The American Spectator

Richard Baker| 8.30.09 @ 2:38PM

I told my friends the day before the Inauguration that a year from tomorrow the country would be howling. The Kenyan has finally been more efficient in one respect as he did it in just 6 months. Way to Go!

Stephen Hayes| 8.30.09 @ 3:43PM

The Comrade O Regime is a mixture of Marxist worldview and Chicago politics, both of which are incompetent means of administering government under our constitution. The O was successful at BS'ing the ghetto rabble. His real failing is that he thinks we're all rabble who can be manipulated and lied to with impunity. His blatant power grabbing and his complete incompetence are far too apparent to the real America outside the inner cities. Thus, his rush to solidify his goals before the people are supposed to have time to get their sea legs on this cruise. We're not all idiot rubes to whom he can flog snake oil with a promise to cure all ills.

Missy| 8.30.09 @ 3:46PM

What creeps me out about Obama is that he doesn't seem to care if the people like him or not. Kind of like Hugo Chavez.

Steve Lee| 8.30.09 @ 3:49PM

The Obama Administration managed to scare the people most likely to have a land-line phone and be home when the pollsters call, the retirees who get scared about losing their medical benefits when there is talk of saving billions of dollars by cutting Medicare Advantage funding.
Then the President scared the people that already have medical coverage through their employers by waiting too long to start explaining what is in the 5 Health Care Bills in the Congress:
The Democrat's Team Captain Drops The Ball

around the track| 8.30.09 @ 4:52PM

I wouldn't be too quick to project these poll numbers too far into the future. Unlike many, I believe that Obama can recover from a failure on healthcare which, however, I think the Republicans will save with some compromise which will lay the foundation for what the liberals want. Further, even without the aforementioned, an Obama recovery is possible because his success or failure is, in my opinioin, tied to the economy. If it recovers in a respectable manner, he will as well.

Josie| 8.30.09 @ 5:40PM

I doubt if Obama's presidency will survive a jobless recovery. Actual unemployment is 16% and rising; that's disaster for any president's approvals.

Alan Brooks| 8.30.09 @ 7:50PM

but the 'People' are relieved an anti-conservative RINO is no longer potus;
the 'People' are hoping Obama will do as well as the last competent potus America had, Bill Clinton...

Alan Brooks| 8.30.09 @ 8:01PM

Our worst enemies are friends who give us bad advice.
I would have become a conservative in the '90s if my conservative friends, especially Charles L. King, retired professor-- as decent a Republican as they come. But even he got carried away by partisanship:
"Hillary has ruined herself forever with HillaryCare" (spring 1993)
"Bill Clinton has destroyed himself in a year 'n' a half, he will never be re-elected"
(summer 1994).

but let's not stoop to calling others, esp. someone those you trust completely, false prophets.

Alan Brooks| 8.30.09 @ 8:10PM

Merely because Dubya was a political doublethinker from Texas doesn't mean he didn't try almost as hard as Clinton did to be a successful potus.
Bush couldn't help being a substandard potus-- he inherited his incompetence from his father. The war threw Dubya for a loop, unlike Reagan (and even Bush '41), who knew what to do during the last stage of the Cold War.
But that's history. Question now is, what futurist for Speaker next year, and what war hero-hack for candidate in '12?

Richard Baker| 8.30.09 @ 9:01PM

Mr. Brooks:
Politics aside, what have you done with YOUR life to rival the incompetent Bush family? Or are you a parasite on someone's efforts and fortune a la Kennedy? Any jackass can kick a barn down.

A son of God Allmighty| 8.30.09 @ 9:41PM

obama is the angel of light,this is a warning people.In the book of 2 Corinthians chapter 11:13-15. you can't trust that man, are his cabinet,and those czars,or crony's

J. Kelley| 8.30.09 @ 9:52PM

Obama.....The Chickens have come home to roost!!

