Winning The Future!

[Mikeg]

Why would someone in the White House think that a political slogan like "Winning the Future" is a good idea, particularly when it's the title of a 2006 book written by someone who has a teeny-tiny chance of challenging your boss in 2012 - not to mention the acronym it forms?

Nonetheless, I present you with this WTF example, brought to you courtesy of President Obama and his minions, which I will subtitle "Winning The Future with Crony Capitalism".

When BP's Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico blew out last April, the Obama Administration immediately suspended processing of all new deepwater drilling permits and also shut down all of their competitor's deepwater drilling operations in the Gulf, sending 30,000 workers to the unemployment lines. Critics rightfully charged that this was an over-reaction on the part of the President and his Energy Secretary, since responsibility should be specific, not collective. The FAA doesn't shut down all airline operations when there is a plane crash, instead they sometimes ground specific types of aircraft like the one involved to perform inspections while the crash is investigated. However, that's apparently just the way this Administration rolls when it comes to environmental disasters and energy policy, so we just need to get over it..

Then during the deepwater drilling ban, President Obama formed a commission and charged them with investigating the BP Macondo blowout and the massive oil spill that followed. The Commission uncovered a series of mistakes and failed judgment calls by BP. They also found that compared to their competitors, BP had a much worse long-term company safety record.

Now the Obama Administration is beginning to issue new permits for deepwater drilling in the Gulf and guess who was issued the very first one on Monday of this week? Answer: BP and their partner, Noble Energy.

Perhaps it's just a co-incidence, even though BP, along with GE, Goldman Sachs and others, have all been long-time supporters of Obama's green initiatives and their attached subsidies.

However, U.S. Rep. Ed Markey [[D-Mass.) felt compelled to note that, "the optics of this situation contain their own special irony".

Bonus question: Energy Secretary Steven Chu's deputy is a gentleman named Steven E. Koonin. For what company did Mr. Koonin used to be the chief scientist?

[Mikeg]

"Winning the Future by Re-Writing the Past"

Obama: Gadhafi 'Has Lost The Legitimacy To Lead'

Washington [[CNN) -- President Barack Obama said Thursday that Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi "has lost the legitimacy to lead and ... must leave." [read the rest]

I seem to remember that Col. Gadhafi staged a coup d’état and has exercised dictatorial power over Libya ever since 1969. How in the hell can anyone say with a straight face that Gadhafi "has lost the legitimacy to lead" when he was never a legitimate leader to begin with? Imagine how those translated words will sound to the ears of Libyans who are risking death to overthrow that bastard?

[TKshreve]

When BP's Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico blew out last April, the Obama Administration immediately suspended processing of all new deepwater drilling permits and also shut down all of their competitor's deepwater drilling operations in the Gulf, sending 30,000 workers to the unemployment lines. Critics rightfully charged that this was an over-reaction on the part of the President and his Energy Secretary, since responsibility should be specific, not collective.

A- I think it was right to suspend all drilling for the time being. Afterall, many forms of regulation were overlooked which lead to the rupture. How is anyone supposed to know which "specific" rigs were subject to this error if nobody was watching the "collective"?

B- The Government was able to shake BP down for hundreds of millions of dollars in what has to be one of the only massive shifts of wealth from the corporate sector back to the people. Refreshing.

C- Are those workers not eligible to go after lost wages due to BP [[and friends) lack of oversight? Or do they no longer have collective bargaining rights either?

It's easy for you {read: right wing/repubs} to scope in on and criticize Obama's actions in the wake of a man made catastrophe nobody was ready for. Katrina anyone....... never saw that one coming, did we?

The saddest part of American morals is that as long as a price tag can be levied on the event, it is ok. Tens of thousands of lives were upended, coastlines were polluted, as well as millions of species of life killed or poisoned. But that's ok since we can throw money at it and make people feel better in the end. Don't confuse me with this externality crap.

It was not solely BP's fault that this happened. If it was, then our government is in far worse shape than I suspected.

Now the Obama Administration is beginning to issue new permits for deepwater drilling in the Gulf and guess who was issued the very first one on Monday of this week? Answer: BP and their partner, Noble Energy.

Are you calling the Obama Administration hypocrites for reprimanding BP then allowing them to continue drilling? It sounds like it. Your argument would be the equivalent of banning NASA from ever launching another shuttle because of the Challenger explosion. We just don't have that many options when it comes to offshore drilling.......... baby............ drilling. Afterall, oil is the 20th/21st century's new idea of water, isn't it? <facepalm>

In conclusion, temporarily suspending 30,000 jobs for the sake of our planet is not the worst thing to happen. At least those jobs are coming back. It's the other offshore jobs that concern me [[and should concern you) the most. They are not coming back from the looks of it.

