It’s one thing for a coterie of liberals at a late-night Washington soirée to say that George W. Bush was the worst president in their lifetimes.

It’s another thing when the same is said by the nation’s 238 leading presidential scholars, who have been polled annually for the last 28 years.

President Bush ranked worst among modern presidents — and the fifth worst in history, according to the poll by the Siena Research Institute. Ranking first? President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who led the country from 1933 until his death in 1945.

President Roosevelt served four terms, the longest of any president in history. US presidents became limited to two terms after US states ratified the 22nd Amendment to the US constitution in 1951.

President Barack Obama, who hasn’t yet served a full term, rated 15th.

Since 1982, the Siena Research Institute has polled presidential scholars on whom they view to be best and worst presidents in American history, based on a variety of issues from “integrity” to economic stewardship. This year’s poll of 238 scholars found that President Franklin Roosevelt was once again ranked on top, joined by Presidents Lincoln, Jefferson, Washington, and Teddy Roosevelt to complete the top five. However, President George W. Bush did not fare well since the last poll was conducted in 2002. He dropped 16 places to 39th, making him the worst president since Warren Harding died in office in 1923, and one of the bottom five of all time, according to the experts:

“Today, just one year after leaving office, the former president has found himself in the bottom five at 39th rated especially poorly in handling the economy, communication, ability to compromise, foreign policy accomplishments and intelligence. Rounding out the bottom five are four presidents that have held that dubious distinction each time the survey has been conducted: Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, Warren G. Harding, and Franklin Pierce.”

Bush was rated second from the bottom on “intelligence,” “foreign policy accomplishments,” and “handling of U.S. economy.” This despite promises from Bush supporters that “history will be very kind” to the former president, as his Attorney General John Ashcroft put it. Bush’s father’s legacy “held constant” in this year’s poll, with George H.W. Bush coming in at 22nd. President Reagan “dropped two places from 16th overall in 2002 to 18th today.” President Obama was ranked 15th.

Thanks Raw Story

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with:
 

President Barack Obama declared Thursday that he and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev have “succeeded in resetting” the relationship between the former Cold War adversaries that had dipped to a dangerous low in recent years.

Obama directly acknowledged differences in some areas, such as Moscow’s tensions with neighboring Georgia, but said “we addressed those differences candidly.” And he announced that the U.S. and Russia had agreed to expand cooperation on intelligence and the counterterror fight and worked on strengthening economic ties between the nations.

Obama gave Russia perhaps the biggest gift it could have wanted from the meetings: an unqualified, hearty plug for Moscow’s ascension to the World Trade Organization. Russia has long wanted membership but U.S. support in the past has come with conditions.

“Russia belongs in the WTO,” Obama said as the two leaders stood side-by-side in the East Room after several hours of meetings—including an impromptu trip to a nearby burger joint for lunch.

The leaders faced questions about the U.S.-led Afghanistan war, and Obama promised that the U.S. will “not miss a beat” because of the change in military command that he ordered on Wednesday. Obama accepted Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s resignation and replaced him with his direct boss, Gen. David Petraeus.

Petraeus “understands the strategy because he helped shape it,” Obama said.

Medvedev seemed reluctant to wade into the topic, recalling the ultimately disastrous Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.

“I try not to give pieces of advice that cannot be fulfilled,” Medvedev said. “This is a very hard topic, a very difficult one.”

Yet he said that Russia supports the U.S. effort if it can result in Afghanistan emerging from extreme poverty and dysfunction to have “effective state and a modern economy.”

“This is the path to guarantee that the gravest scenarios of the last time will not repeat,” he said.

Obama said the two had also agreed to coordinate on humanitarian aid for Kyrgyzstan, wracked by turmoil in the wake of the president’s ouster. Kyrgyzstan’s president was driven from power in April amid corruption allegations, sparking violence that has left about 2,000 people dead and 400,000 ethnic Uzbeks homeless.

