Altered States

A.I.G.

Michael Mc Millian — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 07:31:14 GMT

I know what some are going to say and think,nevertheless,here is my take on what's going on here. When Bush/Cheney got into office Cheney had his 'Energy Task Force',or so it was called. And he would'nt divulge who was on this 'Task Force',or even what they discuessed,even though the meetings were held at the White House. Remember that? The Democrats even took him to court to try and make him tell,but the court,amazingly,but not surprisingly,sided with Cheney. And this is where all the planning took place. Where he and Ken Lay (of Enron fame),plotted to scew Californians out of billions of dollars for overcharging them for electricity. And no doubt also where he and the boys from the major oil companies planned to hike the price of oil and gas the last two years of their administration. And also,where they hatched the plan to allow the banks and financial institutions to run rampant for eight years,bilking millions of people out of their hard-earned money. And at the end of their term there was an agreement,where Dick likely said,"Now,at the end of our last year,you guys,(the financial guys like,Bear Sterns Lehman Brothers,etc.),are going to tell Congress that you're broke,and that you need a bailout,and if you don't get it,the economy will collapse,and so they'll have to give it to you. And when you get it,you give it to me and George,and we'll give you your 'cut',so you'll have that,and also what you've made for the last eight years. This is your way of paying us back for letting you operate with no oversight or regulation all this time."

Now,for all you nay-sayers,let me ask you one question,a question,mind you,that nobody has bothered to ask these Wall Street guys,and that is-"WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE MONEY YOU'VE MADE IN THE LAST EIGHT YEARS?!!"

Does anybody really believe that these people were such upstanding businessmen that they took 'EVERY CENT' they've made in the past eight years and 'REINVESTED IT' and 'LOST IT ALL'?!! GIVE ME A BREAK!!

It's all in offshore and Swiss accounts!

And they are blackmailing Obama and the rest of us because it's like they're telling him,if you don't give us what we want,then the stock market won't budge,and the economy will tank. But,if you do,then everything will be fine and go back to normal.

By the way I have two more questions. The first is,why does it always seem that we have a scandal like this everytime a republican gets in the White House? Nixon had Watergate,Reagan had Iran/Contra,George H.W. Bush had the banking scandal that cost us billions,and now this. Is it just me,or does anybody see a 'pattern' here?

And second,remember during George H.W.'s administration there was a bank-'B.C.C.I.',the Bank of Credit & Commerce International,that turned out to be holding and also laundering money for everybody from the drug cartels and organized crime,to the C.I.A.!

And the new B.C.C.I.? That's A.I.G. folks!

OMG

Americafirst — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:24:37 GMT

The new administration hasn't a clue what do about the economy except spend trillions on pork, but they have time to play revisionist history with Bush's biography. If that's their priority, we are in so much trouble you can't even imagine.

Bios Are Always Political

oregonbird — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:26:35 GMT

Snide suggestion over reasoning. As always.

I prefer the release of Yoo's excuses for Bush to assume dictatorship, over re-positioning Bush's theoretical legecy. But then, I also find the setting aside of constitutional rights more important, as a news story, than which White House left-over updated a trivial section of the WH site, while the present administration is focussed on economic matters.

Gay adoption and don't ask, don't tell

pigbodine — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:38:51 GMT

Obama was addressing these during the campaign especially post-Palin. It was probably because of his heavy support for gay adoption and against don't ask, don't tell that led along with other LGBT concerns that helped elevate the Warren choice to high drama.

What did people expect?

usreporter — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:33:38 GMT

Seriously people - he's PRESIDENT now. He can't have a myspace or a facebook page and he can't have people folllow him on twitter. It was great he reached out to the electorate the way he did during the campaign, 21st century style. But a campaign is by nature informal, a serious of town halls, baby kissing stops, going up to random strangers and shaking their hands and listening to their stories. And that stage is made no less genuine by the fact that once the election is over and it is time to govern, he has to keep his distance. He holds the highest office in the land, he has to act like it. Yes we miss him, but look at him go!

Messyonyuck

boredwell — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:38:29 GMT

Well, the new White House website is cleaner, easier to read than that conjured by the Bush peeps. I won't weight-in just yet on this latest apparition preferring to employ patience while waiting for a more detailed rather than retailed version to pop up. Like Obama's admin, the site is obviously in transition, too and, according to the reports, so are the live wires essential to jump starting a tech savvy desktop tool. Once the communication infrastructure has been enhanced, debugged and is up and running, my expectations for a more remedial site will increase. Until then, I think it best to remain positive and to remember change, being incremental, doesn't happen overnight.

Altered FACTS...

jrdement — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:31:22 GMT

Off the mark on the college issue... the plan as I read it still rewards those who serve with 4K up front that those who don't serve won't get. This is an article written with a pre-concieved notion and agenda; that the facts didn't fit the premise didn't slow this transparent author down a bit...

