Obama Presidency

[José]

[Brock]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090322/ap_on_go_co/gregg_budget

Sen. Gregg says Obama budget will bankrupt US

WASHINGTON – The top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee says the Obama administration is on the right course to save the nation's financial system.

But Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire also says President Barack Obama's massive budget proposal will bankrupt the country.

Gregg says he has no regrets in withdrawing his nomination to become commerce secretary. He pulled out after deciding he could not fully back the administration's economic policies.

The senator said Obama's spending plan in the midst of a prolonged recession would leave the next generation with a country too expensive to live in.

Gregg appeared Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."

Treasury's toxic asset plan could cost $1 trillion

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090322/D973AFAO0.html

Kroft to Obama: Are you punch-drunk?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20339.html

[h16]

Ca commence à déciller outre-atlantique. Eh oui : la facture va être sévère.

[José]

Poll of change: Obama’s job approval slipping to ‘50-50’

The honeymoon is over, a national poll will signal today as President Obama’s job approval stumbles to about 50 percent over the lack of improvement with the crippled economy.

The sobering numbers come as the president backpedals from two prime-time gaffes - one comparing his bowling score to a Special Olympian and another awkwardly laughing about the economy, which prompted Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” to ask “are you punch-drunk?”

Pollster John Zogby said his poll out today will show Americans split on the president’s performance. He said the score factors out to “about 50-50.”

Some polls show Obama coasting with a 65 percent job approval, but not in Zogby’s tally.

“The numbers are going down,” Zogby told the Herald. “It’s not because of the gaffes, but a combination of high expectations and that things aren’t moving fast enough with the economy.”

As for the president’s love of the limelight, it could backfire, according to a media watcher.

“I thought he overexposed himself weeks ago,” said Tobe Berkovitz, associate dean of Boston University’s College of Communication.

“I wonder when the public will say ‘Instead of being in front of the camera, be in front of a spreadsheet.’ ”

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politi…position=recent

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con…l_tracking_poll

[José]

Par contre, une qui, contrairement à Obama, va finalement bien tirer épingle son du jeu, c'est la Clinton :

Poll: Clinton has high job approval

As Hillary Clinton flies to Mexico for a high-level summit, a new national poll indicates seven in 10 Americans are happy with the job she's doing as secretary of state.

Seventy-one percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Wednesday said they approve of how Clinton is handling her job as America's top diplomat. Fewer than one in four disapprove.

"Nine in 10 Democrats approve of Clinton -- that's no surprise," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director. "But by a 50 percent to 43 percent margin, Republicans also think she is doing a good job at the State Department. That's an interesting result for a polarizing figure like Clinton."

The poll's release comes as Clinton teams up with Mexican officials to kick off weeks of meetings intended to find ways to fight drug violence on both sides of the U.S.-Mexican border. The Obama administration on Tuesday announced a major increase in security funding and agent deployments along the border. Watch what Clinton hopes to accomplish in Mexico »

"Since taking office in January, Clinton has been at the White House nearly every day, meeting with President Obama, Vice President [Joseph] Biden and other members of the Cabinet and national security staff," said CNN State Department producer Elise Labott. "The secretary maintains close ties with her former colleagues on Capitol Hill and meets regularly with congressional leaders."

The former first lady, senator from New York and one-time primary rival to Obama already has clocked close to 60,000 miles in her first two trips overseas -- one journey to China, the other to the Middle East and Europe -- since becoming secretary of state in January.

Clinton was met by large crowds and warmly received by world leaders on both trips, although "she met some criticism in Beijing, where she was criticized for a lower-key approach that seemed to downplay the importance of human rights in the overall relationship with China," Labott said.

"Her aides said she wanted a new approach to dealing with China's human rights record, including less public criticism and more private discussions, which may prove more productive in changing Chinese behavior."

Clinton's approval rating is higher than that of her boss: The same CNN/Opinion Research poll put Obama's approval rating at 64 percent, 7 percentage points lower than Clinton's.

