That's ridiculous. While I do wish he was both more liberal, and more combative with Republicans, to say he's another Bush is crazy. First of all we are leaving Iraq. It's not instantaneous, but it is happening. Also the groundwork is being laid for Afghanistan to end. It's several years away but it'll happen, most likely towards the end of his second term, and yes, he'll win easy in 2012. As for Iran, I can't imagine the U.S. being in a ground war there. It will most likely be dealt with through economic and political pressure. At the most we'll send a few missiles over but nothing more. It is important to thwart their nuclear ambitions, but it can be done short of a ground war. While Guantanamo is still going, it is shrinking. Dozens have been moved from there in the last year and plans are being looked at to close it outright.

As for health care, it's far from perfect but it will have many positives in it. Millions of Americans will have coverage they don't have now. Insurance companies will be unable to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions either outright or by exorborant rates. The "donut hole" will end and that will benefit millions of Americans too. All in all there will be a lot of good in the bill, well outweighting it's flaws.  Also the stimulus plan worked. Unemployment in falling and will continue to fall throughout this year and next. The economy is growing very nicely. All in all Pres. Obama is a big success. The growing economy will benefit both Obama and congressional Democrats is coming elections and if not this year, than certainly in 2012 you will see Republican votes against the stimulus hung like an albatross around their necks in the campaign. The tea party movement seems to be very promising for DEMOCRATS. It's big enough to impact the Rep. primary (look at N.Y. 23) but not big enough to matter in the general election. Democrats will win several races because of them. In fact I think in 2012 the booming economy combined with Republicans nominating somebody way too conservative will lead to Obama squishing their candidate like a bug and being remembered as one of our best presidents.

As for Republicans, if they play their cards right they can begin to recover in 2014. All the Senate Democrats who won in '08 will be up for reelection and without Obama's coattails. Also with only a few exceptions there has been a trend for over 50 years in America to give each party an 8 year turn at the oval office. If Republicans nominate a pro-choice, somewhat pro-gay rights moderate in 2016 they should win. If they nominate a tea party approved candidate then Democrats will have 12 years and counting.

The Republicans are the equivalent of rats and sneaks.  They are derailing everything just because they can, and it is crappy for their country.  No one except a republican could do anything effective in this climate, and effective by a Republican standard is garbage.  They are taking him out systematically the way they took out Clinton.  Likely they have paid people to spend their time looking for ways to undercut everything he does, just like Ken Starr was paid to lynch Bill. 

His policies have been thwarted & watered down, even from their initial ' friendly' bi-partisan flavour.   People thought his ideas were terrific.  He moved them, ispired them, and it looked like maybe the country could pull together.  Its like bullies baiting someone to step out, and then pouncing, only the entire country is getting pummeled this time, all for the sake of partisanship.

If America can't rein in the Republicans, they are (as I was coming to believe while Busy was in office) going to sign their own death warrant as a superpower.  Bring Obama here if they turn him out. 

and I agree with Jon - the tea party movement (when I was in Florida) was on the news a lot as a brash, kick-back noisy bunch who weren't taken seriously by even Republicans.  If they keep on picking people like Palin & Huckabee who are so right wingnut it isn't funny, the Republicans will not be unified.

If the Republicans choose someone more moderate, and they win the election, then the country deserves more of the same (from the bush era) and I truly believe their impact & clout will diminish until the rest of the world goes on without them.  Remember the scorn of many European nations and Islamic nations and Canada too towards Bush & his policies?  Towards their plans for solving world issues, and their hyper-religious responses to other countryies?  Those nations were beginning to work independently of the US, and set up their own alliances.  The Nobel prize for Obama was a stunning, resounding vote of support for a new American direction, and look what the American right has done to it. 

Obama is not the worst president in history - he would simply be remembered as the canary in the coal mine, showing the US Empire in its twilight hours.