Thanks Breitbart.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with:
 

Rumours have been circling the internet that President Barack Obama appeared in a music video as a young man.

A smiling man who bears a striking resemblance to the future president appears fleetingly in “Whoomp (There It Is)” – a successful 1993 release by hip-hop outfit Tag Team.

The mystery man appears at the 1 min 1 second mark in the video and is talking a on a large mobile phone while wearing a hat and sunglasses.

Suggestions that the future leader of the free world, who is a fan of hip-hop, had found time in his pre-presidential days to join a video shoot swept the internet.

Further weight was given to the unlikely suggestion when it was noticed that the man in the video plays dominoes with his left hand. President Obama is left handed.

However, sadly for conspiracy theorists, in 1993 Mr Obama was already 31 and heavily involved in political and community activism in Chicago.

Members of Tag Team who spoke to the Gawker website said the president’s doppelganger was in fact a friend of theirs, a Los Angeles rapper called LA Sno.

Thanks Daily Telegraph.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with:
 

Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton began a set of strategic talks between the two most populous democracies that will range from agriculture to investments.

“I truly believe ours is a relationship of limitless opportunity for mutual benefit,” Krishna said at the State Department in Washington today.

The dialogue follows up on November meetings between President Barack Obama and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Washington, a visit that was marked by the first state dinner of Obama’s presidency.

The Obama administration began its work to expand communication and cooperation with India with that visit, which built on agreements during President George W. Bush’s administration on nuclear-energy trade. At the time, Obama described the ties between the U.S. and India as “one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century.”

Krishna said he was “happy” about the creation of a new financial framework and partnership trade agreement, which he said would “help us reach new heights in bilateral trade and investment.”

The opening session touched on the Mumbai terror attacks in November 2008, with Krishna saying it would a “logical next step” for the U.S. to allow India access to individuals detained in connection with the assault.

The Indian minister praised a decision to deepen cooperation on trade and moves to liberalize U.S. export controls that apply to India. The so-called strategic dialogue will also encompass environmental and clean-energy technologies, an area where Krishna said the U.S. and India should collaborate.

Thanks Bloomberg.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

President Barack Obama on Monday is sending legislation to Congress that would allow him to force lawmakers to vote on cutting earmarks and wasteful programs from spending bills.

The legislation would award Obama and his successors the ability to take two months or more to scrutinize spending bills that have already been signed into law for pork barrel projects and other dubious programs. He could then send Congress a package of spending cuts for a mandatory up-or-down vote on whether to accept or reject them.

Senate Democrats filibustered the idea to death just three years ago, and so Obama’s move would seem like a long shot. But the plan could pick up traction in the current anti-Washington political environment in which lawmakers are desperate to demonstrate they are tough on spending.

House Minority Leader John Boehner said in a statement Monday that while Republicans are pleased the president plans to send the legislation to Congress, “this is no substitute for a real budget that reins in overall federal spending.”

The White House move also comes as Obama’s Democratic allies in Congress are trying to pass a tax and spending bill providing $170 billion for programs such as unemployment benefits, aid to state governments, and help for doctors facing a big cut in Medicare reimbursements. The Senate is also taking up an almost $60 billion war funding bill, and a vote looms on an administration-backed plan to add $23 billion to help school districts avoid teacher layoffs.

Under the Constitution, the president has to either sign a bill—forcing him to take the bad along with the good—or veto it, which can be impractical. That allows Congress to pad spending legislation with items a president does not like.

The White House says Obama would use the new power to try to weed out earmarks such as water and sewer grants and road projects not requested by the administration.

The new authority is far weaker than the line-item veto power a GOP-dominated Congress gave President Clinton in 1996. Under that bill, before it was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1998, Clinton’s line-item vetoes automatically went into effect unless overturned by a two-thirds vote of both the House and Senate.

When Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., tried in 2007 to force a vote on the weaker version, he won only 49 votes, far short of the 60 needed to break a filibuster led by Democrats such as Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., who assailed it as an attack on Congress’ power of the purse.