[TKshreve]

BTW....

Why would someone in the White House think that a political slogan like "Winning the Future" is a good idea?

It's actually quite the thoughtful concept. Some groups of individuals lack what is called "foresight".

particularly when it's the title of a 2006 book written by someone who has a teeny-tiny chance of challenging your boss in 2012?

He, and the right should be pleased with such a compliment. It's the closest thing to non-partisanship our gov't has done in ages. And I speak mainly to the republicans.

not to mention the acronym it forms?

Really?

[Mikeg]

"Winning the Future by Double Counting the Savings"

During a US House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee hearing Thursday, Health and Human Services Cabinet Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted to double-counting in the Obamacare budget.

Rep. John Shimkus [[R-IL) specifically asked Sec. Sebelius whether $500 billion in Medicare cuts were used to sustain the program or pay for the law.

Shimkus: "What’s the $500 billion in cuts for? Preserving Medicare or funding the health-care law?" ...... "So is it being used to save Medicare or is it being used to fund health care reform - which one?"
Sebelius: “Both.”

[watch the video]

The subcommittee chairman Rep. Joe Pitts [[R-PA) later stated, “The same dollar can’t be used twice. This is the largest of the many budget gimmicks Democrats used to claim Obamacare would reduce the deficit.”

[Richard]

We import 80% of our seafood the remaining 20% fresh seafood non farmed comes from the Gulf coast one of the US largest oil reserves are in the everglades already drilled and capped do we really need off shore drilling and its unregulated abuses?

[Mikeg]

.....The Government was able to shake BP down for hundreds of millions of dollars in what has to be one of the only massive shifts of wealth from the corporate sector back to the people.......

What's with all the silly facepalming? That's a useless on-line rhetorical device that's become a tired cliche.

Speaking of useless rhetoric, remember President Obama's statement from early June 2010 that he wanted to "know whose ass to kick"? Assuming he ever found out, did we ever see the Feds go after them and "kick their ass" with fines? The answer to that is "no" - so far it has been nothing but talk, despite estimates that BP still faces civil and criminal liabilities totaling $15B to $19B. To date, the only payments BP has had to make were for stopping the blowout, cleaning up the oil spill and for compensating victims from the $20B "pledged" fund they set up shortly after Obama's "kick ass" comment.

In the meantime, BP is the first company back into the Gulf deepwater drilling permits game and even Obama's Democrat allies on Capitol Hill admit that the "optics" look pretty bad. If this had all happened under the Bush Administration, you wouldn't be "facepalming" my comments - you'd be foaming at the mouth about that "criminal Bush and his oil patch buddies".

[Mikeg]

We import 80% of our seafood the remaining 20% fresh seafood non farmed comes from the Gulf coast one of the US largest oil reserves are in the everglades already drilled and capped do we really need off shore drilling and its unregulated abuses?

"unregulated abuses" is an oxymoron. An abuse means that someone is not following the regulations, while "unregulated" implies that there are no regulations to begin with. The facts are that shallowwater and deewater offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico are both heavily regulated by the government and have been for a long time.

There are risks associated with everything man does and the focus should be on how to minimize the risks while reaping the rewards [[and having a realistic plan to respond in the event of a failure). The shallowwater drilling in the Gulf has been proven to be much less riskier than the deepwater drilling. Yet to be answered is why the Federal Government would give a deepwater permit to a company with a known track record of problematic behavior, even on land?

[1KielsonDrive]

"Winning The Future": another example of NO!bama's 'vision', articulation and plans to implement 'Change You Can Believe In'. NO!bama is just another academic, corporate tool. John Stewart had one of NO!bama's spokespeople [[Goomsby?, Gumsby?) on his show last week and all this guy could do was sputter 'Winning The Future', while grinning. Just shows to go ya what a brilliant leader NO!bama is that he'd even adopt such a stupid slogan. The demicans should adopt a slogan like 'Winning Our Balls Back'.

[TKshreve]

What's with all the silly facepalming? That's a useless on-line rhetorical device that's become a tired cliche.

Speaking of useless rhetoric, remember President Obama's statement from early June 2010 that he wanted to "know whose ass to kick"? Assuming he ever found out, did we ever see the Feds go after them and "kick their ass" with fines? The answer to that is "no" - so far it has been nothing but talk, despite estimates that BP still faces civil and criminal liabilities totaling $15B to $19B. To date, the only payments BP has had to make were for stopping the blowout, cleaning up the oil spill and for compensating victims from the $20B "pledged" fund they set up shortly after Obama's "kick ass" comment.