Clinton has a couple of advantages over Obama in public opinion today, Holland said.

"She hasn't had a prominent role in the administration's economic or budget policies," he said. "There haven't been any international issues that have caused as much outrage as the AIG bonuses. And her name wasn't on the ballot in November, so any partisan animosity to her that is left over from 2008 is not as fresh in the public's mind."

Clinton's approval rating is also 10 percentage points higher than the one her predecessor, Condoleezza Rice, had in March 2005, then two months into her tenure as secretary of state.

The CNN/Opinion Research poll of 1,019 Americans was conducted by telephone March 12-15. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/25…poll/index.html

[h16]

Logique, elle a de l'expérience, elle…

[john_ross]

[Apollon]

Obama remonte dans les sondages.

[Brock]

[José]

Bon, le TOTUS (the Teleprompter of the United States) fait déjà plus d'obamisms que Bush de bushims, mais en plus c'est une vraie canule quand il faut aller en visite chez les gens.

Diplomatic jaws dropped across the continent yesterday when it was revealed that U.S. President Barack Obama had, once again, fumbled a routine protocal of international statecraft: finding the right gift for a foreign leader or head of state. In a private ceremony with Queen Elizabeth, Her Royal Highness bequeathed to the Obamas one of the earliest known copies of William Shakespeare's Henry V. She also presented him with the framed orginal sheet music of John Newton's "Amazing Grace." To the Obama daughters, the Queen gave a dollhouse-sized replica of Windsor Castle with a functioning train station in the year of the compound. They also received a prize Shetland pony. Mrs. Obama was given a ruby ring commissioned and worn by Queen Victoria.

The Obamas, unfortunately, did not seem prepared for the occasion despite the row set off by the exchange of gifts between Prime Minister Brown and the U.S. President barely a month ago. Mr. Obama rather unceremoniously handed the Queen a shopping bag from the Duty Free shop at Heathrow airport. It contained a signed paperback copy of Dreams of My Father, purchased at the WH Smith shop at the airport, a bottle of Johnny Walker Scotch (black label), a CD of the Swedish band ABBA's greatest hits (still in shrink wrap with a 2-for-1 sticker on it) and ten bags of M&Ms with the presidential seal on them.

The Queen responded in a rather flat: "How delightful."

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=O…mE2NTdhZThmMDE=

[Sous-Commandant Marco]

"Même les meilleurs poissons sentent mauvais le 2 avril".

[José]

Sinon : The Top 100 April Fool's Day Hoaxes of All Time.

#4 : The Taco Liberty Bell (1996)

The Taco Bell Corporation announced it had bought the Liberty Bell and was renaming it the Taco Liberty Bell. Hundreds of outraged citizens called the National Historic Park in Philadelphia where the bell was housed to express their anger. Their nerves were only calmed when Taco Bell revealed, a few hours later, that it was all a practical joke. The best line of the day came when White House press secretary Mike McCurry was asked about the sale. Thinking on his feet, he responded that the Lincoln Memorial had also been sold. It would now be known, he said, as the Ford Lincoln Mercury Memorial.

#7 : Alabama Changes the Value of Pi (1998)

The April 1998 issue of the New Mexicans for Science and Reason newsletter contained an article claiming that the Alabama state legislature had voted to change the value of the mathematical constant pi from 3.14159 to the 'Biblical value' of 3.0. Soon the article made its way onto the internet, and then it rapidly spread around the world, forwarded by email. It only became apparent how far the article had spread when the Alabama legislature began receiving hundreds of calls from people protesting the legislation. The original article, which was intended as a parody of legislative attempts to circumscribe the teaching of evolution, was written by physicist Mark Boslough.