All but a handful of state governors have the line-item veto, which allows then to kill individual items in spending bills unless they are overridden by state legislatures.

When Clinton used the line-item veto, he applied a light touch. Even so, Congress recoiled and overrode many of his vetoes.

There is already a process under which Obama can ask Congress to cut wasteful programs, but lawmakers are free to ignore the request. Republicans have urged Obama to send the Democratic-controlled Congress a package of such rescissions, but he has opted not to do so.

The new spending cut proposal would apply to the $1 trillion-plus in Cabinet agency budgets passed by Congress each year. Programs like farm subsidies and Medicare wouldn’t be threatened; neither would special interest tax breaks.

Thanks Breitbart.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with:
 

President Barack Obama is committed to finalizing free-trade agreements with Colombia and Panama but faces “political winds” and an uncertain outcome, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday.

Speaking at a conference of leaders from the Western Hemisphere, Clinton expressed some chagrin at seeing colleagues from Colombia and Panama, which have been pushing for final approval of trade deals signed by the Bush administration and have worked to address U.S. concerns.

“We are, as President Obama said in the State of the Union, committed to our free-trade agreements with both countries but we’re also facing very difficult challenges,” she said. “But I am absolutely here to reiterate that commitment.”

The Obama administration has said it is working to resolve concerns with Colombia and Panama so it can send them to Congress for a vote. However, the pacts are unpopular with many Democrats and the White House has been reluctant to force a vote on them, especially ahead of the November congressional elections.

Clinton acknowledged both countries have worked hard to deal with concerns raised by the U.S. administration and Congress. U.S. lawmakers have pushed Colombia to do more to stop the killing of trade unionists and pursue those responsible while Obama has called for the pacts to include tougher labor standards.

“I think we are going to pursue this,” Clinton said of the free-trade deals. “I can’t predict the outcome but it is something that the president and I in particular feel strongly about.

“We just have to deal with the political winds and we need more help from the private sector,” she added, saying better advocacy was required to explain “the importance of trade and why it is good for the United States and American workers.”

Clinton’s remarks came at the Council of the Americas’ 40th annual Washington Conference, which is taking place at the State Department and is attended by heads of state, U.S. Cabinet members, government ministers from the region and congressional leaders.

Clinton said in addition to deepening trade ties with the region, the Obama administration wanted to pursue efforts to improve security, develop energy production and boost economic development as a way of reducing income inequality.

“We believe that we can do so much more on both energy and climate,” she said. “We are particularly concerned about how so many countries in the Caribbean and Central America are dependent on imported oil at great cost to their economies.”

She said drug trafficking and violence were creating insecurity across the region.

“We need smarter more effective strategies to deal with this continuing threat to civil society,” Clinton said. “We have some good examples of what does work but we are nowhere near what I would consider to be an effective strategy.”

She said the economic inequality in the region was driving some of the criminal activity.

“While we can take a lot joy in the positive GDP growth, our income disparity continues to grow, and that is not good news for anybody,” Clinton said. “That’s a source of social and political instability. It feeds a lot of the criminal activity that unfortunately is now dominated by the traffickers of drugs and arms and people.”

Thanks Reuters.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

After some tough talk on Pakistan, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said some people in its government are aware of the whereabouts of elusive Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Omar.

The Obama administration, meanwhile, for the first time accused the Taliban of being behind the botched Times Square bombing plot.

“Some Pakistani officials were more informed about Al-Qaeda and Taliban than they let on,” Clinton told CBS. “I believe somewhere in this government are people who know where Osama bin Laden is, where Mullah Omar and the leadership of the Afghan Taliban is and we expect more cooperation to help us bring to justice, capture or kill, those who attacked us on 9/11/”

The US top diplomat acknowledged there was a “sea change” in cooperation by Pakistani authorities, but added “we want more”.

Thanks Hindustan News.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

Sixty Russian officials should be banned from the United States over the torture and death in prison of a lawyer who exposed a $230 million (£149 million) fraud by corrupt policemen, a powerful US government body has urged Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State.

