Obama Channels Pelosi in Polarizing the Country

Reader Comments
Back to blog

with the advent of 3g and 4g mobiles the mobiles are going to be the better replacement for all other media sources which marketers were using for brand promotion,as with new 3g and 4g technology, mobiles can be equipped with videos and images with paving the path for new way of brand promotion. with this new technology marketers will be able to reach their customers just with a single click on their mobile and get to know their view about the products and services.
www.txtimpact.com
228 Park Avenue S
New York
10003(USA)

Rana of NY 4:50PM November 26, 2009

There are less self identified Republicans as a percentage . Moderate ones declared themselves Independents. So what is left in the Republican party when polling is more right wing and therefore looks more polarized. No surprise there. The "most polarizing President" spin is hype.

thoughtful of OR 7:37PM April 10, 2009

Yes it's a great plan to continue to throw BILLIONS into the bailout "blackhole" without getting anything for OUR money.
Instead of the Government "telling" the banks to do anything, the funds "pay" the banks to rewrite mortgage loans. The news reports already show delinquency rates on "prime" mortgages are rising. There IS a second Tsunami of foreclosures coming unless THE problem is addressed.
The morthgage crisis got us into this mess, fixing it will get us out.

Chris Petty of GA 6:31PM April 09, 2009

Mr. Petty spouts his usual faux centrism in the pursuit of partisan advantage. His suggestions are no good either. Petty suggests lowering the mortgage rates for everyone but I thought Republicans were against the government telling the private sector what to do. It's a fine trap that Petty suggests. If the Obama administration actually followed Petty's plan, then they would be subsequently nailed by Republicans like Petty for being communist and taking over the private sector.
Aside from the politics, it's a bad idea just on its merits. Lowering everyone's interest rates would lower the rates for people who are easily making their mortgage payments and thus be a waste. The real problem is the loans that are going into default. The problem lies at the margin, not at those well within the margin (those who are well-to-do and easily make their payments). The problem is with people who are NOT making their payments and thus not paying the bank. If lots of people do not repay their loans, then that causes the bank to not have enough money in its vaults to cover all the money that people can take out of the bank. That is the situation before a run on the banks. So any relief needs to be targeted at people who could stay in their homes and pay their mortgage with a little bit of help/lowering interest rates on their mortgage.

Smooth Jazz of NY 12:26PM April 09, 2009

This is no longer a "partisan" issue. this is an American issue.
Intellegent and effective spending for our #1 problem, ECONOMY.
All the "agenda" goods on both sides MUST be put aside.
You cannot help your neighbor when you're bankrupt too.
A plan:
Immediately shift all federal employees to a 36hr/4 day workweek. Saves money, saves energy, saves jobs.
Encourage states and business to do the same thing.
If we're going to spend obscene amounts of money to bailout banks, channel it through existing homeowners. Pay the banks to lower interest on EVERYBODY's loan, not just the irresponsible ones. They're not toxic assets if they don't foreclose.
Pidely tax cuts that put $10 in your pocket/week are a useless waste. No stimulus.
Repeal the Stimulus and the budget bills and go back to the table, forge a better plan that uses the best ideas from both parties.
If we're going to get through this, it can't be left or right.
It has to be correct. Hard change for Washington.

Chris Petty of GA 9:24AM April 09, 2009

Mr. Petty,
Your implication that Obama's legislation has no Republican votes is not honest. 3 Republican senators voted for Obama's stimulus plan. The Republicans in the House all voted no, just like they did 16 years ago during Clinton's first year in office. The Republican Party is more partisan on spending than the Democrats.

Smooth Jazz of NY 9:00PM April 08, 2009

GWB did not walk into office expecting 911. He had a more central "agenda" but after 911, GWB had to adjust his "wants" and attend to the PRIORITIES of the country.
Mr. Obama has continued forward with his "agenda" despite the urgent economic needs of this nation. The "yes I can cause I'm president" attitude may play well on TV but the hard dollar numbers are unrealistic. Not even the USA can sustain this degree of debt. I know Bush bashing is almost as popular as the CEO witch-hunt these days but I do not recall a single piece of GWB's legislation that went forward without a single Democratic vote. If Mr Obama had ever governed a State, City, Town, Hamlet or owned a business where he HAD TO meet a payroll or balance a budget, maybe I could have faith. Since he has NEVER done ANY of these things, my vote is ZERO confidence.

Chris Petty of GA 6:51PM April 08, 2009

The initial Obama stimulus plan was about 1/3 tax cuts. That was bipartisan. Obama has added nearly 20,000 troops to Afghanistan. That's bipartisan. Obama is keeping the troops in Iraq for 19 months. That's bipartisan.
Are the Republicans bipartisan? Right now their current policy proposals are: no. During the Clinton years their policy proposals were: no. So is it honest to say that Obama is the one not being bipartisan?
No.

Smooth Jazz of NY 4:30PM April 08, 2009

Everybody who reads once in while the newspapers knows that the nordpol will disappear in the next several years. The US with the half of all weapons on this planet will get the half of the resources hidden under the todays ice in the north. Obama will have to sell a lot of resources in the coming years, why he shouldn't spend a little of this money in advance already for his nation in need?

maz hess 4:21PM April 08, 2009

Ms. Cary, I believe Obama is doing exactly what he said he would do. Watch his nomination acceptance speach; did he miss anything on the left wing agenda? Where I agree with you is in his promise for bipartisanship - he didn't mention that it would only be lip-service.

Brad of TX 3:20PM April 08, 2009