#15: Metric Time (1975)

Australia's This Day Tonight news program revealed that the country would soon be converting to "metric time." Under the new system there would be 100 seconds to the minute, 100 minutes to the hour, and 20-hour days. Furthermore, seconds would become millidays, minutes become centidays, and hours become decidays. The report included an interview with Deputy Premier Des Corcoran who praised the new time system. The Adelaide townhall was even shown sporting a new 10-hour metric clock face. The thumbnail (found at TelevisionAU.com) shows TDT Adelaide reporter Nigel Starck posing with a smaller metric clock. TDT received numerous calls from viewers who fell for the hoax. One frustrated viewer wanted to know how he could convert his newly purchased digital clock to metric time.

[Ash]

J'ai zyeuter la 2 ce matin avant de bosser. Je précise que je regarde rarement la TV en général, quoi qu'il en soit j'ai été sur le cul quand j'ai vu et entendu tout le ramdam qu'ils nous faisaient de la venue d'Obama en France. C'était d'ailleurs le titre affiché tout en haut : Obama en France. C'est complètement délirant. On touche à l'idéologie, je ne vois pas d'autre explication. Et ça confirme ce qu'on sait déjà : sous ces airs d'antiaméricanisme, la France est profondément subjuguée par l'Amérique. On l'a oublié avec Bush (représentant de l'Amérique qu'on n'aime pas) mais c'est désormais clair et net. Ce pays peut l'ouvrir autant qu'il veut, se vouloir universel et j'en passe, ce n'est qu'un petit pays de merde qui se porte comme il se doit.

[Randian shithead]

J'ai zyeuter la 2 ce matin avant de bosser. Je précise que je regarde rarement la TV en général, quoi qu'il en soit j'ai été sur le cul quand j'ai vu et entendu tout le ramdam qu'ils nous faisaient de la venue d'Obama en France. C'était d'ailleurs le titre affiché tout en haut : Obama en France. C'est complètement délirant. On touche à l'idéologie, je ne vois pas d'autre explication. Et ça confirme ce qu'on sait déjà : sous ces airs d'antiaméricanisme, la France est profondément subjuguée par l'Amérique. On l'a oublié avec Bush (représentant de l'Amérique qu'on n'aime pas) mais c'est désormais clair et net. Ce pays peut l'ouvrir autant qu'il veut, se vouloir universel et j'en passe, ce n'est qu'un petit pays de merde qui se porte comme il se doit.

Non, c'est pas ça. En France on aime pas l'Amérique mais on aime les démocrates et les New-Yorkais. "Bah oui,　ils sont quand même plus évolués/cultivés hein."

[john_ross]

Cette fois c'est fait:

Senate Rejects Amendment Protecting Abortion-Conscience Rights for Doctors

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4965.html

[José]

Obama ne parle pas autrichien.

[Apollon]

La preuve que le bushisme tient plus à l'auteur qu'à la chose prononcée.

[Sous-Commandant Marco]

A sa décharge, l'allemand parlé en Autriche est sensiblement différent de l'allemand parlé en Allemagne (lui-même très variable), notamment par l'accent mais aussi par le vocabulaire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_language

[José]

[Saxval]

A sa décharge, l'allemand parlé en Autriche est sensiblement différent de l'allemand parlé en Allemagne (lui-même très variable), notamment par l'accent mais aussi par le vocabulaire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_language

En effet, il existe de nombreux dialectes allemands, et ne dites par exemple jamais à un Bernois ou à un Zurichois qu'il parle allemand…

http://projetbabel.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5740

Obama, même si il n'a pas forcément fait exprès, a très bien fait de parler de langue autrichienne: ça a du paraître très flatteur pour les autrichiens que POUR UNE FOIS on reconnaisse leur différence d'avec le "grand frère" allemand.

Pour le coup, c'est la news qui dénnonce cet "écart de language" qui tombe à plat…

[h16]

Pour le coup, c'est la news qui dénnonce cet "écart de language" qui tombe à plat…

Je me dois ici de dénoncer tes écarts de langage écrit.