Senator Benjamin Cardin, the chairman of the Commission on Security and Co-operation in Europe, sent Mrs Clinton a list of security service agents, police, prosecutors, judges, tax officials and prison wardens who he said were implicated in the killing of Sergei Magnitsky.

The request threatens to cause a row between the Kremlin and the Obama Administration.

The list includes Viktor Grin, Russia’s Deputy General Prosecutor Viktor Grin, Aleksei Anichin, the Interior Ministry’s chief investigator Alexei Anichin, and 11 senior judges.

Mr Magnitsky, 37, died in November in Matrosskaya Tishina prison, Moscow, where he was held in pre-trial detention for almost a year for an alleged tax crime. He was refused medical treatment despite serious illnesses and denied access to his family.

Mr Magnitsky, a lawyer for the US firm Firestone Duncan, represented Hermitage Capital, a London-based hedge fund, in a battle with Kremlin officials allegedly involved in the theft of companies belonging to Hermitage and HSBC.

He was arrested on the orders of a group of Interior Ministry officers whom he had accused of fraudulently reclaiming $230 million in state taxes paid by Hermitage.

He complained that officers repeatedly abused him to try to force him to withdraw his testimony. Prosecutors said that he died of a heart attack but the family was denied an independent post mortem examination.

Senator Cardin asked Mrs Clinton in a letter to blacklist the 60 officials and their families, saying that they were involved in “significant corruption” and responsible “for the torture and death in prison of … Sergei Magnitsky”.

The commission is a US Government agency set up in 1976 to oversee compliance with the Helsinki Accords on human rights.

It comprises nine Senators and nine members of the House of Representatives as well as officials from the Departments of State, Defence and Commerce.

Thanks Times Online.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

An armed man who was spotted at a North Carolina airport parking lot just after Air Force One departed and said he wanted to see the president was to appear before a judge Monday.

Authorities arrested Joseph Sean McVey, 23, of Coshocton, Ohio, on Sunday afternoon at the Asheville Regional Airport and charged him with going armed in terror of the public, a misdemeanor.

A first appearance in court was scheduled for Monday, said Sgt. John Lutz of the Buncombe County jail, where McVey was being held on $100,000 bond.

McVey told an officer in the airport parking lot he wanted to see the president and he had a car equipped with police gear, including a siren and flashing lights, though he did not work in law enforcement, authorities said.

Security was heightened at the airport Sunday because President Barack Obama was leaving after spending the weekend vacationing in Asheville.

At about 2 p.m., airport police saw McVey get out of a maroon car with Ohio plates and that he had a sidearm, airport police Capt. Kevan Smith said. Both airport police and the Secret Service questioned him and he was taken into custody. The suspect was nowhere near the president’s plane, which had just departed, and was in a rental car return lot that is open to the public, Smith said.

His car was equipped with clear LED law enforcement-style strobe lights in the front and rear dash, Smith said. The car also had a mounted digital camera in the front window, four large antennas on the trunk lid, and under the steering wheel was a working siren box.

When McVey got out of the car, he was listening to a handheld scanner and radio that had a remote earpiece, Smith said. Police said he was monitoring local agencies and had formulas for rifle scopes on a note in his cup holder.

Authorities did not say if McVey had a rifle or scope with him.

A rifle scope formula is a set of calculations that helps a shooter adjust for distance from a target. The formulas, which estimate how much a bullet drops after it is fired, are generally in the information packet that comes with a scope purchased for hunting or recreation, said Greg A. Danas, a firearms expert based in Massachusetts.

McVey gave authorities an Ohio driver’s license, but a computer check failed to show the number was valid, police said. His hometown of Coshocton is about halfway between Pittsburgh and Columbus, Ohio.

When Officer Kaleb Rice asked him what he was doing, McVey told him he heard the president was in town and wanted to see him.

Rice removed the firearm and took McVey into custody.