Alan Brooks| 8.30.09 @ 10:54PM

"Any jackass can kick a barn down."

ohhh, Baker! you would quote Sam Rayburn. Do you live in Texas? Were you hurt by my insult to Texas politics?
Did you forget you were at AS when you wrote the above? Did you think for a moment you were at the Barney the Purple Dinosaur Self Esteem blog?
Maybe nobody told you we're not supposed to be nice at AS; why, not even when discussing politics!

Alan Brooks| 8.30.09 @ 11:04PM

Notice this:
not one commenter here has ever responded to my repeated hypothesis that Clinton was more competent than Dubya.
For good reason; it is far too embarrassing to acknowledge. And now Jenna Bush is a budding celebrity, which means the Bush dynasty is on its way to becoming as influential as the Kennedy dynasty.

But I'm not really complaining. The question is, as always, to what purpose calling ourselves conservative when nothing is being conserved? Is conservatism dead and now only libertarianism and radical conservatism are viable?

Alan Brooks| 8.30.09 @ 11:10PM

it would be gratifying to wager anyone $50.00 that Obama will be re-elected. But nobody in '12 will want to lose $50.00 just like that.

It's not that Clinton and Obama are so good, it is that Dole, Bush, and McCain are--were-- so second rate.

Sean| 8.31.09 @ 12:35AM

Alan Brooks, politicians will call themselves conservative so they can get elected. If a politician says he is conservative he can fool people that don't know better. You see people actually do believe what politicians sell them. They will believe the words over the actions. That is why you will hear that Romney is the best bet conservatives have. Never mind that his record was not conservative while in office.

Bob| 8.31.09 @ 8:08AM

While it is highly likely that Obama will be reelected in 2012 (assuming the economy will get slightly better), he is not showing any executive leadership. The office of the President has been lacking either intelligence or leadership. Bush had some leadership, but he lacked the intelligence to make good decisions. Obama has the intelligence, but his forte is that he is a mediator, not an executive. Thus, he may set objectives, but does not lead with force. McCain/Palin lacked both leadership and intelligence and they would have done even worse.

The fact of the matter is that Republicans are doing even worse than Obama. If you take a look at health care, 57% of the under 40 crowd STRONGLY support Obama while only 35% of those over 65 support Obama strongly. White seniors were the only demographic that didn't support Obama during the election. It is observed by most election experts that at least part of this was because of race.

Therefore, if the economy continues to improve, these ratings will be unimportant. People vote their pocketbooks. While the latest polls show Obama's overall approval rating hovering about 50%, Republicans are still under 30% in overall approval. Democrats overall rating is between 35% and 47% depending on the poll.

Richard Baker| 8.31.09 @ 8:08AM

Brooks:
The question remains. What have you done with your life? I'm not from Texas and folks like you are quite humorous in your lunacy. Answer the question that you're avoiding, if you can.

martin j smith| 8.31.09 @ 8:12AM

There is voter remorse out there. But I have to say many people voted for Obama with their heads in the sand--because even I, a caveman, could figure out that he was a thug well before the election: His greek towers,his speech in Berlin,his associations with radical lefties, and his blatant lies and other factors were there to see for those who wanted to. Its sort of like as Bernie Madoff on an even Grander scale and much worse.

martin j smith| 8.31.09 @ 8:18AM

2010 should be the prime focus and these issues that Obama supports will factor in the election:
Health care,cap and trade,immigration,unemployment and national security. The Republican party is a hopeless case so it will be in 2010 and 2012 against the democrats or for them. If a real live elephant ran
it might just win--not a human republican.

Greg| 8.31.09 @ 8:28AM

To Mr. Brooks,
Clinton may very well have been more competent than George Bush. But, is competence all that is required to be a great President? I suspect not, and that is why Clinton fell short. There are issues of philosophy, morality, temperment, self-discipline, etc.