His agenda vanished

gunsmoke — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 17:14:57 GMT

I am puzzled why he did this. Is this a move to suppress expectations? Is it move to reduce “gotchas” like "read my lips". At first I noticed the gun related content was removed then all of it was gone. His agenda used to be a series of vague generally agreed concepts with a sprinkle of details, for example “reducing crime" and "banning assault weapons.” This was changed to a more vaporous all inclusive “addressing domestic agenda and policy issues,” whatever that means. Most people I spoke with are not sure what to make of it. It seems the open door policy Obama promised is now closed.

Every Obama Promise

CO Mom — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:00:48 GMT

Every one comes with an expiration date. Every single one. And when people dismiss those expirations as "flexibility" or "mature revision" or some such nonsense, then President Obama can say anything and do anything with absolutely no accountability.

As usual

tonydavisnelson — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 20:58:55 GMT

the posters are missing half of the story. These two examples mentioned in the piece have been ALL over talk radio in the past week. The other half of the country thinks that mandatory public service sounds a lot like Hitler Youth and don't much care what people in other countries want us to do.

Step back!

Ismene — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:25:15 GMT

Hold on there just a second!

Are you suggesting that it's WRONG or misguided to revise and update plans as you go along? Is that what you're trying to say?

Really? Really?!?

*goggles in disbelief*

Isn't that how we ended up in a financial crisis and unwisely embroiled in war? Because "The Decider" wouldn't budge on anything. I prefer a smart president who'll make changes to the plan as neccessary, thanks. ;)

Whoa

beccanewsome — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:27:02 GMT

Snarky little piece of writing here. I can understand why a candidate Obama would ask questions from all over the world as to opinions of what people think one should do as leader of the USA but as the President-Elect it is understandable that he would ask this question only of Americans, and I may be naive in my understanding.

If this is how you respond to what is happening on a transitional website only 8 days after the election then I am absolutely NOT interested in what you have to say a month, a year or several years out. Patience is a virtue that we all need in abundance right now as all of our wishes and hopes for our country, and by extension the world, Mr. Obama will not be able to tackle before his inauguration much less take care of immediately upon taking office.

I suggest the writer take a deep breath, count to ten and relax.

Missing Policy: Reduce prison population by legalizing crime

Levon Tostig — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:53:26 GMT

That's how he got the prison vote.

Canada too

sd22 — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 00:20:52 GMT

"Now there's no field for your country—the form assumes you're American."

Not true. The Canadian provinces were still in the State category. Also, there's a N/A option. Maybe just President of North America then...

Easy There, Pete

Sparkle Motion! — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:48:49 GMT

Don't mean to minimize the supposed "newsworthiness" of these website changes, but do you think your tone is a bit hyperbolic? Is the "disappearance" of the youth service idea a dramatic change in policy? A clarification? A server glitch? I don't know. Neither do you. So simmer down. Your bluster (with exclamation point!) about breaking campaign promises doesn't make you look wise or funny. It makes you look like a buffoonish ass.

Idiots

grit — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 19:20:05 GMT

In election campaigns the people who run them have learned with the average citizen BS talks and Facts walk. So you get liers, hate mongers, etc like matt drudge, rush limbaugh, and fox news in general that the idiots in this country actually listen too. To the extent that campaigns have to waste time and effort countering. The McCain campaign this time has proven you can stick anyone up on the stage, tell everyone they are great, and there will be people falling all over themselves to kiss their butt. You could erase McCain's name from the ticket replace it with Palin's and make Joe the plummer the VP canidate and you would still have about 40% of the country ready to vote for them. After all alot of them thought a good old boy you could have a beer with would make a good president. While his obvious goal from the beginning was to plunder the country. And is right now working very hard to suck up every last billion he can before he has to leave.

health care and web pages

laura456 — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:31:00 GMT

A note on the article. It seems to be quite one-sided. I looked at the comparison of the McCain webpage, then I went to the McCain site. The first page on health care has changed as you show, but when you go to the "read more" page, it is the same one that you say has had all of the "pink" deleted information. Is there anything wrong with people revising their web pages? I don't think this kind of comparison provides good information for the public when it is biased. Do you think for one moment that Obama has not changed his web pages over the last few months?

On the election monitors, there is nothing wrong with both sides have election monitors. There has been plenty of issues over the last several decades showing the need for changes in the election day process. Types of ballots seem to be an issue for some states and machines for others. The problem I am seeing is the "get out to vote" helpers who bias those whom they take to register or vote. If you honestly want more to vote, then allow everyone to make their own decision, not to be coerced into voting one way.

"Election monitors" McCain's way to supress the vote?

progressivebulldog — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 21:38:18 GMT

It's not enough for McCain to run what is arguably the most negative and untruthful campaign in presidentail election history. Since it's clear that his ideas on the economy aren't resonating (or maybe no one really knows what his ideas are since it seems he himself doesn't) and he's become increasingly erratic it seems McCain is now resorting to the ultimate Republican strategy: trying to suppress enough votes to "win" the election.

