What A Difference A Year Makes

Miss Me Yet

It has been a year since Barack Obama won the national election by a pretty good margin by running on his I am not Bush and Hope and Change platform. People were thrilled with him. Blacks were able to ignore his shortcomings and vote for him because he is a Democrat and he is black and the youth were able to vote for him because he promised to give them everything.

The shininess has worn off Obama and now that the newness has worn off people are able to see that he is nothing more than a typical politician. He promised transparency but has not been transparent about very much. Health care is debated behind closed doors and not on CSPAN as he promised. His personal records are locked up tighter than a gnat’s behind and he has followed many of the things that George W. Bush did, much to the displeasure of his base.

Obama is a man child who is trying to do a job for which he is unqualified and lacks experience to do. He is doing that job the Chicago way and turning DC into a bigger thug infested rat’s nest than it was before he arrived.

Any wonder why some folks are beginning to express displeasure and wishing that Bush were still president? A new poll shows that 44% of respondents wish Bush were still president.

Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama’s declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they’d rather have his predecessor. Given the horrendous approval ratings Bush showed during his final term that’s somewhat of a surprise and an indication that voters are increasingly placing the blame on Obama for the country’s difficulties instead of giving him space because of the tough situation he inherited. The closeness in the Obama/Bush numbers also has implications for the 2010 elections. Using the Bush card may not be particularly effective for Democrats anymore, which is good news generally for Republicans and especially ones like Rob Portman who are running for office and have close ties to the former President.

Given that the Democrats were in charge of the nation when it went to hell (don’t fall for the “Republicans were in charge when things went bad” meme) and that they were responsible for ignoring the warning signs it is no wonder that people long for the days when the adults were in charge.

This number will get larger once inflation arrives and the economy fails to make any real improvement. The elections of 2010 are 11 months away but it is not looking good for the party that has been in power for the last three years.

Stubborn Facts has posters of who we really miss.

Big Dog


If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

42 Responses to “What A Difference A Year Makes”

  1. Hugh Winter says:

    As much as the repubs and dems hated Bush it seems having him back about now would be a better option than the idiot we now have running things. From his ability to spend money like he’s standing if front of a urinal Obama can sometimes make sounds that sound an awful lot like a moderate dem himself. Spending us into oblivion will get the repubs the next election, and agreeing to stay in Iraq and Afganistan makes sure the dems lose the far left peace niks. So Obama might just do what the repubs have been unable to do; dismantle Obama’s coalition that defeated the demon Bushy. In truth all repubs need to remember is if they just wait long enough the dems will shoot themselves in the foot and mouth at the same time and hand the government back to them. What the repubs need to remember; after they get it back they must take care of us or a real third party will be born.

  2. Adam says:

    I like this part of the article:

    Finally 20% of voters, including 35% of Republicans, support impeaching Obama for his actions so far. I’m not clear exactly what ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ they are using to justify that position but there may be a certain segment of voters on both the right and the left these days that simply think the President doing things they don’t agree with is grounds for removal from office.

    • Darrel says:

      [quote] “including 35% of Republicans”

      So it’s about 1/3 that is insane. Interesting. I think it’s only about 5% or so on the lefty side.

      Bigd: “Blacks were able to ignore his [Obama’s] shortcomings”>>

      What shortcomings?

      You should try giving an example of one some time.


      • Blake says:

        Gee- one shortcoming would be a clear and present LACK OF EXPERIENCE at actually DOING something, anything of substance.
        Another would be breaking his promises- he says so many that he can’t keep them straight anymore.
        We could go on all day, he is one shortcoming after another.
        He will be known as the Great Disappointer.

        • Darrel says:

          You should try giving an example of one some time. See how it holds up. There is a difference between vague assertions and a specific example.


  3. Adam says:

    Now this is leadership:

    Q: Global warming, you say the earth is cooling. Michael how do you know for sure?

    STEELE: I don’t! I don’t! But apparently neither does anybody else! Ok? I don’t. All i know is every morning I come on, I turn on channel 13 and I’ll see what the weather man tells me okay?

    • Big Dog says:

      Darrel, I have given plenty of examples of his shortcomings. You just rationalize them and say they are not. I understand you like your head up there so it is OK.

      But what percent of Democrats?