[José]

Pas folichons, les chiffres, après 100 jour de gouvernement :

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con…l_tracking_poll

[Stephdumas]

j'ai l'impression que tout ceux qui ont voté pour Obama vont réagir après 4 ans comme Randy Marsh dans cet extrait d'un épisode de South Park à 1:12 http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7chzy_change_news

[Tortue joviale]

j'ai l'impression que tout ceux qui ont voté pour Obama vont réagir après 4 ans comme Randy Marsh dans cet extrait d'un épisode de South Park à 1:12 http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7chzy_change_news

Tiens sympa :

Deux vidéos à regarder et noter les disparités dans la présentation des médias français :

Qui est Barack Obama ?

[dailymotion]x3head[/dailymotion]

Qui est John McCain ?

[dailymotion]x3hfq1[/dailymotion]

Le tube des quatre prochaines années :

[José]

Terrance et Philip, en version USA :

[Zax]

En tout cas, la politique économique d'Obama commence à énerver certaines personnes. Hier il y a eu des manifs dans 200 villes américaines. Il y avait même une vidéo à ce sujet dans le figaro.

[José]

En tout cas, la politique économique d'Obama commence à énerver certaines personnes.

Certaines ? Seulement un Américain sur trois.

[José]

Heureusement que c'est Obama, avec Bush on aurait eu peur :

F.B.I. and States Vastly Expand DNA Databases

Law enforcement officials are vastly expanding their collection of DNA to include millions more people who have been arrested or detained but not yet convicted. The move, intended to help solve more crimes, is raising concerns about the privacy of petty offenders and people who are presumed innocent.

[…]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/us/19DNA…;pagewanted=all

[Sous-Commandant Marco]

Selon les auteurs de Nudge, un essai d'économie comportementale qui se veut l'anticipation d'un nouveau paradigme, la philosophie politique d'Obama serait orientée par des idées libertariennes de gauche, une conception qu'ils appellent "paternalisme libertarien" - qui rappelle en effet par certains aspects le programme des "géolibertariens", du moins sans les velléités de taxe foncière, mais avec un mélange similaire et improbable de liberté de choix et de chaînes, de marché et d'encadrement, de Friedman et de welfarestate.

http://www.ilovepolitics.info/Nudge,-la-ve…bama_a1363.html

Merci de l'info, Free Jazz !

Je suis tombé par hasard sur ce livre dans un aéroport et je l'ai acheté. Les auteurs commencent par rappeler les découvertes les plus intéressantes de l'économie comportementale, par exemple l'aversion aux pertes, en les plaçant dans le cadre de la contestation de l'homo economicus rationalis présupposé par les théories économiques classiques. A vrai dire, c'est la partie la plus intéressante du livre mais on n'y apprend pas grand-chose. Dans un second temps, un compendium du "nudge", c'est à dire de l'action publique non-coercitive, on pourrait dire de l'incitation, est mis sur pied. Enfin, on y trouve des critiques constructives de la mise en oeuvre de telles politiques publiques, en Suède et aux Etats-Unis.

Pour un libéral, le livre paraît vain, par sa volonté d'optimiser l'action publique en fonction d'objectifs louables, comme réduire l'obésité ou maximiser les revenus des retraités, tout en demeurant dans l'ignorance de l'évolution politique récente, à savoir l'augmentation délirante du poids de l'état. Alors que les auteurs soutiennent ouvertement Obama, qui a adopté certaines de leurs idées, ils font une impasse à peu près totale sur des points majeurs de son programme. L'amplification de l'intervention en Afghanistan est un domaine ou la politique du nudging serait vraiment ridicule.

