this is the best way of explaining obama's actions to talk to the students. and, this is probably the best person(besides parents) to tell your kids to stay in school, and do well.

Apple, I happen to agree about the whole Afghanastan issue and how the younger generation of today, who may not have been old enough to understand back then, should be taught the real reasons as to why we went there in the first place. That issue may warrent a thread of it's own.

But that aside, I just wanted to point out that we all have ideas and suggestions as to what we think may or may not be appropriate for a President to talk to our children about. Everyone from all sides will believe that what they may agree with and believe in does not constitute a neo-con, far right, far left or socialist way of thinking. And if they disagree with the content that will be presented in a President's speech, then they will always find a label for it and accuse the speaker of being a commie, a socialist, a neo-con or a wingnut.

And for the life of me I just cannot see what the hell is wrong with getting back to the basics and talking to children about the importance of education and going to school.

In many ways, what I see going on right now with political arguements and debates, mirrors what went on in the Bush era.

Many from the right were very supportive of President Bush and accused the left of hating him, picking on him, and scrutinizing him for everything that he did and said.

Now many from the left are very supportive of President Obama and accuse the right of hating him, picking on him and scrutinizing him for everything the he does or says.

In truth, right now, the left is learning how the right felt when they, the left, continually and repeatedly attcked President Bush. And many on the right are now acting, with President Obama, the way that many on the left did with President Bush. Opposite sides of the same coin.

Back then many on the left were nothing more than hate mongerers who refused to even look at the actual issues because they were so blinded by the hate that they had for President Bush.

And now many on the right are nothing more than hate mongerers who refuse to even look at the actual issues because they are so blinded by the hate that they have for President Obama.

The more things change.....the more they stay the same.

this is something i really hate...if one side hates the president it can really screw the people over big time. this is one reason why there should be a third party...

That may be worse because then 2 sides will hate the President and it will really screw up the people!

About this President? Sure...he has an extremely charismatic smile (small wonder so many were fooled) and appears to have a lovely family.



Please. He isn't the first to do so and won't be the last.

And of course he 'dumbed down' the speech. That is obvious by the fact that it wasn't posted for review until Sunday. And even more so in the fact that he was forced to post it in the first place.

Apple

ps...another czar appointed today. That makes the current total what - 30?

DC, you must understand that I do not 'hate' President Obama, although I don't like a single thing he's done since taking Office. In fact, now that his dumbed down education speech has actually taken place, I have to admit it's turned out to be the least offensive action he's taken since becoming President, and will concede that he probably meant well by making it.

Any problem with my posting that here? Or is this the 'something nice to say' portion of our evening?

But you are SO right, the more things change the more they stay the same. And that will continue to be the case when we have another Republican in the White House.

Apple

When my Son got home from school I asked him what he thought about his speech and he said that they didn't show it at his school. Oh well.

Obama to seal US-UN relationship
By Harvey Morris at the United Nations

Published: September 8 2009 19:59 | Last updated: September 8 2009 19:59

Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

The topic for the summit-level session of the council on September 24 is nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament – one of several global challenges that the US now wants to see addressed at a multinational level.

Her remarks were the latest by the Obama administration to emphasise a shift from the strategy of the previous Bush administration, sometimes criticised by its UN partners for seeking to use the world body principally to endorse its own unilateral policies. The US currently holds the month-long rotating presidency of the Security Council.

I didn't say the YOU did, nor was I trying to insinuate that YOU did. I was just trying to point out that the hate in general, be it from the left during the last President's administration and the hate, in general, be it from the right during this President's term is one and the same even though it may be coming from opposite parties.

I find it quite ironic and hypocritical that many of those who had no problem mocking and scrutinizing everything that our last President did are now up in arms when this President is scrutinized and questioned for what he is doing. Just the same I find it both ironic and hypocritical that those who were offended whenever the last President was attacked are now attacking this President by resorting to the same tactics used that once offended them when the last President was in office.

As far as I am concerned those on the far left and those on the far right are one and the same. Hypocrites who really care more about their parties and political affiliations than about the actual issues and the good of the country itself.

I agree.

To use a horrible cliche: It is what it is. It's the people who vote for party above candidate who continue to behave like this. These people are loons. When I see how petty they can be (Democrats and Republicans), I'm happy to be an Independent.

Let's be honest, if it were President Huckabee or President Thompson who decided to give a speech to our children, would the righties have been up in arms?

The answer is a big fat NO. But the lefties would've been.

Bottom line: If it's your guy, you keep your mouth shut. If it's not your guy, you scream your head off. That's partisan politics.

You can keep them.

