Guess the whole change thing wasn't just rhetoric

[hork]

Like him or not you can't help but respect a politician who follows through on his word. Especially when that word really does put us as a nation back on the path the founders laid out.

Presidents are typically measured by their first 100 days, if the first three are any indication, we clearly have the right man for the job at this time in our nation's history.

Some of his official acts from the first 72 hours.

Orders Gitmo to close, acknowledges the fact that the Constitution is the law of the land, and finally gives some moral direction to our intel agencies by outlawing torture


Shows financial responsibility by ordering a pay freeze for White House employees earning over $100,000 a year

Breaks from recent history by expanding (let's call a spade a spade and say introducing) transparency in government by ordering federal agencies to be more responsive to requests made under the Freedom of Information Act

Further expands transperency by limiting the right of ex-presidents to block the release of sensitive records of their time in the White House

No secret he was the candidate I was pulling for. He spoke a good game on the campaign trail and has done nothing but impress in his first 72 hours. Granted it's only been three days but if these three days are any indication we might once again return to the ideals of liberty and justice.

[tymy]

A little early to think of him as the savior of the world. I really, really hope he knows what he's doing when it comes to national security interests. To me, that may be a million times more important than the economic mess we are in.

[hork]

fair enough, hard to judge (or even predict) what the next four years hold in store from an Obama administration, but the last few days provide reason enough for hope anyways.

but i'll concede with just shy of four yrs to go, there's plenty of time to change my mind....

[tymy]

Even though he was not my candidate of choice I would be hard pressed not to acknowledge how he has energized the country. I am not picking on a political party here but bear in mind the planning for 911 took place under the last Democatic President. Let's all pray that this administration pays more attention to foreign threats. And yes, I know some will jump on the bandwagon about real and imagined threats but there was nothing imaginary about how the World Trade Centers came crumbling down. For me it was simply beyond imagination.

[hork]

i don't think anyone would argue there aren't folks out there who don't like us and who would if given the chance love the opportunity to strike again. in fact the invasion of afghanistan was one move by the last administration i supported whole heartedly.

i lost no sleep nor did i stress for one minute about the removal of the taliban or the search for al queda operatives in the afghan/pakistan areas.

i agree that we have to keep an eye on the threat of attack but i hope the current administration tempers that with rationality. it's one thing to be cognizant of and prepared for the common defense, it's an entirely different thing to let it consume you so much so that we forget there are real issues here at home that need addressing.

let's hope the current administration attends to both. and, while it's impossible to solve all our problems in four years, let's hope they at least begin to address them in real and realistic ways.

[P562045]

Just yesterday I did what journalists used to do and I came up with something very similar to this.

The who, what, when, where, why, how of Guantanamo Bay Cuba.

Who exactly are these prisoners and why are some of them still there?

What is going to happen to the prisoners after the facility is shut down?

When exactly are these prisoners going to be removed from the facility?

How are these prisoners going to be treated any differently than they already have been? This question has already been answered partially. The prisoners can only be treated like it says in the military field manual which I will go out on a limb and does not include torturing people.

Why haven't other countries offered any type of assistance in this matter? I would think the very least other countries would want to help us prosecute these people and see what happens at the earliest time possible.

What is going to happen to the prisoners after they are moved to wherever? Is there going to some kind of trial or something else? I just ask because I don't think these prisoners should not be held indefinitely any longer than we have to.

I just love how Obama signs a piece of paper and I am just supposed to forget some basic questions that need to be answered about the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay Cuba.

I put these questions here for one other reason. This is a matter that needs careful considerations moving forward. Also there is an actual reality of the situation and just as an example what is going to happen to these prisoners in the first place.

[P562045]

Originally Posted by tymy

I really, really hope he [Obama] knows what he's doing when it comes to national security interests.

Now don't worry Obama will be sending out envoys to fix whatever matter needs fixing.

I really like the use of the word envoy. It sounds like something the United Nations would use.

This is the very same United Nations that we went to for approval at the security council in order to get permission to go into Iraq.

Story Here

[Bill Shaw]

72 hours?

Back up. Initially, Obama promised to close Gitmo on Day 1. This wasn't some hastily made November concoction, it was a major part of his campaign since at least June 2007.

The difficulty comes in the actual "doing" of it.

Not until 2 weeks ago, and within the context of discussing his economic stimulus plans, did Obama concede it will take longer than he pledged.

It was day two that he signed an order to close the detainee center- a year from now.

Peter already touched on many of the reasons, and loose ends causing the delay. Even this morning there are reports of potential problems in the future if these issues are not resolved correctly before acting.

He did something. It wasn't what her said he would do, and it may just be that what was being done already was the best that could be done, under the circumstances. Perhaps the rhetoric wasn't realistic, exposing rhetoric is exactly what it was.

[P562045]

Well this change may not be entirely rhetoric but it will take some time to work out several situations.

Obama has been trying to tell people this very thing. It will be very interesting to me to see how long the people give Obama to fix several major problems.

I find this article interesting because it talks about Europe being all over the place when it comes to what should happen to the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay Cuba.

I well know that Europe has had a long history of having all kinds of different views on many different matters. I would hope eventually the European Union could come to an agreement on what their role should be when it comes to what should happen to these prisoners.

Article here.

[P562045]

I feel like Ben Stein.