1. He has not left Iraq, and he can't, whatever anyone says about a deadline.

2. He  has actually stepped up the war in Afghanistan and expanded it in Pakistan. The deadline is so far in the future, it has no meaning. At the very best, he will end up with a "democratic" government in that country which is the most corrupt in the world, and one that has much the same values as the Taliban. So what do we gain by being there at all?

3. re Guatantamo, it is still open. And there are some 14 other such camps, mostly in Africa. They are also rendering prisoners for torture in other countries.

As for torture itself, congress has just pased a bill making it legal. Want to bet on whether Obama will sign it?

4. The health bill does not do two things such a bill has to do. It does not give everyone  the right to medical care. And it maintains the high cost, in fact increasing it, of the world's most overpriced health system. The major changes were to somewhat expand coverage while at the same time maintaining the very high profits of the private health industries. As well, some of the health stats for the US are alarmingly below the standard for an industrialized society - infant survival, for example. Obama has increased the price of an already overpriced industry. He has done so at a tiime of enormous debt. Guess what stands likely to have its budget cut?

5, The idea of Iran being close to a bomb is silly. The idea that would make it a world threat if it could is even sillier. Ever notice the US has never attacked North Korea - and it actually made a few. So why is Iran, which doesn't yet have a bomb and probably isn't close, and which faces an Israel with some 250 nuclear bombs - why is it such a threat to world peace?

In any case, Obama has no choice. Israel has made it very clear it wants war with Iran. And the US is so deeply committed to Israel (Obama has said so many times) that it would have no choice but to play a role in such a war.

6. Don't underestimate the tea baggers. This is a sign of advanced  distrust of the democratic system as is exists. At best, t his suggests a very low turnout in the next election. It also resembles conditions in Germany that enabled Hitler to rise.

7. I certainly hope the American economy will recover over the next couple of years. But there are many economists who don't think it will. The only way I can see that happening it to drive american wages down to those of a third world company. That will give American industry labour cheap enough to compete, and poor enough to be unable to afford imported goods.

Yes, the Empire is on the verge of collapse.

I am not worried about Iran getting nuclear weapons--the West's attacks on the Iranian nuclear program have been enormously helpful to a corrupt regime that is steadily losing control of its own country.  What would Iran be able to do with nuclear weapons that would not be enormously harmful to every other Muslim country in the region, and itself as the radioactive debris settled over the Iranian countryside?  I am more worried about the nuclear weapons attached to ICBM's scattered through a number of ex-Soviet republics.

Obama's Health Bill is insanely expensive -- I don't understand why it is costing so much to provide health care to so few.

The American right is dividied between the war-mongers and the traditional isolationists who just want the US to quit interfering in the affairs of other countries--let's be careful about making blanket statements about anyone in our neighbour to the south.  Many good people there are caught up in a complicated mess--please wish them well.

I would take Obama over Harper any day of the week

So far, they're interchangeable.

 I completely agree with Graeme on every point --- well, except one, I don't think it's "tea-baggers," I think it is the "tea-parties."  Tea-bagging is something else entirely.  ahem.

And, by the way, the whole Tea Party movement, one could argue started by the like of Ron Paul, has been effectively hijacked by the Republicans because it was deemed a potential threat to their base.  Wingnuts like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin have stormed their way in derailing that train.

Oh, what did Obama do this weekend?  Signed an extension of the Patriot Act to further allow unconstitutional wiretaps, raids, imprisonment of the American people.  And while the Patriot Act was supposed be about terrorism, in the majority of cases it is being used in drug cases.  And did Obama post the extension on his website for five days before he signed it --- like he promised he would do?  No, he didn't.

And what about his promise not to use "executive signing privileges" on laws passed by congress?  No, he used them many times - a direct campaign pledge reversal.

And while he is talking about health care health care health care --- and the rest of the country is saying jobs jobs jobs --- he is only underscoring how out of touch he is with the rest of America.

He has had his one year of "well, yeah, at least I'm not Bush..."  Now it's time for him to prove himself.