In the meantime, BP is the first company back into the Gulf deepwater drilling permits game and even Obama's Democrat allies on Capitol Hill admit that the "optics" look pretty bad. If this had all happened under the Bush Administration, you wouldn't be "facepalming" my comments - you'd be foaming at the mouth about that "criminal Bush and his oil patch buddies".

In regards to facepalming [[interesting portion of my argument to criticize btw), I happen to think it does a tremendous job explaining how one party feels when there is debate and spin blended together forming the opposing parties stance on an issue.

Maybe there was no ass kicking because a large portion of the spill simply dissapeared into the Gulf waters to my recollection. Pretty much a wet dream for BP. Whatever was finalized between the Obama Admin and BP it appears we'll never know. After all the gov't is still looking at the causes and culprits of the recession. Kwame is still yet to go in front of a judge for crimes he "potentially" <used very, very loosely> committed 6-8 years ago. Nobody said BP is off the hook for their past actions. But, in the end they are out there again drilling up our addiction. Because they will. We need them to. We do not have a contingency plan around this form of energy, sadly.

If Obama prevents BP from drilling, and gasoline prices are affected due to the decision, how long would it take Fox and friends [[and you) to crucify him for that particular situation? Thought so.

Finally, it would bother me a little more if Bush were at the helm when the spill occurred. Any legislation passed which affects, or govermental inquiries into the operations of the oil companies reeks of conflict of interest. I would much rather have Obama who at least appears to be an objective moderator to the situation, opposed to Texas Dolly and his crew.

[Mikeg]

In regards to facepalming [[interesting portion of my argument to criticize btw), I happen to think it does a tremendous job explaining how one party feels when there is debate and spin blended together forming the opposing parties stance on an issue.......

The reason I mentioned it was because I never even had a chance to respond to your comments before you started characterizing the "debate" as if it were a hopeless conversation with an idiot. If that's the way you want to "debate", you can do it with yourself.

[maxx]

"Winning the Future by Re-Writing the Past"

Obama: Gadhafi 'Has Lost The Legitimacy To Lead'

Washington [[CNN) -- President Barack Obama said Thursday that Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi "has lost the legitimacy to lead and ... must leave." [read the rest]

I seem to remember that Col. Gadhafi staged a coup d’état and has exercised dictatorial power over Libya ever since 1969. How in the hell can anyone say with a straight face that Gadhafi "has lost the legitimacy to lead" when he was never a legitimate leader to begin with? Imagine how those translated words will sound to the ears of Libyans who are risking death to overthrow that bastard?

SO instead Obama should have said that the U.S. policy regarding Libya for the past 3 or more decades was all wrong? We bought peace in the middle east for Israel and the rest of the world by giving money to Gadafi and Mubarak. It wasn't the best solution but it was a better alternative to continuous war in that area. As I recall, W's policy was to not talk to any country that wasn't already friendly with the U.S. If you don't talk, the only alternative is conflict which eventually turns into talking about peace once most of the war-lovers are personally hurt or killed.

[maxx]

Re: BP oil etc.

If Congress had listened to Jimmy Carter, we would have had an energy policy that looked to the future instead of the Republican's energy policy of sucking up to oil and coal. They couldn't even leave the solar panels on the White House.

[maxx]

"unregulated abuses" is an oxymoron. An abuse means that someone is not following the regulations, while "unregulated" implies that there are no regulations to begin with. The facts are that shallowwater and deewater offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico are both heavily regulated by the government and have been for a long time.

There are risks associated with everything man does ...

And when W's people are in bed with the oil companies literally, our futures are at risk.

[Mikeg]

"Winning the Future with Fuzzy Budget Math!"

