Restitutor Orbis

I've been very clear about how I feel about this particular trap. It's my biggest and most enduring gripe about the Obama Administration. Unfortunately, it won't be getting any better and the situation will likely keep Obama's grade (to the right) below an A for the foreseeable future.

A recent release by Americans United for Separation of Church and State has focused my attention on these unhealthy policies again:

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today expressed disappointment at the Obama administration’s decision to ask former football coach Tony Dungy to serve on the president’s Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

“God & Country,” the religion blog of U.S. News & World Report, said today that Dungy has been asked to serve on the council, but he has not yet decided whether to do so.

Dungy, former coach of the Indianapolis Colts football team, has well-known ties with intolerant Religious Right groups. In 2007, for example, he spoke at a fund-raising dinner for the Indiana Family Institute, a James Dobson-affiliated group that opposes gay rights, reproductive rights and separation of church and state.

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United’s executive director, “I am surprised and disappointed that Dungy has been asked to serve on the council. His view that civil-marriage law should reflect religious doctrine is not in keeping with the Constitution.”

While I respect Tony Dungy as an NFL Coach, and while he comes across as a very positive, kind and compassionate man, associations with such groups as Dobson's should raise alarms. These are hate groups. We do not need government support (tacit or otherwise) for hate groups.

I share AU.org's disappointment with this decision. Any attempt that was serious about uniting Americans of all religious persuasions would have chosen a non-Christian instead, as plenty of Christians of all types have already been appointed to this council, but few if any religious minorities.

I cannot denounce this move strongly enough.

For the full press release, go here.

A Tale of Two Revolutions
The Republican Party has launched an all out crusade against any New Deal redux by attacking the New Deal on two fronts: that it is socialism and that it does not work. But is either charge true?
http://www.associatedcontent.comarticle/1582363/a_tale_of_two_revolutions.html

Politico is reporting that Obama has demanded that the chairman and CEO of GM, Rick Wagoner, resign. And according to Politico, he has.

Why?

Because GM wants more government money. Accusations of socialism aside, fears of government encroachment into industry aside, this should have happened at the outset of the stimulus crisis, while Bush was still in office. The fact that these people ran their businesses into the ground, the fact that it is OUR tax dollars that are being tossed at them, led me to the early conclusion that the management of any corporation that accepted our money should have to go. CEO, Board, all of them. Go. Replace them with competent people.

Everything that has followed that initial bailout has convinced me I was right. Unbridled greed, corruption and a refusal to change an entrenched philosophy that panders to further enriching the already grotesquely overpaid executives, have demonstrated that these people have not made and will not make the necessary changes for their companies to survive. They cannot continue to suck up our tax dollars and bankrupt our nation in the process while continuing with the same failed policies. Somebody had to do this. Since they wouldn't do it themselves, the government has.

It's unfortunate that it had to be, but that's the way it goes, sometimes. Nobody wanted it. Doesn't mean we don't have to do it. Today,

President Barack Obama is to unveil his plans for the auto industry, including a response to a request for additional funds by GM and Chrysler. The plan is based on recommendations from the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, headed by the Treasury Department.

The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government's behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason.

Here is a history of the auto industries failings:

• GM and Chrysler first requested billions in federal aid in November, warning that they could run out of cash in a matter of months if they didn't receive it.


• In December, President Bush agreed to loan $9.4 billion to GM and $4 billion to Chrysler.


• Last month, GM asked for $16.6 billion more and Chrysler requested an additional $5 billion.


• Earlier this month, Obama agreed to loan $5 billion to American auto parts manufacturers to help them weather the steep drop in new vehicle orders and the financial uncertainty at the Big Three.

Why Waggoner? Politico offers two reasons:

1. First, his company is asking for the most in total federal aid: $26 billion, a figure administration officials fear could grow even larger.


2. Second, the GM chief was tied more directly to the ill-fated decisions that that brought much of the American auto industry to the brink of collapse.

According to the New York Times the government "has also instructed Chrysler to form a partnership with the Italian automaker Fiat within 30 days as conditions for receiving another much-needed round of government aid...If a deal is reached between Chrysler and Fiat, the administration says it would consider another loan of $6 billion to Chrysler."

We are a month out from the end of President Obama's first 100 days. Clearly, the American people are for the most part satisfied with his progress as a recent CNN poll demonstrates.