The investigation into what McVey was doing with a gun, with formulas for rifle scopes and why his car was equipped with police gear was continuing, Smith said. The Secret Service had no comment on the arrest Sunday, deferring to airport police.

In Ohio, Randy Fisher, president of the Coshocton County Amateur Radio Association, said McVey was a ham radio enthusiast who had come several times to the group’s monthly meetings over the last year or two. Fisher said he was shocked to hear of the arrest and said he last talked with McVey about a week ago via radio and always found him friendly and interesting to talk to.

“I was impressed that he was a public-service-minded type of individual. He really enjoyed using his ham radio for emergency services and that sort of thing,” Fisher said.

McVey was involved in a local organization that assists the sheriff’s department when it needs help controlling traffic, which may explain why he had the police gear, Fisher said.

A message seeking comment was left Monday for Coshocton County Sheriff Tim Rogers.

Thanks Breitbart.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]

President Barack Obama says there won’t be any “litmus tests” for a Supreme Court nominee, but he wants someone who recognizes individual aspirations, and “that includes women’s rights.”

The president said he was confident the Senate would offer a smooth, civil and thoughtful confirmation process for his eventual choice. Obama spoke as he began a meeting with Senate leaders at the White House.

Asked if he could nominate someone who did not support abortion rights, Obama said his stand is like that of other presidents—no litmus tests. But he said he wants someone for the court who interprets the Constitution in a way that “takes into account individual rights.”

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP)—Pushing forward with one of his most consequential decisions, President Barack Obama has begun informal talks with potential nominees for the Supreme Court. And now he is reaching out to the senators who will control the confirmation fight ahead.

Obama was to meet Wednesday with the top Democrat and Republican in the Senate, along with leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, as he launches a period of political protocol that comes with each high court nomination. The White House says the point is for Obama to get advice from the senators on how to proceed and even ideas of people to consider, but his goal is also to show bipartisanship, even if the debate to follow is almost sure to have a divided tone.

At the White House, Obama will gather with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the committee.

Within a few weeks, Obama is expected to announce a nominee to replace longtime Justice John Paul Stevens, who is retiring this summer. This is Obama’s second chance in less than a year to name someone to the Supreme Court, a presidential prerogative that could put his imprint on the judicial branch for decades. Stevens announced his retirement plans on April 9, and Obama is still believed to be in the early stages of making his decision.

The nominee will be subject to Senate confirmation.

Obama has begun conversations with potential nominees, a senior administration official said Tuesday, signaling an upswing in the president’s consideration of an already coalescing list of about 10 candidates. Those discussions have not been formal interviews, the administration official emphasized, speaking on condition of anonymity to protect the privacy of Obama’s deliberations. In his search last year, Obama ultimately did four face-to-face interviews with finalists.

He ended up choosing federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace Justice David Souter. Sotomayor’s confirmation was a largely partisan summertime battle, with most Republicans objecting to her and to Obama’s standards for choosing justices in general. The Senate vote was 68-31, with nine Republicans in favor.

So far, the early signs of ideological divide are the same.

Many Republican senators are wary that Obama will seek out a judicial activist who will bring a liberal agenda to the bench, and the White House already is expecting what chief of staff Rahm Emanuel called a “huge, huge battle” from Republicans over whomever Obama picks. The president says he will choose someone with the expected credentials of a strong record and dedication to the rule of law, plus an understanding of how court rulings affect people in real life.

With 59 usually reliable votes from Democrats and independents in the Senate, Obama is in a strong position to pick the person he wants. He would need 60 votes to head off a filibuster. Obama aides are confident that they can get that support and that Republicans won’t go that route anyway.

Among the people Obama is considering for the court are federal appeals court judges Diane Wood, Merrick Garland and Sidney Thomas, former Georgia Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Harvard Law School dean Martha Minow.

Thanks Breitbart.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with:
 

President Barack Obama’s national standing has slipped to a new low after his victory on the historic health care overhaul, even in the face of growing signs of economic revival, according to the latest Associated Press-GfK poll.

