Archive for September, 2011
I’ve been wondering if Obama is really a bad president. Lately, it’s been pressing me.
Politics really became popular again in 2004. I remember their somewhat of a class war in high school (no pun intended) between those of us whose families voted for John Kerry, and those of us whose families were voting for George Bush. It amounted to school yard brawls and intense sh*it talking – not that any of us really knew anything about politics at that age.
But now we have Obama to consider. He was highly popular amongst youth during his initial election, and now that the time for a possible re-election is coming, we can see that his popularity is slipping. 42% of Americans strongly disapprove of his presidency. His attitude is unwavering though. This is unlike President Bush. When his poll’s showed a massive decrease in popularity, his insecurity was obvious. His speeches became slowly pathetic and bumbling, and each appearance he made was tormented, frustrated and slightly embarrassing to watch.
Like the Iraq War during Bush’s presidency, the economy is Obama’s baby, and it doesn’t look good. Worse, we can’t pull out of the economy. Whether a “stagnating” economy is really Obama’s fault doesn’t really matter. He is the American president and if he doesn’t fix our problems he isn’t likely to get re-elected.
The democratic voters, liberals, and other blue bleeding political types want to moderate though. Or at least that’s what the blogosphere hints at. This is unlike some republican voters I know, who, brutishly defended President Bush’s every move and denied any mad-up word or mistake he ever made. I like to think that democratic voters are keeping ears and eyes open to the potential republican candidates.
Is Obama a bad president? I would like to say: why, NO. He’s simply fixing the mistakes that his predecessors have made in the past and getting blamed for it. But to tell the truth, I don’t know how true that is. What I do know is that for many, it’s starting to look like all of the change he promised was a lot of hot air, and that he won’t get re-elected. To be forward, I will say that: Obama’s ideas are a little ahead of his time and not generally accepted by the working class, american, white male majority. And in a democracy the majority rules.
I AM COMPLETELY BLOWN AWAY WITH THIS, and I seem to have walked in on this developing story at just the right time. To be honest, I have no idea what the F***k is going on in this story. But good God, it is full of juicy murderous pulp.
- U.S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms set up Operation Fast and Furious to, allegedly, nab Mexican drug lords. ATF sold something like 2000 U.S. weapons – illegally – in order to build a case against these drug lords. Roughly 600 weapons have been recovered.
- The death of Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry, brought theoperation to a halt; weapons found at the crime scene were part of the operation.
- Similar ATF operations have landed weapons in the hands of gang-members in the U.S.
- ATF Operation Fast and Furious “expands to White House staffers.”
- CIA agents are supporting Mexican security forces in a direct attempt to combat the cartels.
To many, Obama is now very possibly trafficking guns in a large unmarked windowless van himself. If not, then he is certainly orchestrating a HUGE conspiracy to build a case against firearms in the U.S. Either way, you should feel compelled to by another shotgun. (By the way what case does Obama need to build? Theres already thousands of gun related homicides in the U.S. each year.)
I am not surprised by any of this. There’s no reason why the leader of the Free World wouldn’t be behind a massive conspiracy. But it’s also possible that the sting operations in Mexico really are being tracked to topple some of these kingpins.
Anywho, CIA operatives are now in Mexico? Por que? Is this a conspiracy or an attempt to bring stability to Mexico? One thing is for sure, it is most definitely drawing a lot of unwanted attention to the White House.
What now? Could this be the cover-up the Conservative America is looking for? It certainly seems that after the death of a federal agent (Brian Terry) and the arming of gang-members inside the U.S., that more pressure would be on Obama, his aides, and especially the ATF to find out who is really responsible for these shenanigans.
SOMETIMES, IN THE LAST REMAINING DAYS OF SUMMER, when the grass is still green and the sky seems big and endless, I find it more than necessary to crawl out of the dark moist cave that is my room. So the other day, I did, even though I didn’t remain outside, I eventually went to the gym to get some much-needed exercise.
A great thing about the gym is that when you go, you can watch TV to take your mind off the liquid cupcakes rolling down your forehead. I had known Obama was about to make a speech on the 8th, so when I saw him standing before Congress on MSNBC, I slowed my pace on the tread-mill to less than a trot to watch.
I currently live on a military base, so there are a wide variety of (species) people who frequent the base’s facilities. One such type, is the Army Wife. If you don’t see them first, wearing their husband’s worn out PT shirt or “PROUD ARMY WIFE” hoodie, you can definitely hear the gossip from a mile away. Two of these women took a couple tread-mills nearest to mine (I had basically stopped movement all together by that point) and were gumming away about how “Amy’s mad at Cindy’s dog because it kept barking last night, and Amy’s mad at Alissa’s dog cause it shat on her lawn,” and how their abusive husbands* are coming back from Afghanistan in two weeks and then they start singing the lyrics to “I’m So Excited” and blah blah blah. I couldn’t bear it. I suspect they realized this because I was solely focused on the Obama speech and didn’t even bother to turn my head, despite the way the one with the Purple Hair kept glancing at me.