Cependant, ce livre est révélateur que l'action politique classique, fondée sur la contrainte, arrive à ses limites, en ce qu'elle ne pourra continuer que grâce à des ruses pathétiques, telles que les smileys sur les factures EDF pour féliciter les économes et améliorer le bilan-carbone (exemple tiré du livre). De ce point de vue, la verrue finale sur la crise financière est vraiment comique: comment peut-on se préoccuper de l'agencement des yaourts et des hamburgers dans les cantines (autre exemple) tout en passant à côté d'une crise d'une telle ampleur? Serions-nous déjà passés du règne des grandes politiques à celui des petites retouches?

[José]

C'est clair, les choses changent bien sous Obama par rapport à l'ère fasciste de Bush. La Maison Blanche vient de demander officiellement à la Cour Suprême de retirer aux suspects arrêtés le droit de ne pas être interrogés par la police sans présence d'un avocat. Yes, we can!

Apr 24, 4:17 AM EDT

Obama legal team wants to limit defendants' rights

By MARK SHERMAN

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to overrule a 23 year-old decision that stopped police from initiating questions unless a defendant's lawyer is present, the latest stance that has disappointed civil rights and civil liberties groups.

While President Barack Obama has reversed many policies of his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, the defendants' rights case is another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather than expand rights.

Since taking office, Obama has drawn criticism for backing the continued imprisonment of enemy combatants in Afghanistan without trial, invoking the "state secrets" privilege to avoid releasing information in lawsuits and limiting the rights of prisoners to test genetic evidence used to convict them.

The case at issue is Michigan v. Jackson, in which the Supreme Court said in 1986 that police may not initiate questioning of a defendant who has a lawyer or has asked for one unless the attorney is present. The decision applies even to defendants who agree to talk to the authorities without their lawyers.

Anything police learn through such questioning may not be used against the defendant at trial. The opinion was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the only current justice who was on the court at the time.

The justices could decide as early as Friday whether they want to hear arguments on the issue as they wrestle with an ongoing case from Louisiana that involves police questioning of an indigent defendant that led to a murder confession and a death sentence.

The Justice Department, in a brief signed by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, said the 1986 decision "serves no real purpose" and offers only "meager benefits." The government said defendants who don't wish to talk to police don't have to and that officers must respect that decision. But it said there is no reason a defendant who wants to should not be able to respond to officers' questions.

At the same time, the administration acknowledges that the decision "only occasionally prevents federal prosecutors from obtaining appropriate convictions."

The administration's legal move is a reminder that Obama, who has moved from campaigning to governing, now speaks for federal prosecutors.

The administration's position assumes a level playing field, with equally savvy police and criminal suspects, lawyers on the other side of the case said. But the protection offered by the court in Stevens' 1986 opinion is especially important for vulnerable defendants, including the mentally and developmentally disabled, addicts, juveniles and the poor, the lawyers said.

"Your right to assistance of counsel can be undermined if somebody on the other side who is much more sophisticated than you are comes and talks to you and asks for information," said Sidney Rosdeitcher, a New York lawyer who advises the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.

Stephen B. Bright, a lawyer who works with poor defendants at the Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta, said the administration's position "is disappointing, no question."

Bright said that poor defendants' constitutional right to a lawyer, spelled out by the high court in 1965, has been neglected in recent years. "I would hope that this administration would be doing things to shore up the right to counsel for poor people accused of crimes," said Bright, whose group joined with the Brennan Center and other rights organizations in a court filing opposing the administration's position.

Former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson and former FBI Director William Sessions are among 19 one-time judges and prosecutors urging the court to leave the decision in place because it has been incorporated into routine police practice and establishes a rule on interrogations that is easy to follow.

Eleven states also are echoing the administration's call to overrule the 1986 case.

Justice Samuel Alito first raised the prospect of overruling the decision at arguments in January over the rights of Jesse Montejo, the Louisiana death row inmate.

Montejo's lawyer, Donald Verrilli, urged the court not to do it. Since then, Verrilli has joined the Justice Department, but played no role in the department's brief.

http://wabcradio.com/news.asp?c=5145&u…PLATE%3DDEFAULT