Well put, DC. Watching all this I am reminded of what Vito Corleone said at the meeting..."How did things get so far?"
I remember well in the 1980's the great friendship between Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan. They would go after each other tooth and nail, but they had an unwritten rule that after 5:00 the fighting would stop, and Tip often went by the White House to have a drink with Reagan. Note Reagan's first term tax cuts were an anathema to most liberals but there was enough bipartisan support for it that it became law. Equally graceful
has been the relationship between the G.W. Bush family and the Obamas. Laura even went to bat for him yesterday. I put some of the blame for recent incivility on the CLintons and Newt Gingrich, who in the 90's had a "take no prisoners" attitude that created bad blood, and which probably made blocking Clinton's impeachment impossible.

I am the first to admit I was no fan of G.W. Bush and probably threw gasoline on the fire from time to time, but in truth that kind oftalk does not add to any debate on any issue.

Now on this health care thing, which no one undertands, people on the right are talking nonsense about death panels, etc.

I think one problem is that the media pays too much attention to outrageousness because it ges ratings. It would be much better IMHO to hear experts on all sides saying whether a public option is good or or not but we're just not going to hear it.

During the Reagan tributes at the time of his death, there were recollections of the Friday evenings when Reagan would call O'Neill to the White House and order the White House steward to secure cold bottles of beer and Guinness. There was laughter and an occasional duet of "Danny Boy," echoing outside the windows of the Oval Office at night.

Don't mind the constant scrutiny of the President, whether Bush or Obama. It would be unpatriotic if we didn't have the constant voice of the loyal opposition. As citizens in a free state, we are obligated to question, and seek out and consider criticisms of the executive office, but we need not buy into them. It's how democracy works. The dangerous people are those that accept everything the President says without question.

Preach on Btro. Klyd.

I humbly disagree, Klyd. I think the dangerous people are those that accept ANYthing that is said by their party, blindly and with complete support. The most outrageous lies (the stories about McCain, which killed his 2000 nomination, are a good example) are accepted and are simply toxic. They do nothing but win elections or further agendas, without any thought of the harm they do. It's an attitude of winning at any cost. Who cares if the very people that you were elected to represent get totally screwed? You WON!

I think that the word hate is overused when people describe someone's attitude toward or criticism of a President. Hate is a strong word and I just don't believe that it accrues to most people who ideologically oppose the Presient's views even when they are vociferous in doing so.

However, I am sorely disappointed in those, as DT points out, "who are on the right [and who] are talking nonsense about death panels, etc. when it comes to proposed health care reform. I was just as disappointed when many on this Board posted that "the government" was taking over the auto industry and the banks.

That's true SB. Look at all the lapdogs who blindly and loyally believed (or turned a blind eye to) absolutely everything Bush said and did. NOBODY could criticize him in any way shape or form. Remember? How unpatriotic we were to blast King George. And, try criticizing him for starting a war; or while he was on foreign soil. What a sin. But, that was for that President, now anything goes. Bring guns to townhalls, call him Hitler, unAmerican (or non-citizen). And, don't let this President dare tell your kids to stay in school. The nerve of him.

As a result our country was left in total shambles war-wise, foreign relation-wise, economy-wise and otherwise. NOW is the time for everyone to come together but that won't happen in the real world I'm afraid.

TIS

Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent

By ALAN FRAM (AP)

WASHINGTON — Public disapproval of President Barack Obama's handling of health care has leaped to 52 percent, according to Associated Press-GfK poll that underscores the country's glowering mood just as the White House revs up its pitch for an overhaul.

Just 42 percent approve of the president's work on the high-profile health issue. The survey was released Wednesday hours before his nationally televised effort to persuade Congress and voters to back his drive to reshape the nation's $2.5 trillion-a-year medical system.

Spotlighting how Obama lost ground this summer, his latest approval figures on health were essentially reversed since July, when 50 percent approved of his health effort and just 43 percent disapproved.

The poll illustrates how difficult recent weeks have been for a president who, besides tackling health care, has been battling to end a devastatingly deep recession. Fifty percent approve and 49 percent disapprove of the overall job he is doing as president, compared to July, when those approving his performance clearly outnumbered those who were unhappy with it, 55 percent to 42 percent.

The slipping figures were an ominous sign for Obama, who by year's end wants Congress to send him legislation lowering health costs while covering millions of uninsured Americans. Besides near unanimous opposition from Republicans, the president's proposal has divided lawmakers from his own party, with liberals battling for a far-reaching plan that would include optional government-run insurance, and moderates demanding a scaled-down version without public coverage.

The poll found that discontent with Obama's health care effort is not isolated to Republicans. While nearly nine in 10 from the GOP disapproved of his handling of the issue, so did about six in 10 independents and two in 10 Democrats.