In his weekly address this past Saturday, President Obama called on both parties to “come together” around a budget “that cuts spending without slowing our economic momentum.” He added, "My administration has already put forward specific cuts that meet congressional Republicans halfway. And I’m prepared to do more. But we’ll only finish the job together – by sitting at the same table, working out our differences, and finding common ground. “

Nobody is buying the President's "halfway" assertion, not even his sycophants in the Mainstream Media. Among others, CBS' Chip Reid takes issue with the Administration's spin on the 2011 Continuing Resolution budget negotiations with House Republican Leaders:

The White House insists they're meeting the Republicans half way on budget cuts, but the numbers simply don't add up.
Here's the White House's fuzzy math:
White House cuts:

• Freeze on 2011 spending: $40.8 billion
• Cuts in Senate bill: $4.0 billion
• New proposed cuts: $6.5 billion
• Total: $51.3 billion

Republican cuts:

• Freeze on 2011 spending: $40.8 billion
• Cuts in House bill: $61.5 billion
• Total: $102.3 billion

The Democrats' $51.3 billion is about half of the Republicans' $102.3 billion, so they're "meeting the Republicans half way." Right? Wrong. What makes this nonsense is the fact that BOTH parties are using fake numbers. The $40.8 billion in savings used by Democrats and Republicans is imaginary -- it's not cuts, it's the amount that would be saved by a freeze compared to a 2011 proposed budget that never came close to being enacted.
Without that imaginary $40.8 billion, the real numbers are Democrats: $10.5 billion; Republicans: $61.5 billion. So Democrats are meeting them one-sixth of the way.

Keep in mind the only reason that this is happening halfway into the 2011 Budget year is the deliberate failure of former House Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi [[and her accomplice "Pinky" Reid) to produce a 2011 Budget.

How can the President expect to be "Winning the Future" when he still don't even have a Budget to control current federal government spending?

What this is really about is the President's desperate attempt to stake out a more favorable baseline for the 2012 Budget negotiations - one that is more favorable for maintaining higher levels of deficit spending.

[Gistok]

WTF... nicely sums up the whole theme of this thread....

[maxx]

Our government operated for decades by the two parties reaching compromises. Now Republicans in Congress treat compromise as a breach of morality. As Mitch O'Connell said, their one main goal is not improving the lot of the average citizen but getting back the presidency in the next election.

[Mikeg]

Our government operated for decades by the two parties reaching compromises. Now Republicans in Congress treat compromise as a breach of morality. As Mitch O'Connell said, their one main goal is not improving the lot of the average citizen but getting back the presidency in the next election.

Try Googling Pelosi compromise with Republicans and see exactly how many results you get that are dated prior to Nov. 2, 2010.

[maxx]

Try Googling Pelosi compromise with Republicans and see exactly how many results you get that are dated prior to Nov. 2, 2010.

Republicans don't compromise, they dictate. Their fight for the super-rich's tax cut was a prime example. They were ready to hold up unemployment benefits to ensure that their contributors got that tax break. They closed down the government when Newtie was Speaker. They don't give a sh!t about most people in this country. They are working to consolidate the corporations' grip on our government. W's admin. showed what little regard they had for the average citizen, starting an unnecessary war to enrich Halliburton, cutting funding to the FDA and EPA. And now they are going after OSHA. The economy is so messed up, people have to work day and night just to keep their heads above water so they have even less time to keep up with what Congress is doing. And just to make it even harder for the average citizen to be informed, Republicans have been cutting NPR and PBS funding and finishing off the unions which provided political information to workers. The largest voting block is people over 60, people less likely to change their views or even remember what happened three years ago. The young people voted in Obama in 2008, but they are going to learn the hard way that when they don't vote every two years, they pay the price.

Republicans hated Pelosi because she was just like them. She hates to give in to their tactics.
Did the Republicans have a healthcare plan in 2009? If they did, part of it is probably in the new healthcare law because it is very friendly to health insurance companies. But businesses are not in business to compromise either. They see anything that cuts into their profit margins as a declaration of war. The biggest lie perpetuated by the rightwing media and the Republicans is the term "Obamacare" when a lot of the law's provisions are straight out of the Republicans' proposed healthcare plan of the 1990s.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_515743.html

[oladub]

If Republicans were the fiscal conservatives they pretend to be, they would hold fast for a $500B reduction in deficit spending which is otherwise $1.65T this year or about $14,228 of added debt for every adult couple in the US. Such a reduction would reduce deficit spending by less than one third. Surely, if Democrats comprehended numbers, this would be recognized a meeting Democrats 2/3 in Democrats favor. If Democrats want to shut down the government, take heart, Belgium has gone over 300 days without a government without many ill effects. I will think more kindly of Democrats.

[maxx]

Those crazy Belgians. If it is true that the Walloon areas are dependent on Flemish subsidies, then the Flemish have them over a barrel. It sounds like the situation is similar to Spain where the people of Barcelona feel they are supporting most of the rest of Spain. Some want to secede. Cultural pride is great and all, but when it tears a country apart, there needs to be a barrage of public education and discussion to get people's priorities right.

[Mikeg]

"Winning the Future while Barreling Down the Wrong Track!"

