So far I am liking President Obama way more than candidate Obama. It kind of upsets and confuses me that he is doing some really good things at the beginning of his presidency that he never said he would do during the campaign trail, at least not specifically. Most candidates say that they will end corruption and curb spending, blah, blah, blah. However, it looks like he is actually doing it.
Read this article to read all the juicy details including some changes to the Freedom of Information act that makes more of the governments documents available to the public. You can decide if you think that is a good thing. Here is a summary of the spending and corruption stuff:
White House executives including the chief of staff, national security adviser, and Press Secretary are being limited in their pay to $100,000 a year. Obama's rationale here, "Families are tightening their belts, and so should Washington." I agree! Nice work Mr. President.
Then there are the anti-corruption measures to block the influence of lobby's in his administration. The article reads, "Obama's new lobbying rules will not only ban aides from trying to influence the administration when they leave his staff. Those already hired will be banned from working on matters they have previously lobbied on, or to approach agencies that they once targeted.
The rules also ban lobbyists from giving gifts of any size to any member of his administration. It wasn't immediately clear whether the ban would include the traditional "previous relationships" clause, allowing gifts from friends or associates with which an employee comes in with strong ties.
The new rules also require that anyone who leaves his administration is not allowed to try to influence former friends and colleagues for at least two years."So far, so good. I am sure he will screw something up at some point, but for now, I like it.
Then again James you did also like the first couple Jeff Foxworthy shows on TV, so your first blush impression of things can be called into question.
ReplyDeleteI liked the Jeff Foxworthy stuff? Are you sure? I don't think so.
ReplyDeleteJames, you are missing the double standard though. Obama is limiting the pay, which I AGREE with too. But he spent 140 Million dollars on his inauguration. 100 Million more then any other President. To put that into perspective the average household income in America is a little over 50K a year, Obama could have provided 50K to 2000 families who have lost their jobs. I am not saying that is what I would do with the money but I sure as heck would not have spent it on a party.
ReplyDeleteI am not saying the man is perfect. I have pointed out in previous blogs as many others have that Obama has previously represented many double standards. I was not pointing out anything with this article other than some of the good things he was doing.
ReplyDeleteIts called wanting to stay positive. Sure there is evidence that this man is spending money like crazy. Sometimes spending money is a good thing. Considering the benefit to the morale of the American people, if a party helps get people thinking positively and less like complaining. Perhaps if that effect is real it was a valuable use of funds. But I feel that if we are to see change happen in this country for good, I would like to think that praise should be given where it is due.
These two principles are good things that Obama did. I chose to reserve the role of negativism for Great White Hope who wants the corner on that market.
I call it realism. You, James are living in a dream world.
ReplyDeleteReality doesn't suck as bad as you point it out to be GreatWhiteHope. Plus I would rather live in a dream world than a world surrounded by the nightmares you seem to peddle with every post you make.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you should read what the lords anointed said about their trip to the inauguration and their hope in the "great objectives he (Obama) has set."
They encouraged us to pray for the new president and to unify as a country. Those were not prayers that he would fail. Do you think the apostles are living in a dream world? Would you like to be found speaking ill of such opinions?
The world is what you make of it. You (GWH) can choose to see the world as crap. I choose to see it for its potential. Both of which could be defined a reality just simply different takes on it. I hardly think that my desire to consider the best in people a sign that I have lost touch with reality. In fact I believe I am more in touch with a future reality, a future potential, one that negativism is unable to obtain.