The survey shows the political terrain growing rockier for Obama and congressional Democrats heading into midterm elections, boosting Republican hopes for a return to power this fall.

Just 49 percent of people now approve of the job Obama’s doing overall, and less than that—44 percent—like the way he’s handled health care and the economy. Last September, Obama hit a low of 50 percent in job approval before ticking a bit higher. His high-water mark as president was 67 percent in February of last year, just after he took office.

The news is worse for other Democrats. For the first time this year, about as many Americans approve of congressional Republicans as Democrats—38 percent to 41 percent—and neither has an edge when it comes to the party voters want controlling Congress. Democrats also have lost their advantage on the economy; people now trust both parties equally on that, another first in 2010.

Roughly half want to fire their own congressman.

Adding to Democratic woes, people have grown increasingly opposed to the health care overhaul in the weeks since it became law; 50 percent now oppose it, the most negative measure all year. People also have a dim view of the economy though employers have begun to add jobs, including 162,000 in March. Just as many people rated the economy poor this month—76 percent—as did last July.

And it could get worse for Democrats: One-third of those surveyed consider themselves tea party supporters, and three-quarters of those people are overwhelmingly Republicans or right-leaning independents. That means they are more likely to vote with the GOP in this fall’s midterms, when energized base voters will be crucial amid the typical low turnout of a non-presidential election year.

With the electorate angry, Republicans enthusiastic and Democrats seemingly less so, Obama’s party increasingly fears it could lose control of the House, if not the Senate, in his first midterms. The GOP, conversely, is emboldened as voters warm to its opposition to much of the president’s agenda.

On the minds of Democrats and Republicans alike: the Democratic bloodletting in 1994, when the GOP seized control of Congress two years after Bill Clinton was elected president. But the less-dispiriting news for Democrats is that it’s only April—a long way to November in politics.

Still, persuading change-minded voters to keep the status quo will be no easy task given that most people call details of the health care overhaul murky and that the unemployment rate is unlikely to fall below 9 percent by November.

The key for Obama and his party: firing up moribund Democratic voters while appealing to independents who are splitting their support after back-to-back national elections in which they tilted heavily toward Democrats and caused the power shift.

None of that will be easy.

Just listen to independent voters who typically decide elections.

“He’s moving the country into a socialized country,” Jim Fall, 73, of Wrightwood, Calif., said of the president. He worries that Obama is too “radical left wing” and that government has grown too big, saying: “He is constantly in our lives more and more and more and more.”

Fall was just as down on the Democratic-controlled Congress: “They’re horrible. I think all they do is talk,” he said, adding that Republicans acted no differently when they had power: “Just spend and spend and spend.”

In Spokane, Wash., Angela Hardin, 43, was just as disapproving.

“I don’t like what’s going on,” the small business owner said. “He is just making a huge mess out of everything. … He’s all over the map. It’s like, ‘Slow down! Breathe! Think!’”

As for Democrats in Congress, she said: “I’m not happy with them.” Republicans, she said, may be better. But she’s really ambivalent toward any of them: “It’s just beyond me how they can sit up there with all of their college degrees and fight like they were in middle school.”

The new poll findings also show:

_ Equal percentages of Democrats—87 percent—approve of Obama’s job performance as Republicans—88 percent—disapprove. Independents are about split, 50 percent disapprove to 47 percent approve. And, when it comes to Congress, 91 percent of Republicans, 65 percent of independents and even 51 percent of Democrats disapprove.

_ The tea party coalition remains fuzzy to most people; only 16 percent say they know a great deal or a lot about this political phenomenon born a year ago.

Obama remains a polarizing figure, as does Congress.

“He’s trying to do what he said we was going to do,” said David Jeter of Los Angeles, 51, who votes Democratic and co-owns a lighting business. Jeter credits Congress with passing health care but wonders: “Now what will they do? … I watch Congress with bated breath, but I don’t expect that anything is going to radically alter my life.”