It's been more than a full month now since President Obama rolled out his new Winning the Future™ catch phrase and the pollsters are eager to find out if anyone is buying it. So how is it going?

The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll released today shows that "the proportion of Americans who believe the country is on the right track dropped 7 points in the past month to 31 percent, and 64 percent think the country is on the wrong track."

The percentage of "right track" respondents is now at the lowest level of Obama's presidency. The Ipsos spokesperson directly attributes the sharp drop to recent turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East and the corresponding increase in the price of gasoline.

Let me suggest that the sharp drop is directly attributable to the President's ineffectual response to that turmoil, since the question is about whether our country is on the right or wrong track, not their opinion of events in some other country and the subsequent market reactions.

Even more troublesome for the President is the fact that the Reuters/Ipsos poll results show that over the past month his job approval rating among independent voters took a sharp dive, to 37 percent from 47 percent. Apparently they aren't buying his WTF schtick, particularly when they hear comments from the President insisting that more federal education spending is needed along with education reform.

[ghettopalmetto]

"Winning the Future while Barreling Down the Wrong Track!"

It's been more than a full month now since President Obama rolled out his new Winning the Future™ catch phrase and the pollsters are eager to find out if anyone is buying it. So how is it going?

The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll released today shows that "the proportion of Americans who believe the country is on the right track dropped 7 points in the past month to 31 percent, and 64 percent think the country is on the wrong track."

The percentage of "right track" respondents is now at the lowest level of Obama's presidency. The Ipsos spokesperson directly attributes the sharp drop to recent turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East and the corresponding increase in the price of gasoline.

Let me suggest that the sharp drop is directly attributable to the President's ineffectual response to that turmoil, since the question is about whether our country is on the right or wrong track, not their opinion of events in some other country and the subsequent market reactions.

Even more troublesome for the President is the fact that the Reuters/Ipsos poll results show that over the past month his job approval rating among independent voters took a sharp dive, to 37 percent from 47 percent. Apparently they aren't buying his WTF schtick, particularly when they hear comments from the President insisting that more federal education spending is needed along with education reform.

Are these your original musings, Mikeg? Or are you violating copyright protections again?

[Mikeg]

Are these your original musings, Mikeg? Or are you violating copyright protections again?

I link to and/or identify in quotes anything in my posts that are not my own original thoughts, ideas, opinions, etc.

If you had any evidence that I've been "violating copyright protections again", I'm sure you would have presented it, since it would be so easy to prove with a Google search.

[TKshreve]

"Winning the Future while Barreling Down the Wrong Track!"

It's been more than a full month now since President Obama rolled out his new Winning the Future™ catch phrase and the pollsters are eager to find out if anyone is buying it. So how is it going?

The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll released today shows that "the proportion of Americans who believe the country is on the right track dropped 7 points in the past month to 31 percent, and 64 percent think the country is on the wrong track."

The percentage of "right track" respondents is now at the lowest level of Obama's presidency. The Ipsos spokesperson directly attributes the sharp drop to recent turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East and the corresponding increase in the price of gasoline.

Let me suggest that the sharp drop is directly attributable to the President's ineffectual response to that turmoil, since the question is about whether our country is on the right or wrong track, not their opinion of events in some other country and the subsequent market reactions.

Even more troublesome for the President is the fact that the Reuters/Ipsos poll results show that over the past month his job approval rating among independent voters took a sharp dive, to 37 percent from 47 percent. Apparently they aren't buying his WTF schtick, particularly when they hear comments from the President insisting that more federal education spending is needed along with education reform.

OMG! You mean people don't think Obama is doing a good job? WTF!

Here's your daily eye opener. I have to agree with oladub on his premise that both the Obama Admin and the Republicans in general have screwed taxpayers silly.

Republicans for their onslaught of the "NO" campaign and continuous dealings with Corporate America. The Koch brothers and the GOP might as well be one and the same. It's like these two groups will not be happy until there are zero jobs left in this country and everybody is a slave to the credit machine.

Obama for his willingness [[and ignorance) to try and work together with the GOP to better our country while he had a majority. I would rather the Dems "rammed health care down our throat" when they had the chance. Instead they tried to compromise with stubborn GOP corporate poodles who clusterfu*ked everything up and together they accomplished zilch.

And we continue to shovel money into the hungry never-full bellies of Corporate Insurance giants. You do realize that you will never see that money again, right? It would have been better used as toilet paper. Trickle down my a$$.

It's part of the great American wealth transfer we so often hear about.

Read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Spin-In.../dp/1608192814

I dare you.