Obviously, any single poll cannot be used to demonstrate anything, but CNN is hardly alone. Gallup, a more substantial, and highly respected poll, shows the following:

Things still look good in March. Using the same period as the CNN poll above, Gallup shows the following:

In a comparison with Bush and Clinton we can get a better picture of how Obama is faring:

The following comes as no surprise:

As is the case for most presidents, there are sharp partisan differences in Obama's job approval rating. Among Republicans, Obama's average approval for the past week (March 9-15) is 26%, among independents it is 59%, and among his fellow Democrats, 91%.

Even the Rasmussen poll, the only poll cited by conservative sources, shows Obama at over 50%:

Overall, 56% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. The President’s overall ratings have been within a point of the 56% level every day but one over the past three weeks. Forty-three percent (43%) now disapprove.

Rasmussen essentially finds the same as Gallup where by-party approval comes in: 90% of Democrats approve and 24% of Republicans.

What seems clear to this observer is that Obama has a mandate from the American people and that he is fulfilling their expectations under the most terrible of circumstances: two wars and an economy in shambles, not to mention the social issues that divide the Nation. And he is carrying on despite an obstructionist, reactionary Republican Party forming a not-so-loyal opposition.

My own grade for Obama remains a "B". The only thing that really mars his performance so far is his catering to the intolerant and bigoted "Religious Right". Fortunately, he has balanced this flaw with support of science over superstition. I do believe he is trying to cater to everybody and I do also believe that his attempts to find support on the Right are doomed to failure. The poll numbers from every source demonstrate the accuracy of this statement. The Right, which, as most of you remember, lost the elections in 2008, will accept nothing but unconditional surrender. That this is a flawed and delusional understand of the facts as they exist, scarce needs mentioning.

I suspect that come Day 100, we will find Obama still at around 60% approval and that the percentages in each party who favor him will remain unchanged unless more moderate Republicans, offended by the intransigence and do-nothingness of their compatriots, shift.

President Obama held a virtual town hall meeting today, answering questions posted to the White House site (link below).

From CNN:

The virtual meeting, a new take on President Franklin Roosevelt's fireside chats, was another sign that Obama is reaching out to online followers as he tries to rally an anxious country in support of his solutions to the economic crisis.

After the call for questions closed at 9:30 a.m., more than 90,000 people had submitted more than 104,000 questions for the president. The questions largely focused on the economy but spread across several categories. Online users ranked the questions more than 3.6 million times, according to WhiteHouse.gov.

Full transcript here

Below is the link for submitting questions:

Open For Questions

The Huffington Post is reporting that Obama is speaking his mind with regards to Republican intransigence. I think he's nailed it:

"I do think that the Republican Party right now hasn't sort of figured out what it's for," Obama said in a White House interview with The Courier-Journal and reporters from five other newspapers. "And so, as a proxy, they've just decided 'we're going to be against whatever the other side is for.' That's not what's needed in an economic crisis."

With a big budget battle coming up and the Republicans just saying "no" to everything Obama backs, he has no choice but to accept the gauntlet that has been thrown at his feet. Remaining passive is the wrong course, and I'm glad he understands that now. He needs to get out there and rally the troops, to let America know that the Republican brand is the do-nothing brand, a brand of reactionary contrariness. As Obama put it, "you could play that game maybe in the early '90s, when basically we were pretty prosperous. Right now, everybody's got to pull together."

On a broader economic front, CNN reports that "President Obama reached out to citizens of the world Tuesday, saying in an op-ed piece that ran in 31 newspapers around the globe that there is an urgent need for worldwide economic cooperation."

Obama's move comes ahead of next week's Group of 20 meeting in London, England, in which leaders of the world's richest nations will discuss the global economic downturn.

"My message is clear," Obama wrote. "The United States is ready to lead, and we call upon our partners to join us with a sense of urgency and common purpose. Much good work has been done, but much more remains."

"Once and for all, we have learned that the success of the American economy is inextricably linked to the global economy," Obama said. "There is no line between action that restores growth within our borders and action that supports it beyond."

Last night, 60 Minutes aired an interview with Barack Obama, which gave the president an opportunity to fire back at Dick Cheney. It is brilliant. And it's about time. Bush's "war on terror" has not made the US safer, and it has provided a recruitment tool for Al Qaeda:



Obama says we must remain true to our traditions, and I agree. If we destroy our country to save our country, what have we fought for? What have we saved?