End the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somolia, Yemen, Pakistan, close the torture prisons once and for all, bring accountability to Wall Street, stop trying to create a war in Iran, you know, do all of those things you said you were going to do Mr. President.

 ...and by the way, (and I am in no way advocating the US two party system), the Dems have control of both the house and senate... bashing the republicans is avoiding the issue...

Tea-bagging is something else entirely.  ahem.

oh goosh thank you 4 the monday morning

split my seams laff

graham cracker....................... look up tea bagging m'dear

back to dunking the tea bag in the tea cup

 And here's one for you if you are American:  If Obama wants to, he can kill you.  In fact, it's policy -- and he doesn't even need to ask a judge for a warrant:

Although Blair emphasized that it requires "special permission" before an American citizen can be placed on the assassination list, consider from whom that "permission" is obtained:  the President, or someone else under his authority within the Executive Branch.  There are no outside checks or limits at all on how these "factors" are weighed.  In last week's post, I wrote about all the reasons why it's so dangerous -- as well as both legally and Consitutionally dubious -- to allow the President to kill American citizens not on an active battlefield during combat, but while they are sleeping, sitting with their families in their home, walking on the street, etc.  That's basically giving the President the power to impose death sentences on his own citizens without any charges or trial.  Who could possibly support that?

-- with links to that whacky conspiracy minded newspaper The Washington Post

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/02/04/assassinati...

I agree Graeme, if all seems same old same old to me.

A new person, not much has changed other than that.

I expect there are alot of dissillusioned americans who bought into the whole package and now wonder why

I agree Graeme, if all seems same old same old to me.

A new person, not much has changed other than that.

I expect there are alot of dissillusioned americans who bought into the whole package and now wonder why

 a little while ago i asked my best friend - who is an American living in S. California - what she thought of Obama a year after his inauguration.  Her reply was "Well he came into a real shit storm, didn't he?"  She is NOT impressed with Ahhnald, the senator of Calif.

It's not entirely Obama's fault. The American constitution has been in shreds for a long time.  I think the situation is very bad, and that no elected person in the US has any real power to deal with real problems - only the power to imprison or even kill without charge, and the power to hand over ever more money to those who already have piles. I don't see how the US can escape violence.

Resolve... Discernment... and a truthful exercising of their proclaimed values...

yes, that would do it. But what I'm seeing so far is fear and hysteria.

 In fairness to Obama on one point anyway,  his promise was not to get out of Afghanistan (certainly not in his first year, anyway.) His promise was to redirect military resources TO Afghanistan (in other words, to ramp up the war in Afghanistan) because he believed that was the war America should be fighting, and not Iraq. You can't condemn a person for not doing what they never said they would do. As far as health care is concerned, Obama's at the mercy of Congress. There's no point in proposing something that's going to crash and burn in the Senate. The U.S. health care system - if it's going to be reformed at all - is going to have to be reformed incrementally. Obama's is a first step, which I think he himself would admit is inadequate, and not what he had promised.

Like all politicians, of course, he's got himself into trouble by making promises without any plan for how to keep them. You can't close Guantanamo without a plan for what to do with those being held there. You can't just up and leave Iraq. He shouldn't have made such explicit promises that he knew would be difficult if not impossible to keep.

Thanks Graeme - I think that is the sad truth of American politics right now, and it is the reason I see them losing global power quickly.  Obama won because he sounded like what many hope for there.  And he had global support because the world wished that was what America was like.  But the juggernaut of the Republican party is relentless in destroying Democrats regardless of their policies.  This is evident in the number of times that Republicans have bailed on their own policies because the Dems were trying to 'work together'. 

Rev. Steve Davis - likely if he'd tried to put details to those plans more than he did, the Republicans would have roasted him, even if he'd taken them from their very own playbook.  Its a crappy way of playing politics, and its about money for top republican politicians and supporters. That's it.

Now, maybe year 2 can see some momentum gather.  If  not, I would think the world will start write off the US and marginalize them.  The US will be called on for cash and bloody battles, and abandoned elsewhere.

Again, I'd say bring Obama up here ASAP.

Why is Afghanistan the "right" war? The current government installed with US help is the most corrupt in the world, and cannot win an election without massive fraud, and has exactly the same social values as the Taliban. As for the taliban being evil, the US new that through the years when they were supplying it with training and warpons and money so that it could get control of Afghanistan. And,if it is evil, why is the US now negotiating with it and offering it a share of power?

Meanwhile, the FBI announced long ago that is has no evidence the taliban had any connection with the attack on New York - or even that Osama did.

Is Afghanistan a threat to the US? It no navy, no force, virtually no army, and little equipment.

Exactly what makes this the "right" war? What will the US gain for the tens of thousands of ciivilans killed. and for the half trillion or so dollars borrowed from China to fight it. What makes it worth starting a civil war in Pakistan?

As well, the current bill is not a step to medicare. not even one step. Medicare does not mean subidizing private insurance companies to cover the poor. Doing that simply drives up the cost of heatlh care even more - and to a level that will make it even easier to attack.

I agree with you completely. 

I didn't say it was, but Obama did. That's my point. You can't criticize him for not keeping a promise to get out of Afghanistan (which I've heard people do) when he never made a promise to get out of Afghanistan.

 Rev. Davis, yes he did promise to get out of Afghanistan, and to do so rather quickly.  Please watch this:

Does that not give one the impression that he will "end the war?"  Of course, in that clip he doesn't say it is going to take another three years, require another 30-40,000 human beings... but do you not think that it gives the intended impression that he plans on bringing 'em home?

"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am President, it is the first think I will do.  I will get out troops home.  We will bring an end to this war.  You can take that to the bank."

Gee, I didn't even know it was a war --- did Congress make a declaration of war?  Graeme, could you help me out with that?

Obama consistently engages in Orwellian doublespeak -- more war means war peace.  The same week he gets the Nobel Peace Prize, he commits more troops to secure the oil pipelines, ooops, I mean crush that nasty CIA created Al-Quida

And yes, we can criticize him, he is now the President.

If you want more examples of Obama's broken promises, just ask...

Granton, do I really have to point out that the clip you've shared is totally meaningless? I would need to know the context of those remarks to know what was being promised. As it stands, it's totally out of context and offers no meaningful information whatsoever as to what Obama was actually speaking about. It's a 15 second clip in which Obama says he'll bring troops home. From where? Iraq or Afghanistan? The clip doesn't say. I submit that the following You Tube clip is an accurate summary of what Obama promised (it's certainly what I remember his policy to have been, and I followed the U.S. campaign rather closely.)

As to criticizing him, of course you can criticize him. I never said you couldn't. I suggested that it was unfair to criticize someone for not keeping a promise that was never actually made (and, in fact, when the absolute reverse was promised.) Obama promised not an end to the war in Afghanistan, but a troop surge in Afghanistan.

As to other broken promises of Obama, no I'm not interested. He's not my President. I'm just speaking about this one issue.

 Yes - you are correct - and I apologize Rev. Davis that out of his lips in that clip it is unclear if he is speaking about Iraq or Afghanistan.  My recollection of the election was that the didn't speak up about more troops in Afghanistan until after he had virtually secured the nomination.  And I think the clip you sent, has him speaking from that point on.

Regardless, I guess we disagree about which impression he was trying to create prior to the election or his nomination.  I thought he was promoting ending the war, and your take is that he promised lots more young men and women would be killed and it would be over whenever and that inspiring vision of the future is what propelled his victory.  Sorry I got it wrong.

He is still responsible for saying AFghanistan was the "right" war. And I still don't see in what possible sense it could be right.

As for Guantanamo, it is only one of more than a dozen torture camps. Neither Obama not anybody else has spoken of those or of "rendering"; and, in fact, torture has now been regularized by US courts. And Obama has renewed all the extraordinary powers of the patriot act, inlcuding the power to imprison people without charge, trial or legal representation. I have also read from several sources that the president now also has legal authority to assassinate any American with no evidence of anything. I can hardly believe it, so I am still checking it.

But the reality, I'm afraid, is that Obama was all fluff in the campaign, and also true that the American constitution is in such tatters that the President doesn't much power to do anything - except jail and assassinate Americans at will.

There is an alarming resemblance betwen  the US today, and Germany of 1928.

graeme

 Graeme,

You can start by looking here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/04/dennis-blair-us-can-kill_n_4491...

 And here's one you should have a look at --- from last year

I honestly don't think there was any doubt which impression he was trying to create on the subject of Afghanistan - I actually remember being surprised throughout the campaign that he would be so forthright on promoting a troop surge in Afghanistan to a war-weary population. Please note - I'm not saying I agree with the policy; I'm just saying that he shouldn't be criticized for breaking a promise he never made.

If you have some time watch THE OBAMA DECEPTION

Content of this movie is hard to believe, however, I have a friend who is an avid student of Amercian politics and economics who assures me there is way too much truth told in this movie.  Pretty disturbing then.....

Thank you, granton and gecko46. You're pushing my thinking in a direction I didn't want to go. I had written off most of Obama's campaign speeches as pure oratory and fluff. It may be more dangerous than that.

He promised change. There's not doubt he said that. Many times. There's no doubt that people voted for him because he promised change. But he has made no significant change from what Bush was doing. Even his "medicare" change did more for Wall street than for medical care.

You now have one hell of a lot of American disillusioned with the workings of their nation, many for different and even contradictory reasons. But we're moving into a time of heightened anger, fear, and irrationality. In practical terms, American democracy ended many years ago. Now, even the illusion of democracy is dying. That's dangerous.

 There's a lot in that Obama Deception film --- a lot!

And it plays into a huge scenerio most folks would just as soon right off as nutty --- it's just that when you see what's going on - it's very difficult to argue against.

Keep the faith everyone!

Gecko - I see what you mean: "if you have some time"  I was just puttering here with a cup o java, thinking I'd check it out.  It will have to wait. 

I'm leery of many conspiracies, but not political ones anymore.  I think that political apathy has turned to political disdain and a belief that hope is lost.  And so the ones with money & power see it as a playground of power, much the same as WWF is a ridiculous version of say, olympic wrestling.  They dont' even approach it as good for the country or the world or to help a fellow human.  It simply becomes a game.  And they love to crush the do-gooders.  Am I too cynical about it?  

 When watching the Alex Jones' movies, you do get the feeling he is trying to sell you something.  Problem is, I have tried to research his claims, find some errors or something in conflict with what he says, and I haven't been able to do so.

that's like Michael Moore - he seems too slick to be truthful, and he may be very good at spinning things to an extreme, but in the end, how can one argue?

Michael Moore has been bery quiet these past few years.  After exposing some truths about the Bush regime, he seems to have pulled back.  I've read that he has faced ongoing death threats if he continues to expose the designs of big government.  Guess it's difficult to move forward when you live in the shadow of the CIA with a target on your back..

Another website that might provide some perspectives on American politics.

http://www.commondreams.org

Common Dreams is an alternative press that presents diverse opinions that often aren't heard/read in mainstream press. 

With Moore I have found at times that plays a little fast and lose with the truth - and his arguments are often based on isolated cases and emotion -- yes, they can be powerful - but not always convincing from an entirely empirical or rational viewpoint.  I mean we all watched Sicko and thought, "what's wrong with the U.s.?" - but I think that's because we're Canadians and our values about health care have definitely taken us on different paths.