"How in the world can anybody look at this and evaluate it and see if it makes effective change?" Kelly Hoots, 35, a pharmacist and independent from Weaverville, N.C., said of the health care legislation. "Who knows what's in it?"

Further spotlighting the opposition Obama is encountering, 49 percent in the AP-GfK poll said they oppose the health overhaul plans being considered by Congress, compared to just 34 percent who favor them.

People are about evenly split over what lawmakers should do next on health care: About four in 10 say they should keep trying to pass a bill this year while about the same number say they should start over again.

Significantly, though, only about two in 10 say the health care system should be left as is, a positive sign for Obama.

"It's about time" for expanded health coverage, said Randy Yarborough, 56, a retired cabinetmaker and Democrat from Fort Lauderdale, Fla. "Everybody ought to have it. Anybody who says we can't afford it or we shouldn't have government health care, you need to wake up."

There is a clear public desire for a bipartisan approach on health care. Eight in 10 say it's important that any plan that passes Congress have the support of both parties, with Democrats, Republicans and independents all saying so by roughly that proportion. Two-thirds say if Obama and congressional Democrats can't win support from Republicans to pass a bill this year, they should keep trying until they get it.

Obama's marks are also declining on the economy, with 52 percent saying they disapprove of how he's handled that issue. Just 46 percent disapproved in a July AP-GfK poll, and 35 percent disapproved in April.

About half disapprove of his handling of taxes, some of which may rise to help finance his health overhaul, and of unemployment, which has been on the rise. And 56 percent dislike his handling of the budget deficit, which has skyrocketed under the costs of the financial bailouts and a recession that has caused federal revenues to sink.

While 77 percent say health care is important to them, 92 percent said the same about the economy, more than any other issue in the AP-GfK poll. That suggests that despite Washington's focus on the health care struggle, few voters have taken their eyes off the recession.

"They ought to scrap the whole thing" on health care, said Republican Wendy Sanders, 39, a homemaker from Kingsland, Ga. "People need jobs. Do that."

The survey of 1,001 adults with cell and landline telephones was conducted from Sept. 3-8. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

AP polling director Trevor Tompson and news survey specialist Dennis Junius contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

This really makes me laugh. I know so many people who can't afford insurance. They can't afford the ever-increasing premiums, the ever-increasing copayments. They can't afford NOT to have insurance, because they can't afford to get sick. People are crying, "Somebody has to do something about healthcare!" But then nobody wants "socialized medicine".

It's the same with the Clunkers program. I sell commercial real estate, and I can't tell you how many car dealerships I have seen go out of business in the past year. The automotive industry as a whole was crying, "Somebody help us!"

So, the government decided it would be better for the economy and ecology if they offered a decent trade-in for cars that were otherwise worthless. Get rid of the inventory on the lots, and the manufacturers would have a reason to start production again. The old gas-guzzlers would be off the road. People would get some help, and be able to buy themselves a new car. It was a real win-win for everyone.

Those same car dealers who were crying that they were going bankrupt are now crying that the government isn't paying them quickly enough. They don't tell you that they submitted paperwork that was incomplete. They don't tell you that they pre-sold the program and created a backlog before it even STARTED, despite warnings to not do so. They don't tell you that they did record sales.

What a joke.

Joe Wilson, what a turd. And they get on my case about making fun of southerners?

Wilson's rallying cry

Glenn Thrush, Politico

All eyes were on Barack Obama entering Wednesday night's address to Congress, but a little-known South Carolina Republican may have done more than the president’s combative speech to unify besieged Democrats around health care reform.

The night's defining moment — which Democrats hope to transform into a turning point – came when Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) shouted "You lie!" as Obama claimed his plan wouldn't offer free care to illegal immigrants.

Wilson's boorishness — for which he quickly apologized — enraged audience members on both sides of the aisle.

It also overshadowed a speech that included some of Obama's harshest attacks on his GOP critics to date, including a denunciation of "death panel" alarmists as liars — a veiled swipe at Sarah Palin — and a warning to Republicans who want to "kill" reform.

"What we have also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have toward their own government," Obama said. "Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned.

"Well, the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed," he added, to Democratic cheers.

The president's combativeness, coupled with Wilson's behavior, clearly energized Democrats — to the point where few were in a mood to criticize Obama's lack of specifics or the fact that he offered no ironclad commitment to inserting a robust public option in the final legislation.

Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), one of the upper-chamber Democrats most skeptical of the White House reform efforts, was impressed by Obama’s speech.

"I think it was a bit of a game changer," he said.

"The speech galvanized support along the Democratic caucus across the political spectrum, from the progressive caucus to the Blue Dogs, and everybody left determined to get something done this year," Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told POLITICO Wednesday night.

Republicans — some of whom expressed open contempt for Obama by scanning their BlackBerrys or holding up copies of GOP bills during the speech — saw the president’s remarks as a Democratic call to arms that belied the president’s oft-repeated calls for bipartisanship.

"I was incredibly disappointed in the tone of his speech,” said Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).”At times, I found his tone to be overly combative and believe he behaved in a manner beneath the dignity of the office. I fear his speech tonight has made it more difficult — not less — to find common ground.

"He appeared to be angry at his critics and disappointed the American people were not buying the proposals he has been selling... If the Obama administration and congressional Democrats go down this path and push a bill on the American people they do not want, it could be the beginning of the end of the Obama presidency."

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who is running for Obama's old Senate seat, said, "He talked at us. He didn't listen to us... It was a missed opportunity."

Added Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.): "I sat there tonight wondering what the purpose of this evening was. I was hoping to hear the president flesh out a middle ground, but instead we heard platitudes and campaign rhetoric."

But Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), one of Obama's most consistent critics, saw some room for compromise. "It was a good speech, the problem is that what he wants and what they've written are two totally different things," said Coburn, an OB-GYN. “I'm willing to compromise to get things fixed. But I'm not willing to put the government in charge because we don't have a good track record."

Despite the energized tone, Obama offered cold comforts to liberals, no detailed road map for reform and an endorsement of the public option that fell far short of a guarantee.

"It is only one part of my plan," he said of the option. "To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it. The public option is only a means to that end - and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal."

But the fight over the public plan was eclipsed by Wilson's outburst halfway through Obama's address.

Wilson was quickly shouted down by Democrats, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot a withering glance at the GOP side of the room. White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel demanded an apology from Wilson - as did Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

A chastened Wilson quickly obliged, issuing a public apology and calling Emanuel personally after the speech, according to a White House source.

"This evening, I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the president's remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill," he wrote in an email to reporters.. "While I disagree with the president's statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility."

House Majority Whip James Clyburn, a South Carolina Democrat, said the remark was the latest in a long line of political attacks by Wilson.

“Joe Wilson took our state's reputation to a new low. I thought Mark Sanford had taken it as low as it could go, but this is beyond the pale," Clyburn said.

"Joe is very confrontational," he added. "He held his first town hall meeting three blocks from my house at my kid's high school. Now why would he have this town hall meeting in my congressional district, three blocks from my house in my kid's high school? It's not in his district.

That's the kind of guy Joe Wilson is. He loves confronting people. So he was confronting the president, just as he was confronting me."

Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate, predicted that Wilson’s outburst would have consequences.

"The person who said it will pay a price,” Durbin said. “I think the average American thinks that the president and the office deserve respect and that was a disrespectful comment. They'll pay a price in the court of public opinion."

Alex Isenstadt, Ben Smith, Jonathan Martin, Manu Raju, Patrick O’Connor and Lisa Lerer contributed to this report.

Very good points, TIS.

A few years into the war a local news radio proram from a station that airs Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, etc., sponsored a "Support the Troops Rally." They emphasized that regardless of your stance on the war, personal beliefs or your party affiliation, all were encouraged to gather at the PA Capitol Bldg. to show their support for the troops.

People, who chose to show their support for the troops by carrying signs for them to come home now, were verbally scorned and had their signs taken. The radio hosts also condemned them the following day. It turned out that it was a rally for the war, disguised as one for the troops, and they could not understand that one could support the troops while disagreeing with the war.

Joe Wilson is the personification of everything I dislike about the haters on the right. PB is absolutely right in his comments about many southerners.

I don't care if he is from the south, the north, or the moon. I don't care if he is a Democrat or a Republican. He's a boor. Free speech or not, there's such a thing as civility.

My daughter's first day of school was yesterday, and their Global Studies teacher assigned watching the speech and taking notes. She was shocked at the display of bad manners. She couldn't quite make sense of it. I told her that some people are just plain rude.

There should be a course in civility in schools but some asshole parents would complain about that. Of course civility should be taught at home but.....

Have you been out in public lately?? It seems that civility is a thing of the past, unfortunately.

Oh, fuck you... what do you know?

They should teach civility AND civics in the schools.

Maybe if you kiss me first...

Ha ha ha ha! I knew you wouldn't remain silent.


TIS

Huffington Post is running the Wilson story with the title of the story as, "A Muzzle For Old Yeller"

That's VERY civil of you!!

I didn't watch Obama's speech. But why would that Senator say that? Do you guys think that he might have read those bills and it just might be in there? All those Congressmen and Senator's are nothing but liars and that includes the President.