This happened in Florida in 2000 when at least 20000 African American voters were prevented from voting because their names were "similiar" to those of felons. It happened in Ohio in 2004 when there were plenty of voting machines in affluent neighborhoods but nowhere near enough in poor neighborhoods.

It happened in California decades ago when as many as 1 million African American votes were discarded. This is the so-called "Bradley effect." Bradley, an African American candidate for governor led in the polls but lost the election. The explanation was that whites secretly voted for the white guy. Yeah, right.

The Republican mantra is if you can't win an election, steal it.

It seems McCain is all about desperate revision.

Baalzephon — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:29:32 GMT

He has flip-flopped more than Kerry ever did.

This site has a series of videos that show him espousing one position and then switching to another.

http://www.freewebs.com/baalzephon/johnmccain.htm

lawyers?

GMX — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 17:52:22 GMT

The last paragraph of the story takes issue with the call for law students and concerned citizens, but not lawyers. Seems like an unsupported concern because the original version of the page asked for lawyers as marked by the box that says "I am a lawyer and I am licensed to practice law in the state(s) of:" That box remains present in the new version and lawyers are specifically mentioned as part of the team in the introductory text - "They will include both lawyers and concerned citizens who want to safeguard the integrity of American elections." The new version of the page just seems to offer more context for what people are signing up for and allows for "law students" or just plain "concerned citizens" to go ahead and sign up. This doesn't really seem to be troubling at all.

hasn't that been true for a while?

gzuckier — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 17:24:49 GMT

" If you don't like your current health insurance, looks as though you can't go with the government program anymore."

that's why i was supporting hillary over obama, back in the day. still, a step forward for the uninsured is a step forward, even if it's not a step forward for me.

Obama has changed back his website

marcgoldwein — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 13:09:23 GMT

http://www.usbudgetwatch.org/budgetblog/2008/what-s-table-obama-part-ii-210

the altar's been altered

boredwell — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 23:43:49 GMT

yeah, well, yawn, like this should be a surprise, eh? even the most jaded pundit wouldn't blink an eye at the hard reality of electioneering. truth-telling only makes victory more difficult, doncha think? tell them what they WANT to hear. that's what elections are all about. maybe obama's just reaching out when redacting his webology.

look, if you don't play compromise you can't be president. well, you can but you won't win another 4 years if that's your ultimate ego-goal in running this time around. that's obama's camp's entrenched thinking. the idealogical necessities will lose the pragmatic when wooing the rural, the elderly, the voucher people into the Big Tent. this man is only practicing common sensibleness, right? and Right Now!

it's naive and dangerously over optimistic to ever believe any one candidate will be able to right this country's woes. i must comiserate when i look around at my family and work and throw up my hands! like one person's ceiling being another floor, the nation's woes are either boon or banes, depending on its partisans. and partisan issues have become institutions, sacred ones, that will not be so easily profaned. especially by god-presidents with clay feet. let's grow up and the fact that fact.

as i was privately schooled, i'm sure my parents would have endorsed the idea of vouchers. the public schools are systemically corroded,no longer capable of bearing fruit, right? and they're gonna cost a lot more money than the bailout figure to fix em, too. besides it will not happen overnight, either. nobody has ever had the will to do much more than talk about the reviled publics and throw out some gutless ideas on how to improve them. forget public education, the schools, its infra-and super-structures! ohm yeahm=, i guess that includes the students, too but heck. so, pragmatically speaking, doesn't it make sense that in order to have an educated workforce, we pour some extra bucks into vouchers? where it will do the Most Good? then at least the fourtunate minority can take advantage of continuing better education. they will be, afterall, the stock from which our future leaders will most likely be culled. even if it means they are really no smarter than public schooled kids. oh, let's not forget the bright side. americans love those who, despite all odds, pull themself up by the boot straps. so, hope has some currency.

as for jill biden, well, busy people can forget. they're so, well, busy that can't remember if they started an organization or we're told/asked to join one. it's a lot like asking-do you remember what you had for dinner or what you wore the other day. yeah, people can forget stuff like that. so what? we're all a bit enervated by this campaign season. we need to rest NOW before the unslaught of whatever the next 4years hold in store. one way or the other we're all gonna need a lot of energy to get through those. so let's not sweat the small, significant stuff.

Imagine Bush/McCain SS Plan TODAY?

The Real RML — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 12:45:44 GMT

Your social security would have been handed to the very same companies now being bailed out to save them from complete failure even as executives run away with the money. Yeah-they care about serniors. SENIOR MANAGEMENT.

Why not raise the retirement age?

libertyforall — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:24:12 GMT

The original retirement age was set by life expectancy and ability to continue to perform the job of the seniors of the 1930's. The life expectancy is now something like 17 years higher than when social security was created, jobs are as an aggregate less labor intensive, and the normal retirement age for social security has gone up a measly 2 years. What am I missing here, shouldn't we start tweaking the normal retirement age up to something like 75 or even higher? Only thing I can figure is the AARP is too powerful.