 There's a bunch of very interesting ones...

whatreallyhappened.com

whowhatwhy.com

infowars.com

rense.com

lol- look at this - today Michael Moore is bailing on the Democrats!  He's calling them (and Obama too, perhaps?) a bunch of wusses for not standing up for health care reform.  He even (!!!)  praises the Republicans for 'cahones'.  Wow.

It's a fair comment. The republicans were at least honest in voting openly against the bill. The democrats first destroyed the central purpose, and then voted for the empty shell.

Sure it is. 

I've seen this in church - where the nice caring open folks try so hard to be nice and caring and open, that the rotten ones expect it, use it and destroy the good folks.  

My advice to Obama:  Use a soft heart, not a soft head.  Or soft cahones, for that matter.

Dear President Obama,

I understand you may be looking to replace Rahm Emanuel as your chief of staff.

I would like to humbly offer myself, yours truly, as his replacement.

I will come to D.C. and clean up the mess that's been created around you. I will work for $1 a year. I will help the Dems on Capitol Hill find their spines and I will teach them how to nonviolently beat the Republicans to a pulp.

And I will help you get done what the American people sent you there to do. I don't need much, just a cot in the White House basement will do.

Now, don't get too giddy with excitement over my offer, because you and I are going to be up at 5 in the morning, 7 days a week and I am going to get you pumped up for battle every single day . Each morning you and I will do 100 jumping jacks and you will repeat after me:

"The American people elected me, not the Republicans, to run the country! I am in charge! I will order all obstructionists outta my way! If the American people don't like what I'm doing they can throw my ass out in 2012. In the meantime, I call the shots on their behalf! Now, Congress, drop and give me 50!!"

Then we will put on our jogging sweats and run up to Capitol Hill. We will take names, kick butts, and then take some more names. If we have to give a few noogies or half-nelson's, then so be it. In our pockets we will have a piece of paper to show the pansy Dems just how much they won by in 2008 -- and the poll results that show the majority of Americans oppose the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and want the bankers punished. Like drill sergeants, we will get right up in their faces and ask them,

"What part of the public mandate don't you understand, soldier?!! Drop and give me 50!"

I know this is the job Rahm Emanuel was supposed to be doing.

Now, don't get me wrong. I have always admired Rahm Emanuel (if you don't count his getting NAFTA pushed through Congress in the '90s which destroyed towns like Flint, Michigan. I know, picky-picky.). He is what we needed for a long time -- a no-apologies, take-no-prisoners fighting machine. Someone who is not afraid to get his hands dirty and pound the right wing into submission. Far from being the foul-mouthed bully he has been portrayed as, Rahm is the one who BEAT UP the bullies to protect us from them.

That's certainly what he did in 2006. After six long, miserable years of the middle-class getting slaughtered and the poor being flushed down the toilet, Rahm Emanuel took on the job of returning Congress to the Democrats. No one believed it could be done.

But he did it. Big time. He put the fear of God into the party of Rush and Newt. They had never been so scared. More importantly, though, he instilled a sense of hope in the Democrats that they could actually score the mother of all hat tricks in 2008 -- and with you, an African American no less, in the pole position!

It worked. The Darkness ended. The vast majority of nation wept with joy on the night of the election (those who weren't weeping went out and bought a record number of guns and ammo). Unlike the last president, you didn't "win" by 537 votes in Florida (although Gore won the popular vote by a half-million), you beat McCain nationally by 9,522,083 votes! The House Democrats got a walloping 79-vote margin. The Senate Dems would caucus with a supermajority of 60 votes unheard of in over 30 years. The wars would now end. America would have universal health care. Wall Street and the banks would, at the very least, be reined in. Hardworking citizens would not be thrown out of their homes. It was supposed to be the dawning of a new age.