Of course they noticed me: mute, and sweaty, standing two feet away on an immobile exercise machine watching a presidential address. I was enjoying the speech and the reactions the President was getting from his audience. Some stood and clapped, some smirked, some grimaced, others raised suspicious eyebrows. I usually enjoy the things he has to say – regardless of whether they get done or not he is very charismatic. The two women changed their conversation to the President and watched little bits in between the personal opinions they shared.
“This is supposed to be a huge speech,” Purple Hair says. “But I don’t like him.”
“Neither do I.” Their conversation was a bore and distracted me from the slow-moving sub-titles. But then I heard something interesting.
“Did you hear that this speech was originally scheduled during the Republican debate?”
“Apparently, he scheduled his speech during the Republican debate, so the Republicans asked him to reschedule. And Obama said, ‘OK!’ so now everybody is saying that he’s a weak president because he rescheduled…” trailing into incoherency, she then added, “the media blew the rescheduling way out of proportion. I still don’t like him though.”
Touché Army wife, touché. You know something I don’t. What else do you know?
“Oh and Obama is the coolest leader in the world, based on a world poll.”
“Well, duh! He has a Facebook page!” – nevermind.
This isn’t to say Republicans or Democrats are to blame for Obama’s decision or redecision. This is another ridiculous example of news networks covering irrelevant stories. If this had been an attempt to sabotage coverage of the Republican debate it would have been more firmly defended, not brushed to the side.
Regardless, the speech went well, in my non-expert opinion, and I left the two women to their tread-mills to be free of my heavy judgements.
*Not all Army soldiers are abusive to their wives, I’m just exaggerating. And a lot of Army wives are decent women as well.
The prospects in Libya are incredibly low, the cost is high, and it’s priority on the Humanitarian Intervention Check List (something I just made up) isn’t exactly that high. Sometimes I like to wonder what U.S. troops in Afghanistan think about these efforts.
As far as I know, the West’s recent actions in Libya have been of the best of intentions. Similar to Iraq and Afghanistan, we are working to kill or capture another asshole, by supporting and arming revolutionaries and rebel groups. This makes our third “regime makeover” in the last ten years (and jeeze, I really hope they make a TV series out of these inteventions).
Everyone (for the most part) seems happy about this. Both Democrats and Republicans, Conservative and Liberals are generally accepting of these efforts. Finally, something to agree on. Conservatives get aerial bombardment and Liberals get a democratic revolution.
According to Al Jazeera, the revolution’s death toll is somewhere around 10,000. Which is a lot of bodies, in comparison to the conflict in Afghanistan. Even more disconcerting is the death toll in Sub-Saharan Africa where 30,000 people have died from a famine in Somalia – lets not forget 5 million in Congo. Closer to home is the death toll in Mexico which reached 15,273 last year.
Although, Libya, Somalia, and Mexico all mean different things to the U.S., I find the amount of aid and support being sent to Libya unfair.
I’ve come to terms with the U.S. being the SWAT team of the WPD (World Police Department), but our priorities are off. Where Mexican cartels are fueling drug trade in the U.S., crime rates, and instability along our border, the Libyan rebels we support are commiting the same war crimes as their former leader they seek to kill. And although the U.S. is the biggest donor to the Somalian relief, the money it sends to the Horn of Africa a small fraction of what it plans to send in support of Libya.
The U.S. has a pretty kick ass history of destroying foreign armies; the truth is, no one want’s to go to war with the U.S. We love the smell of napalm in the morning. But could we please rearrange our list of things to do? And can we start at home for the love of Christ?
I find it hard to believe anyone would support multiple $500 million dollar “baskets” being sent to Libya in support of a new regime, especially when the only issue advertised on T.V. is the national debt and the unemployment rate.
Some 55,000 troops will have withdrawn from Afghanistan by 2012. But will this decutction support the aid we send to Libya, or any other Middle-East country who decides to overthrow a dictator?
The Western support for Libya is just another feeble attempt at securing a pro-Western government in the Middle-East. Who’s to say the Transitional National Council will develop anything the least bit democratic anyway? The Libyan people deserve a stronger, more independent nation, but it is not the West’s place to control this.
Since Iraq, the U.S. and other Coalition forces, developed the mentality that because they are free countries, and have advanced militaries, they are the only ones capable of providing Democracy and Peace – or at least Democracy- in countries without it.
A couple hundred years ago, there was a very repressed country that had little foreign aid, money, or military power. They managed to overcome the world’s largest superpower and maintain a democratic-republic that is still present today. I don’t remember