      I think the whole issue of impeachment is shaky but then about all Democrats wanted Bush impeached and he had no ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’

      I imagine we could go after Obama for circumventing the Constitution but since people were not willing to go after all the others who did then it would be a tough sell.

      Just vote them out and put in people who will follow it.

      Yeah Adam, how is this for leadership:


      Or you could plug in some of the racist remarks or the remarks about how stupid Republicans are…

      And Steele makes this point. Can’t tell what is going to happen int he next 3 days how can you tell about the next 3 decades…

      And Adam, if you don’t agree with him it is because you are racist…

      • Adam says:

        Yes, we could list the silly things Dean’s done, or I could just list all the things the Democrats accomplished under Dean’s leadership and his 50 state strategy:

        * 52 new House seats in 2006 and 2008 giving the Democrats a 37 seat majority
        * 14 new Senate seats in 2006 and 2008 giving the Democrats a 18 seat majority
        * 7 new Governorships 2006 and 2008 giving the Democrats a majority
        * Democrats in the White House


        Steele doesn’t many any valid point though. You should both go back to your highschool science classes and learn the difference between weather and climate.

        But look on the bright side. If the GOP doesn’t get respectable gains in 2010 then Steele will have a lot more time to go on TV and make such foolish unscientific arguments.

        • Big Dog says:

          I know the difference between weather and climate. Neither is predicted very well. If you all could then we would not be having the cooling trend necessitating the change to climate change instead of global warming.

          We could list Steele’s accomplishments as well.

          Funny though,m you credit Dean but then say it was because of Bush. Only one can have the credit. Obviously Dean was not pleasing to someone because he is not in Obama’s administration.

          I love the way you dismiss Dean’s mean spirited and sometimes racist remarks because he had some success. (of course even if the GOP took back the House you would not credit Steele the way you credited Dean)

          It is the way you work, as long as you get what you want it is all good (your words about NY23).

          Adam, you are a racist for saying something bad about Steele.

        • Adam says:

          What cooling trend? This decade was the hottest on record. Tell the truth now.

          List Steele’s accomplishments if you like. I’d love to see them.

          I don’t dismiss Dean’s remarks. I questioned Steele’s leadership and you brought up a quote by Dean that was not made while he was the leader of the Democrats. Dean was clearly one of the most successful leaders of the Dems in party history so you look like a fool for questioning it.

          Let’s not forget that you are only pretending that liberals think you are racist by default for questioning Obama. But then again Steele has imagined racism against himself in the past so maybe you are in good company.

        • Blake says:

          Come on, cook the books some more Adam- as someone who has of necessity viewed and experienced more weather than you or almost anyone else, I can say that climate does indeed change (all by itself- it needs no humans involved), and CO2 is NOT a poison, but necessary to this climate. In the past, CO2 levels were far higher than they are now.
          In all this discussion, the point is missed, deliberately so, because Liberals stand to make a great deal of money and power from this missed point- the point is not that humans alter their surroundings- of course they do, and often in truly negative ways, but it is NOT the CO2 we need to worry about- it is stifling government intervention in the workplace of ideas when it comes to solving man’s interaction with the planet.
          Lowering our standard of living to be more “in line” with the rest of the world is stupid- only a true idiot would think that is a solution, but that is what Copenhagen is proposing, when you cut through the Euro-trash PC- speak there- and they feel that we, as a nation, should give money to poorer nations, kind of like Nobumma does to the people here who do not pay taxes. Wow- that is SO avant garde that I think it is retarded.

  4. Big Dog says:

    That’s right Adam, ou were there for the “imagined” racsim. How silly of me to take someone else’s word.

    Give Steele the tenure Dean had and let’s see. Is it fair to compare a complete tenure to about a year?

    Liberals do think you are racist for questioning Obama. Garafalo is a prime example as is Olberdouche.

    I don’t think this decade was the hottest on record. I would need to see some credible data, not the phony stuff coming out. And if it was wouldn’t it be more accurate to say since we started recording? I mean, can you say ever without data from the beginning of time?

    I bet there were hotter decades long before man got here. What do you think would cause that?

    And let’s be real, the hottest year on record has changed a number of times over the years in order to massage the issue.

    • Adam says:

      “Give Steele the tenure Dean had and let’s see. Is it fair to compare a complete tenure to about a year?”

      I haven’t called Steele a failure. He may in fact be very successful. I just question his leadership when he spouts those climate change denial talking points, AKA…lies.

      “I would need to see some credible data, not the phony stuff coming out.”

      That’s the trick. You still believe that the stolen e-mails revealed some flaw in the data on global temperatures. They did not. The World Meteorological Organization’s preliminary data for the decade points to 2009 being one of the 10 hottest years on record and the decade itself being the hottest on record. You can see the trend yourself unless you want to call it phony.

      “And if it was wouldn’t it be more accurate to say since we started recording?”

      I didn’t say ever, I said on record.

      “And let’s be real, the hottest year on record has changed a number of times over the years in order to massage the issue.”

      I don’t know what you’re talking about but maybe you can go into further detail on that.

      • Blake says:

        Adam- when scientists lie, it calls into question ALL the rest of their research- or should, if you were truly being honest- I know you have no children, but if you ever do, you will learn that often one lie covers up another.
        I have questioned the research since before these e- mails came out, simply because I can see that there has been no truly critical study, just blind acceptance of conclusions that favor those who grant money to these scientists, and when I see payola, I think something stinks.

  5. Big Dog says:

    I don’t know. Perhaps the way data seems to change and the secrecy behind how numbers are obtained. Here is an example

    It is easy to make the claims you do because in the GW world snow and freezing temperatures are because of WARMING.

    Sure, Steele might say some things that are odd but Dean did the same. They both have had their Biden moments.

    The emails did reveal flaws, cover-ups, and deception. Plus they “lost” all the original data.

    You did say on record but how would you account for hotter periods before humans were here?

    And how is what we breathe out and what plants need to live a harmful substance?

  6. Adam says:

    Cold weather is not a refutation of the data behind climate change, as bad as you folks want it to be.

    I don’t know anything about hotter periods before human evolution.

    If the only carbon in our atmosphere came from breathing in and out and natural Earth forces then we most likely wouldn’t be having this conversation.

    • Blake says:

      If you do not know of hotter periods BEFORE humans came along, don’t you think perhaps it might open your eyes to study these periods?
      Otherwise, you stand to resemble in your ignorance, people who believe that dinosaurs and humans existed together, and the Earth is only 6,000 years old. The difference would only be in WHAT you believe, not the ignorance you display in blindly believing.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: “you stand to resemble in your ignorance, people who believe that dinosaurs and humans existed together, and the Earth is only 6,000 years old.”>>

        Ah, those are your people btw.

  7. Big Dog says:

    But carbon was thousands of times higher a long time ago before we had SUVs.

    And cold weather is not an indicator that global warming is real either. You can’t say it is cold because of global warming. And yet they do.

    • Adam says:

      My first thought is this: If you want humans to live on an Earth more like it was millions of years before we existed then I guess that explains your stubborn refusal to accept the scientific truth of climate change.

      I’m sure these unnamed people that make up ‘they’ say a lot of things.

      • Big Dog says:

        My first thought is that I want people to be able to use SUVs, use our own energy and not have government spend trillions on something that, even if successful, would amount to less than 1 degree in change.

        I do not want money spent on something that is not settled. It is you and your ilk who want to reduce carbon levels to what they were 100 years ago (impossible I might add) so it seems to me that you all want us moving to the way it was a long time ago. There is no scientific truth of global warming. It is not settled but health care is. People rejected it when Hillary tried it so it is settled now stop trying to impose that on us.

        How about all you global warming people (and yes, it is GW, you can’t change the name to suit your needs) give up your cars, your electricity and all the other things and live how you want and let the rest of us live like we want. I do not want you or anyone else telling me how to live.

        If they increase taxes I will run my lawnmower all day and burn leaves just out of spite. I am tired of you all telling us what we can and cannot do and I won’t do it anyway.

        Maybe a volcano will erupt and really screw things up. That would be great, mother nature exercising might and nothing you libtards can do about it.

        Eff you all…


        • Adam says:

          “If they increase taxes I will run my lawnmower all day and burn leaves just out of spite. … Eff you all…”

          Yes, to oppose the raise in your taxes feel free to spend even more money wasting gasoline. That will show us “libtards” a thing or two.

  8. Big Dog says:

    No Adam, perhaps you miss the irony of the statement. First of all, I can afford all the gas I want. Second of all, it was if they increase taxes FOR GLOBAL WARMING (I would think you could get the context) and it means that there will still be people doing what they want, when they want and there is nothing that will stop that.

    We do not intend to pay trillions of dollars for something that will make no difference.

    Yes, eff all you people who think you should have the right to tell everyone how to live.

    And how about the peaceful libtards protesting in Copenhagen. Fix it now or we will get upset and break windows. Wish they would do that here, I need target practice…

    • Adam says:

      I’m sorry. I missed the irony because I was too busy laughing at your stubbornness. This is like Glenn Beck and Hannity and others who pledged to use more energy to offset the attempts at the Democratic Convention to be carbon neutral. Oh yes, you showed us didn’t you? This is how Republican adults act and it’s hard to believe your kind wants to run this country again.

      News flash though. You’re told how to live your life a 100 ways every day from speed limits and seat belt laws to limits on the drugs we can possess, use or sell. How about limits on where you can put your garbage or how you can treat your own children? Heaven forbid you’re forced to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle or pay higher taxes in order to support a cleaner economy. HELL NO, let’s hang ’em all for that!

      If you don’t like to be told how to live then perhaps you’d be happier moving to another country. That’s what you tell liberals when we have a complaint, right?

      • Big Dog says:

        You must be mistaken. I wear my seat belt because it is a safe thing to do. I do not agree with seat belt or helmet laws but would wear them myself out of safety. I drive the speed I want and I treat my children properly because that is what I am supposed to do as a parent, not because the government says how to do it. I wear my seat belt because it is safe just like I wear aural protectors and safety eye wear when I shoot or hearing protection when I use noisy things or gloves when there is a danger to my hands or steel toed shoes when there is a crush hazard. I do all that because it is the safe thing to do and I don’t need a rule from government in order to do it.

        I put my garbage in a garbage can and if I feel like it I separate it and recycle. I do this because I know how, not because government tells me to.

        That is the difference, you have to be told how to do thing because you lack the ability to do it on your own. I do not need the government to tell me how to raise my kids (who both happen to be successful adults no thanks to government) because I know how to do that. Government is unable to raise children. Government is unable to educate them very well.

        If I want to drive an SUV I will drive an SUV. I don’t care what government says about it and I don’t care what you say. An SUV is what I prefer. You drive what you want and I will drive what I want and we will get along just fine.

        You see, I don’t care what you drive and would never try to tell you what you have to drive but you feel OK doing that to me. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

        And when Obama (or person who follows him) leaves more carbon on one trip in AF One than I will in a lifetime of using my SUV then I feel pretty justified in driving it. I plant a few trees each year so I am covered anyway.

        But I intend to run my gas lawnmower when I want to cut my grass, run my SUV when I want and I plan on using whatever fuel I want to live the life I want. I do not intend to let the UN, the US government or anyone else tell me what I will and will not do. They can try to tell me but I am going to do it anyway.

        That is freedom, you should try it sometime.

      • Big Dog says:

        Um, I will never leave because I don’t like being told how to live. The country was founded on freedom and that is how I will live. If you don’t like freedom then perhaps you should move to another country.

        Against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

        No Adam, the last time people living here did not like being told what to do by an oppressive government they did not move, they fought a revolution.

        I will fight long before I ever move…

    • Adam says:

      Not all liberal protesters are swearing to be peaceful. But then again you might not understand what kind of people these are. This is not the Tea [REDACTED BECAUSE OF VULGAR CHILDISH REFERENCE] Party made up of a bunch of old white folks running around crying about czars and ACORN and the commie nazi dictators that were democratically elected to office.

      • Big Dog says:

        Adam, if you use the vulgar word for Tea Party again I will ban you from this site. I TOLD you before that I will not tolerate that. This is not MSNBC and you are not Olberdouche. My site, my rules. Use the word again and you are gone.

        Is that plain enough for you?

        Tea Partiers are people of all ages and all colors. Racists like you can’t see that. The guy SEIU beat up was black.

      • Darrel says:

        Speaking of those fine Tea People… check out this interesting examination:


        Video clip from Jason Jones on The Daily Show.

      • Adam says:

        You’re unbelievable. I can’t say that but I guess you’re giving the OK to say things like: vicious, man hating, bitch, liberal butt boy, tongue in Obama’s rectum, getting on your knees for Obama, or bend over and take it like a liberal?

        You can’t handle a little criticism of your precious tea party movement so you want to make it seem like you have some sort of rules for vulgar talk? Only when it’s liberals I guess. Don’t be such a coward.

        • Big Dog says:

          I have made it clear that I do not want that term used. You call the right all kinds of names and that is up to you and no different than what I call the left but I made it perfectly clear that I do not like that label and will not tolerate it. You decided to use it anyway.

          If you want to use it then use it at Meathead’s, but I will not allow it here. I do not like it and that is all you need to know.

        • Adam says:

          You hate that word because it’s critical of something you believe in, pure and simple. You’d turn around and use it against liberals as soon as you could if you hadn’t made such a big deal about it. Your the most vulgar person here so I find your distaste for that single phrase disingenuous and funny.

        • Adam says:

          You even use it six times yourself in reference to gay activism in DC because you thought it was more appropriate to them than the Tea Party protesters. Don’t pretend you’ve censored me because you hate that phrase when you’ve used it yourself. You hate my criticism of the movement, that’s all.

  9. Big Dog says:

    You use plenty of words critical of things I believe in. I do not like that word and no matter how you happen to find my position, my position is the only one that matters here.

  10. Big Dog says:

    I used that term in the post you reference to show that the MSM would not report on the people to whom that more appropriately applies but takes great pride in using it in childish attacks on people who have concerns about their country.

    I used the N word in a post in a parody of Jeremiah Wright and caught hell for it though I was only using his words out of context. I don’t use the N word and if I did you would object.

    There are certain words that I will not use. BTW, if you used the N word I would redact that as well.

    • Adam says:

      You’re the boss here but we both know you don’t apply your rules equally to yourself or other conservatives on this site so it just comes off as petty and cowardly.

  11. Big Dog says:

    I do apply rules equally. I don’t allow vulgar cuss words (like ones that start with an F) and I don’t allow the one you used, or the N word. I have changed or deleted comments because of those words. perhaps you did not notice or were not paying attention or perhaps I got them in moderation and would not approve them.

    Just because YOU do not see it does not mean it has not taken place.

    Though the most vulgar people who have commented here are liberals.

  12. Big Dog says:

    But to be clear, while I feel I apply the rules equally, I don’t have to for myself. I do not use the words that I do not like.

    • Adam says:

      I suppose if I called Sarah Palin a bitch or a whore or I accused you of being Rush’s butt boy, having your tongue in Ron Paul’s rectum, or maybe getting on your knees for Bush, then you’d be just fine with that, right? You use and allow plenty of vulgar comments and suggestions to attack or link support for a liberals to sexual innuendo but apparently attacking the tea party crosses the line.

      I have no problems with site rules and you know I never swear excessively and rarely do I attack someone who’s not an author on this site. Still, you have one set of rules for the folks you agree with and another set for those you don’t and that is clear by looking through your archives.

      I have no problem with this in general but once you start threatening to ban me for saying something no more offensive than you say on a weekly basis then it takes it to a whole new level.

      • Big Dog says:

        It would not be the first time some of those names nave been used and it won’t be the last.

        You have directly called me plenty of names. I specifically said I did not want that one used and you did.

        It has nothing to do with sexual innuendo, I use them all the time. It has to do with that term which I do not like.

        You ignored what i said about the term so what did you expect me to do? I guess I could have asked again but how many times do i need to ask that it not be used?

        Perhaps you did not see the request and if so then it is my fault.

      • Blake says:

        If you have no problems with site rules, then just shut up and abide by them, Adam- But the last comment ( the one I am responding to) shows your childish nature, and that you are, like Nobumma, unable to respond to criticism in an adult fashion, or accept blame, two things you and the resident have in common.
        It is a good thing you do not live near me- I would crawl on my knees to your place just to bitch- slap you back to the stone age- if for no other reason than to show you that there ARE people who take action when insulted.
        It is just too bad dueling is outlawed- you need a wake- up call.