Would anyone like to explain what the very first piece of legislation Obama might sign into law involves. Anyone? Anyone?

[tymy]

I'm too busy watching Blago make an arse of himself.

[hork]

Originally Posted by tymy

I'm too busy watching Blago make an arse of himself.

he's doing a mighty fine job of it

[P562045]

Well this already is a huge revenue generator already I am sure but it has the potential for even more revenue generation because the language in the bill is much clearer and easier to understand now.

This is the actual title of the bill.

The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay restoration Act.

Well of course Obama has his own little spin about this, "We are upholding one of this nation's first principles: that we are all created equal and each deserve a chance to pursue our own version of happiness,"

Obama is referencing to something called the Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men [and women] are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Thought I would add women to the Declaration on this important occasion. Now I did not add women to the other part when it talks about men because at the time white men were the only ones that were allowed to make the rules that the people have to live within.

I need to think alternative titles for this bill.

Business is so unfair to females act and we have to make this right act and make things equal.
It is our public policy to continue to punish business act of 2009.
Trial lawyers of America are going to keep loving this act of 2009.

If a business gives a paycheck to a women that is less than a male makes that business will be in violation of federal law each time such a paycheck is given to a female worker and this worker has up to six months to file a claim and the feds will look into the matter.

Well there is something very interesting about this. There is already a law that says a female has six months to file a claim already. There are two instances in this particular article that lead me to believe this has already been federal law for some time now.

"She [Ledbetter] filed suit and won a jury verdict in 2003. But the lawsuit was deemed invalid, because it wasn't filed within six months of when the discrimination -- unknown to Ledbetter at the time -- began."

"...the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, which makes clear that workers may bring a lawsuit for up to six months after they receive any paycheck that they allege is discriminatory."

Yes ladies and gentlemen you read that correctly. The only thing that changes about this is that the language is easier to read and understand.

So this is Obama's very first piece of legislation he signs as president.

Why yes it is and Obama wants to make it darn clear that females should continue not to be discriminated against in the workplace.

Now I must ask a question about this. What if a male finds out a female is making more than them are they allowed to file a claim as well? I would darn well hope that is the case already. This is about as Obama even said creating equality in the workplace.

Call me sexist and I have been called much worse. I am just looking for genuine equality in the work place. Now of course this article does not even mention if what I just asked about male workers is part of this piece of legislation or previous legislation or not.

I hope that I will always remember the very first piece of legislation that Obama ever signed into law as president.

I am sure there is much more to come.

For his next signing of a piece of legislation I would hope that Obama gets his spread the wealth scheme, that is much better know as the stimulus package, he so desires.

Story about this very important occasion Here


I am just trying to point out how somewhat absurd this all is in the first place. The very reason is is that this is already federal law anyway and I have already explained the reason why the congress and Obama thinks this is so necessary.

Well I can't wait for Obama and the congress to get to some more pressing issues that the country faces as well. Just as an example the umteenth bailout package because the first ones did not actually work as intended. Well they did work as intended but they need to reworked again, again, and again etc. and I must remind people of something. Each one of these reworks costs us money either directly or indirectly. It will be interesting to see to me when the people finally say enough is enough.

[P562045]

Well as a person should know the white house now has a blog.

This is from the white house blog about what happened earlier today at the signing of the Lily Ledbetter fair pay restoration Act.

"It's about justice. It's about who we are. And on this 'wonderful day,' we're getting a step closer to both of those things.

That was President Obama's message as he signed his first piece of legislation, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which will make it easier for people to get the pay they deserve -- regardless of their gender, race, or age."

That last part of this passage sounds vaguely familiar. It sounds like something that is called the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That wonderful Act that would have never passed congress without senate republicans even though the democrats almost had sixty members in the senate at the time.

The blog continues,

"Ultimately, equal pay isn't just an economic issue for millions of Americans and their families, it's a question of who we are -- and whether we're truly living up to our fundamental ideals," President Obama said."

Yes our fundamental ideals do include equality but I don't think equal pay was ever mentioned.

Well even the title of the bill references that this was law before Obama signed this piece of legislation earlier today.

restoration- noun 1. the act of restoring; renewal, revival, or reestablishment.

It sure does sound like this has been a very wonderful day for Obama for sure.

But there is more work to be done on this matter. The Paycheck Fairness Act needs to be passed as well. Hopefully the congress can get right on that.

"And you can count on my [Mrs. Ledbetter] continued commitment to fighting to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act -- (applause) -- and to make sure that women have equal pay for equal work, because that's what this country is all about."

So let me get this perfectly clear. The country is all about making sure women have equal pay for equal work. Or could it be that the country is all about making things equal for all of its people.

white house blog entry

[P562045]

Well there is one thing that must happen for this so called change to be meaningful and that one thing is very unlikely that will all of sudden stop anytime soon.

The congress must stop spending the people's money foolishly countless number of times.

This sentence is very important because even though the congress loves to spend the people's money like there is an unlimited amount that is simply not true. We are just prolonging paying the bill and in the mean time the bill gets larger and larger and larger.

So if the congress spends money foolishly that will ultimately mean there will be less money for more important things right? Quite simply the answer to my question is a resounding yes.

How simple it really is but I don't expect the congress as I mentioned before to just magically change their ways all of sudden anytime soon.