Thus, Abraham Lincoln is not a great President because he was better than either Buchanan or Johnson; he was a great President because of the combination of intelligence, competence, persistence, and a strong moral compass.

Considered more broadly, it is likely that Clinton will be remembered as an average President. He left no major legacy as President, but happened to govern during a time of extraordinary economic growth that came about more from others' policies than anything he had advocated from a position of leadership.

Indiana Alex| 8.31.09 @ 8:33AM

Clinton was able to get re-elected because he tracked hard to the right after losing congress.

There is no way Obama is smart enough to do the same.

Tim| 8.31.09 @ 8:36AM

Obama's fate is tied to the economy. Bill Clinton proved you can get away with almost anything while people are feeling secure and prsoperus. Obama seems to think he can succeed by being "virtuous" and dealing punishing economic blows-deficits, taxes, regulations, deficits. Oh and deficits.
Taxpayer fears of the economic panic of 2008 may have propelled him to office, but those same fears have now been internalized and they threaten to propel him onto the street in 2012.

Bob| 8.31.09 @ 8:44AM

Greg,

Historians rate Presidents based upon their ability to transform government over the longer term. Abe Lincoln was obviously transformative regarding slavery. Washington is normally second and FDR third. Reagan and Clinton are considered as slightly above average. Both Reagan and Clinton's ratings have improved over time. In the latest rankings, Reagan is 10 and Clinton is 15.

People seem to forget history, but Reagan's ratings were just average during the 90's and fairly low during his Presidency. Clinton's approval ratings have also increased significantly. I must disagree with Greg about Clinton having no impact on economic growth. He had much more impact than Reagan if you look at normalized GDP and deficit spending. Even Reagan's own economists don't consider Reaganomics that successful.

Indiana Alex| 8.31.09 @ 9:31AM

Historical approval ratings for Presidents? Clinton is a 15 and Reagan is a 10?

We sure get some nonsense here.

Solo| 8.31.09 @ 9:32AM

I agree that, if the economy improves, Obama's numbers will rise significantly.
Ironically enough, a strong republican showing in 2010 (strong enough to frustrate Obama's agenda) will make Obama appear more moderate. This, with an improved economy (something that is almost guaranteed), will all but assure an Obama victory in 2012.

Grzmlyk| 8.31.09 @ 10:47AM

Where was Clinton's "competence" on display most, do you think? His just-out-of-the-chute squandering of political capital on "don't ask don't tell" or his own health care debacle? Perhaps it was the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, or his policy that led to the deaths of 700,000 Rwandans.

I know: It was the building of the "wall" by Jame Gorelick created fertile ground for terrorist "green shoots."

Yup. That's rip-roarin’ competence.

What saved Clinton's presidency from being a pock-marked wasteland of disaster? Newt Gingrich and the Republican congress of 1994.

Clinton will fade into the wallpaper in terms of leadership once he and Hillary have been dragged kicking and screaming from the stage. In 20 years, nobody will put Clinton on their list of best presidents; his name will resonate with future American's as much as Millard Fillmore's, James Polk's or Chester Arthur's do with school kids today.

But of course the asterisk will always be there. I refer, of course, to Clinton's extracurricular activities.

Oldefarte| 8.31.09 @ 10:54AM

Hopefully, this DISAPPROVAL will translate into DEFEAT [beginning in 2010 and continuing throught 2012] for any political candidates acquising to Obama's insane agenda and politics!!!

The Big O | 8.31.09 @ 11:08AM

Obama, Michelle, and Oprah are all adoration addicts. They're like rock stars, and people who worship false idols are notoriously fickle. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

Ken (Old Texican)| 8.31.09 @ 12:28PM

If we adult Americans don't get serious...right the hell now...20 10 just might be the last meaningful election for the United States....ever.

