It seems that nobody wanted to work with our president from the very beginning, and now they waste time, taxpayer money, and common sense on efforts that only show stupidity. Here's the result of the latest poll that I found yesterday at NewsMax.
Then today I'm finding another article in the Huffington Post that just might explain why Obama has had such a hard time. I wonder why nobody thought of this before? I've said it from the beginning.
Why is it that our leaders want to put fundamentalist religion into our politics and the "do nothing" faction wants to be re-elected when all they have done is shackle Obama?
I don't think you would need a sitting president to put Bush and Cheney up for prosecution, so my question is why didn't somebody else cover it back then once they found it all out? Water boarding and Quantanamo was around way before Obama.
I agree - in a more just world, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield would be on trial for murder of every American and Iraqi killed in that abortion of a war.
There definitely seems to be a large irrational component to the widespread hatred of Obama, not unlike hatred of the Clintons. To me the biggest disappointment about Obama is that he turned out to be such an ordinary politician, and all the wild beliefs about his "rabid socialism," etc. etc. make no sense. But then much of this comes right out of the same mentality that underlies the religious right. There's no reasoning with people who think getting a blowjob was far worse than manipulating a pack of lies to maneuver the country into a completely unjustified war that's now coming back to bite us again. And the same scary crazy people are blaming Obama for Iraq now too. It would seem that intelligence is a deficit for anyone running for public office in this country.
Michael & Freethinker31--I think you'll find this interesting:
Charlie Pierce is for my money one of the most perceptive journalists we have around today, and he gives great snark.
Thanks, Bertold, for pointing us to a very well written piece that describes a lot of what's going on in our politics today.
Newsmax might not be targeted at a "balanced" audience.
This Washington Post - ABC News poll from April found a general job approval rating of 41% for Obama, vs. 25% in the Newsmax poll. That 41% hides strong polarization by political party (74% of Democrats approved; 12% of Republicans), ideology, race, and "race/religion" (from 16% among White evangelical Protestants to 54% among people claiming no religion).
The poll also found people trusting the Democrats somewhat more than the Republicans "to do a better job in coping with the main problems the nation faces over the next few years"; respondents also trusted Democrats more on the economy, health care, immigration issues, helping the middle class, and issues especially important to women (but not on the federal budget deficit).
On "Which political party is closer to your own opinion on the issue of global warming, also known as climate change", the response was Democrats 47%, Republicans 29%, no opinion 15%, with 10% volunteering "neither" or "both equally". (But as Bernard Baruch, James Schlesinger, and Daniel Patrick Moynahan pointed out, people are entitled to their own opinions but not to their own facts!)
I agree, and NewsMax is extreme right wing to me. I just used it because it was the one that I happened to get at the time.
Example of their "off" reporting is a headline saying Obama wanted to spend "millions" of our dollars on something, but when you read the story it becomes 1 million.