There was a total of 200 attendees including top ranking Republicans and there spouses. president and vice president and there wives. This wasn't just any dinner this was an attempt to sell the "$410 billion spending bill and future debate over Obama's $3.6 trillion budget proposal for the next year" Obama knows that it was not going to be easy to convince the republicans especially since only three Republicans voted for his Stimulus plan. In welcoming his guess Obama noted that "We also know that we're not always going to agree on everything, but given how hard so many of you are working on both sides of the aisle — day in, day out — we thought it was important for us to step back for a moment, remind ourselves that we have things in common — family, friends, laughter — and hopefully we'll have a chance to appreciate each other a little bit, take a time-out before we dive back into the game."

This is not the first time The Obamas had invited the Republicans the The White House for "standing Wednesday evening events" but not in this large number. there has been private cocktail sessions and other small meets and greets which is an attempt to show that they may not agree on everything but they should at least agree on the things that matter most to the country on a hold.

Article in the Huffington Post by Anya Strzemien February 19, 2009 01:06 PM

There was also the "The First Formal Dinner " on February 23 ,2009 Which was attended by the Governor's and there wives also other White House aids. "The Oscars weren't the only major black-tie event to take place on Sunday night. Across the country, the President and First Lady hosted their first formal dinner in Washington, inviting the nation's governors, in town for the National Governors Association meeting, and their spouses to the White House. The menu, according to AP, was designed to reflect the season and represent the American spirit. It included red dragon carrots from Ohio, beef from Nebraska, watermelon radishes grown in the Washington area, and sea scallops from Massachusetts. The dessert featured huckleberries from Idaho".

With everyone in one place the President hope to get the support he needs to move forward with his plans to revive the Economy and at lest make a step in to pulling the parties together. Even though there are people who don't believe that is of any importance at least not in these times. New York Times Saturday, March 7, 2009 A new NYT/CBS News poll (pdf) found that most surveyed said Mr. Obama should pursue the priorities he campaigned on rather than seek middle ground with Republicans. Given the decidedly partisan outcome of the stimulus vote, should President Obama give up on bipartisanship in carrying out his broader agenda?" Not everyone believe in this there are those of us who would rather the government come to a compromise and do what is best for than having this childish bickering in The White House they need to leave that tho the high school kids. There are others who feel that it makes it more interesting to have both sides disagreeing and hammering out there disagreements at one point or another they have to agree on something.

Mrs. O's Wardrobe takes center stage

The Official Portrait of The First Lady photo by Joyce N. Boghosian/The White House

Bonnie Fuller of the Founder, Bonnie Fuller Media
Posted March 2, 2009 03:38 PM (EST) "Is Michelle Obama supposed to wear a burka? Since when are a woman's arms considered an erogenous zone here in America? Why would it be inappropriate for the First Lady to attend her husband's address to Congress in a beautiful, purple Narcisco Rodriguez SLEEVELESS dress?
Whoever those twitterers — or should I call them "twits" — are out there who have raised the question of propriety, they should not only get a life, but also a history book. Not only have many First Ladies been photographed at official state and White House events, America's most fashionable previous First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy practically made sleeveless looks her uniform, whether they were dresses or two piece shirt and skirt ensembles."

The photos above on the right are those of The Former First Lady Jackie O seems Sleeveless was also a favorite of hers(image from the Huffington Post) Why are they making such a big of her clothes there is so much going on that should be in the news why are the tabloids devoting so much time to her ward robe.

I love the dress Mrs O is wearing and its from one of my favorite designer Michael Kors she could not have made a better choice. this is her signature sleeveless Michelle Obama wears

Lady By Leah Chernikoff

Photo byDoug Mills/The New York Times
It seems like all the first Ladies Have something they are famous or when it comes to there wardrobe. As per The New York Times "Nancy Reagan wore spangled ballgowns. Barbara Bush had fake pearls. Michelle Obama wears her bare arms. This the first Lady at her Husbands First Address To Congress. I love this dress Except Michelle its February it is too cold. some critic said it was too revealing some even said it was inappropriate for he occasion. This seem to be a trend for the first Lady she was seen sleeveless several times this week on the cover of Vogue magazine. When she was discussing menus on Sunday. All the women were dressed in suits or long sleeves except Michelle and apparently I'm not the only one who thought it was a bit cold to wear short sleeve in winter. Oh my god,” Cindi Leive, the editor of Glamour magazine, exclaimed while watching the address, she said via email. “The First Lady has bare arms in Congress, in February, at night!” It seems her noticeable-sculpted arms are her greatest asset and it seems she is getting noticed. "Post-Title IX arms,” Robin Givhan called them in the Washington Post" and "Kate Holmquist in the Irish Times claim they represent achievement and self-control." She seem to have allot of self control. For her age she is well conditioned and in shape It doesn't matter what Michelle Obama wears a gap sum dress or a designer ballgown she always seems to pull it off.

Photo credit: Yuri Gripas /AFP/Getty Images

check out this ensemble this is a great look allot more people would love to see Mrs. O in something like this.She looks good in anything she wears. if she can pull it off the n why not. It all depends.

This is more for the White house many would add It seems Mr's O wardrobe is the new "Talk Of The Town"From her signature style Floral Broaches of which she has an enviable collection from Erickson Beamon, To her stunning sleeveless form fitting dress many people are back and forth with what style is acceptable and whats not acceptable. As long as she is covered and she looks good she should be fine. talk about the econamy, Global Warming etc. this is not that important. Or is it? I guess it all depends on who you ask.