Here is how to begin: http:judgeroy.wordpress.com

Pete| 8.31.09 @ 12:40PM

The messiah and his criminal henchmen are busy figuring out how to rig the next election (even more openly than last year) and/or eliminate all elections going forward . I predict violent conflict at the polls in 2010 between real Americans trying to get their country back and Black Panther thugs trying to intimidate. We may not have to wait that long for this type of conflict given the current administration's propensity to bus in union thugs to town halls, etc.... This is going to get ugly before things get better. Prepare accordingly.

Grzmlyk| 8.31.09 @ 1:08PM

Pete, I think you are right on the money.

They've already figured out how to rig the next election, however: ACORN will stuff the ballot boxes with fake votes and the Black Panthers will intimidate the real people who show up wanting to express their desire for, you know, freedom.

But none of the mainstream media will cover any of this. And not because they're "state controlled," for at least there were a few stalwart souls in totalitarian regimes like the old USSR who wanted to publish the truth.

No, our "journalist" class - a merry, monolithic band of wealthy communists on the outside and greedy, narcissistic capitalists on the inside - are ecstatic about going along with the Obama Statist agenda. That's because ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NY Times, the Tribune Company, McClatchy, AP, Scripps-Howard, Time, Newsweek and the rest of the rotten fourth estate don't give a damn how many lives they destroy in their drive to help our Stalinist in Chief make America a "better" place.

martin j smith| 8.31.09 @ 1:18PM

Predicting future elections is impossible from this point. But I will throw out some cards that could effect things: On the economy the amount of unemployment,level of inflation,the market,the 50+ vote regarding healthcare legislation and then there is the terrorist attack matter.

martin j smith| 8.31.09 @ 1:41PM

I am an independent voter--and voted against Obama by voting for Mcaine. He was a bad choice and ran a terrible campaign-- yet the difference was 6%--not insurmountable. Also large numbers did not vote at all. If enough voters are dissatisfied as they are now--I would no t invest one cent of my money on Obama if Republicans run a bettor choice than Mcaine--not hard to do.

ConservativeWanderer| 8.31.09 @ 6:33PM

Notice this (to borrow a phrase):

Since he's gotten a flood of thoughtful and convincing replies, Mr. Brooks appears to have vanished from this thread.

By the way, Mr. Brooks, the reason you didn't get any replies last night is probably because, well, many people have other things to do on a Sunday night.

WendyG| 8.31.09 @ 6:58PM

>>>>Sad to have so many people so unhappy with the Prez this early in his term, isn't it?

Yeah. So sad. Boo hoo hoo. :)

Sue| 8.31.09 @ 11:37PM

With me it's all those "advisors" advising. What does he do and the cabinet do?

Then, he screwed the GM bondholders; that just wasn't right.

Then, it was the "cash for clunkers" (after GM screwed the dealers) - looting tax dollars and transferring tax dollars to others (I guess even those who don't pay taxes).

Then, it was this health care business - first, reform health care, second, reform health insurance, third, just cut everybody's legs off for $50,000.

Then, it was the vacations! What three weeks the first eight months of employment? I never had a job where that happened.

Then, it was the apology tour to Europe and the Paris trip, Middle East Trip.

Then, it was the first speech given by him in office and he elected to give it on an Arab TV station.

Opps, I forgot about the bailout of GM and Chrysler, the firing of their CEO (GM) and the Golf Cart Car or whatever it is that doesn't have any of those little round things that start with "B".

Oh, my, let's not forget cap and tax! Designed by a college kid I read. Well, there was something similar in the '70s and it was called "pollution control credits" so I kind of don't think it was "original idea."

And let's not forget the constant insults thrown Bush's and Cheney's way. Even though he just wanted to "move on." Or, "MOVEON."

And now finally, (drum roll please) the continued persecution of our CIA agents. Yes. Just want America wants to do. Spend lots of tax dollars persecuting the very people who are charged with protecting us and gathering intelligence on bad guys. Again, that MOVEON complex he has.

I think that about wraps it up for me.

It ENOUGH!!!!