But the Republicans were not going to go quietly into the night. You see, instead of having just one Rahm Emanuel, they are ALL Rahm Emanuels. That's why they usually win. Unlike most Democrats, they are relentless and unstoppable. When they believe in something (which is usually themselves and the K Street job they hope to be rewarded with someday), they'll fight for it till the death. They are loyal to a fault to each other (they were never able to denounce Bush, even though they knew he was destroying the party). They dig their heels in deep no matter what. If you exiled them to a lone chunk of melting polar ice cap, they would keep insisting that it was just a normal "January thaw," even as the frigid Arctic waters rose above their God-fearing necks ("See what I mean -- this water is COLD! What 'global *warming*'?! Adam and Eve rode dinos...aagghh!!... gulp gulp gulp").

We thought we were all done with this craziness, but we were mistaken. Like a beast that you just can't cage, the Republicans convinced not only the media, but YOU and your fellow Dems, that 59 votes was a *minority*! Precious time was lost trying to reach a "consensus" and trying to be "bipartisan."

Well, you and the Democrats have been in charge now for over a year and not one banking regulation has been reinstated. We don't have universal health care. The war in Afghanistan has escalated. And tens of thousands of Americans continue to lose their jobs and be thrown out of their homes. For most of us, it's just simply no longer good enough that Bush is gone. Woo hoo. Bush is gone. Yippee. That hasn't created one new friggin' job.

You're such a good guy, Mr. President. You came to Washington with your hand extended to the Republicans and they just chopped it off. You wanted to be respectful and they decided that they were going to say "no" to everything you suggested. Yet, you kept on saying you still believed in bipartisanship.

Well, if you really want bipartisanship, just go ahead and let the Republicans win in November. Then you'll get all the bipartisanship you want.

Let me be clear about one thing: The Democrats on Election Day 2010 are going to get an ass-whoopin' of biblical proportions if things don't change right now. And after the new Republican majority takes over, they, along with a few conservative Democrats in Congress, will get to bipartisanly impeach you for being a socialist and a citizen of Kenya. How nice to see both sides of the aisle working together again!

And the brief window we had to fix this country will be gone.

Gone.

Gone, baby, gone.

I don't know what your team has been up to, but they haven't served you well. And Rahm, poor Rahm, has turned into a fighter -- not of Republicans, but of the left. He called those of us who want universal health care "f***ing retarded." Look, I don't know if Rahm is the problem or if it's Gibbs or Axelrod or any of the other great people we owe a debt of thanks to for getting you elected. All I know is that whatever is fueling your White House it's now running on fumes. Time to shake things up! Time to bring me in to get you pumped up every morning! Go Barack! Yay Obama! Fight, Team, Fight!

I'm packed and ready to come to D.C. tomorrow. If it helps, you won't really be losing Rahm entirely because I'll be bringing his brother with me -- my agent, Ari Emanuel. Man, you should see HIM negotiate a deal! Have you ever wanted to see Mitch McConnell walking around Capitol Hill carrying his own head in his hands after it's just been handed to him by the infamous Ari? Oh, baby, it won't be pretty -- but boy will it be sweet!

What say you, Barack? Me and you against the world! Yes we can! It'll be fun -- and we may just get something done. Whaddaya got to lose? Hope?

Retardedly yours,

Michael Moore

MMFlint@aol.com

MichaelMoore.com

P.S. Just to give you an idea of the new style I'll be bringing with me, when a cornhole like Sen. Ben Nelson tries to hold you up next time, this is what I will tell him in order to get his vote: "You've got exactly 30 seconds to rescind your demand or I will personally make sure that Nebraska doesn't get one more federal dollar for the rest of Obama's term. And then I will let everyone in your state know that you wear Sooner panties, backwards. NOW DROP AND GIVE ME 50!"

 Even the ACLU is expressing their shock and disbelief about what Obama is doing... backing down from his campaign pledges.  They ran an ad in the New York Times today, showing a picture of Obama morphing into  George 43 Bush... 

Takes a while to load...

http://www.aclu.org/files/safefree/detention/NYT_ad_3.pdf

And please, even if you don't like anything I've posted and think I am a real jerk, fine, please watch this -- PLEASE!