The AP-GfK Poll was conducted April 7-12, 2010 by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Media. It involved interviews with 1,001 adults nationwide on both landline and cellular telephones. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.

Thanks Breitbart.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with:
 

The cross-country Tea Party Express tour built toward a climax Wednesday with a rally steeped in anti-tax symbolism and an exhortation from one of the few politicians it has embraced, Sarah Palin.

The former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee said in Boston that President Barack Obama must be rebuffed in this fall’s midterm elections after overreaching with his first-year stimulus law and with health care, student loan and financial regulatory overhauls.

“Is this what their ‘change’ is all about?” Palin asked a sun-splashed crowd of roughly 5,000 gathered just a mile from the site of the original Tea Party from which the movement got its name. “I want to tell them, nah, we’ll keep clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion—and you can keep the change.”

Tea partiers planned to meet for a final rally in Washington on Thursday, coinciding with the federal tax-filing deadline. Local events are also planned in Oklahoma, Ohio and other locations.

Palin put her own spin on Tax Day, saying, “We need to cut taxes so that our families can keep more of what they earn and produce, and our mom-and-pops then, our small businesses, can reinvest according to our own priorities, and hire more people and let the private sector grow and thrive and prosper.”

She also played to the crowd by trotting out a trademark line as she lobbied for more domestic energy production.

“Yeah, let’s drill baby drill, not stall baby stall—you betcha,” Palin said.

The gathering intended to hark back to 1773, when American colonists upset about British taxation without government representation threw British tea into the harbor in protest.

The modern tea party movement is diverse, with both Republican and Democratic followers, as well as some outliers who question the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency. Some doubt he was born in the United States, as his birth certificate shows.

Several speakers protested suggestions of racist undertones to the movement, which sprouted as the nation elected its first black president. Nonetheless, virtually the entire speaking program and audience were white.

An exception was the singer of the Tea Party anthem, Lloyd Marcus, who made a point of describing himself not as African-American, but American.

One person in the crowd, John Arathuzik, 69, of Topsfield, said he had never been especially politically active until he saw the direction of the Obama administration.

“I feel like I can do one of two things: I can certainly vote in November, which I’ll do, and I can provide support for the peaceful protest about the direction this country is taking,” said Arathuzik, a veteran who clutched a copy of the Constitution distributed by a vendor.

Michael Brantmuller, a 40-year-old unemployed carpenter from Salem, N.H., said he appreciated Palin’s “red-white-and-blue” speech but added: “I don’t know whether she’s the right spokesperson, because she’s such a polarizing figure and people may judge her before they listen to her.”

A festive mood filled the air. A band played patriotic music, and hawkers sold yellow Gadsden flags emblazoned with the words “Don’t Tread on Me” and the image of a rattlesnake.

Small groups of counterprotesters urged civility, as well as respect for gay and minority rights. They noted some members of Congress alleged racism after voting for Obama’s health care law.

“Public discourse is great—there’s room for the tea party—but there’s no room for racism or homophobia or any other negative discourse,” said Susan Leslie, a member of the group, Standing on the Side of Love.

Notably absent was Sen. Scott Brown, the Massachusetts Republican who in January won the seat held for half a century by liberal icon Edward M. Kennedy.

He cited congressional business, which included hearings about the Iranian nuclear program.

“That’s a heck of a lot more important than him being here right now,” conservative talk show host Mark Williams told the crowd.

While the movement claimed partial credit for his victory, Brown has kept his distance. If he gets too close, he risks being aligned with the tea party’s more radical followers.

He is up for re-election in 2012, and most of the state political establishment remains Democratic.

Thanks Breitbart.

[Ask] [Bloglines] [del.icio.us] [Digg] [Google] [Mister Wong] [MySpace] [Netvouz] [Newsvine] [OnlyWire] [Propeller] [Shoutwire] [Squidoo] [StumbleUpon] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Windows Live] [Yahoo!]
Tagged with: