"People are actually benefitting from the diassembling of our country's security and prosperity."

*****************************************************************************

Yes. They are called illegal aliens, radical Islamists and America haters.

I believe the Presidents speech to the nation was great! Yes, it was vague, but come on America your expecting an immediate solution to a problem that's been going on for years!!! You can't expect one President to fix all the problems of years of political corruption overnight!! We've become a nation that wants solutions to problems immediately. Well guess what, this oil spill is one problem NO ONE has any immediate solution to! If you listened to the conference held with the top exec's of oil companies...all readily admitted they DID NOT have any plans in place for a situation like this! You can't blame the president for everything! Unfortunately, we will have to give it time, until someone can figure out what to with the oil spill and its effects. And setting up a brand new energy plan does not happen over night either! It takes TIME...this is not a fast food restur.....nor do we want "fast food" politics...just doesn't work as you can see over the years!!!!

One president to fix the problems of political corruption over the years? Please, this president has given political corruption a new definition. Obama is the typical bully. He talks tough from behind the power of the presidency but talk is cheap and ineffective. More talk about kicking Iran and N Korea's ass would benefit us more than taking cheap shots at BP. Accidents happen and risks are taken in this life. When things go south it's time to pull together not sit on the sidelines with no clue as to what to do to help and shout insults at the only people capable of fixing this problem. There's plenty of time to fix blame when it's over. This guy isn't a president he's still a rabble rousing street thug organizer. Presidents lead and inspire they don't bully their own people with cheap talk.

CU Farley, you forgot one group, the "real Americans"

He just used the situation as a opportunity to get on national TV and push his agenda. The rest was just fluff used to rationalize the need for national TV time.

If our government has been on top of this since day 1, then why haven't they stopped the leak? It appears that BP has been the only one's trying to stop the leak. Why did our government wait until the oil reached the beaches to begin cleanup efforts instead of cleaning it up when it was miles offshore?

Rich, who are "own people"? This is a foreign owned Company who was given the opportunity to drill a well on American soil and chose not to place all the necessary precautions in place in order to prevent a catastrophe. They chose not to pay for the $500m default mechanism at the bottom of the well pipe that could have turned this leak off. That was a financial decision. And they've already conceeded that they have not advanced the ability to fix problems that are happening that deep in the water. BP's CEO said so last week. He said we can drill there but cannot fix problems if they occur that deep. That's called irresponsible. When would you rather call them to task? After they make like saviors by actually cleaning up their mess? No I don't think so. How about calling them out in public because they have ruined the lives of so many with greed and aren't even having the decency to pay those people on time? GD the corporate diety complex is heavy on the conservative side of politics. What happened to those who actually care about the people who are the little businesses down there? What happens if a hurricane comes? Oil in Arkansas is what happens.....

Sure, a president can't fix this overnight, radicalagainstjustice, but we've given him sixty days to at least act against the BP oil spill, which he hasn't. Hell, Bush and Clinton both made harbors full of ships with vacuums to help curb this kind of thing, but not a damn one has been deployed.

Let's face it, the only thing he's done is screw us over. Health care bill that will ruin the economy, bankrupting a huge oil company that will ruin the economy (taxes go up to pay for BP's mistake, and they end up getting bankrupt because Obama won't leave them alone or offer any help) and a failed foreign policy (dictators and other leaders laugh at him because of how easy it is to walk all over him.)

He hit all three?? What speech did you watch. Sorry, but the thrill is gone! It was political and too late.

Joey5559 -

Please explain how the government was supposed to stop the leak. Shouldn't BP be the ones to stop it? After all they are the ones who caused it.

Does anyone pay attention to NBC anymore, since they have become little more than the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party?

If Obama said the Earth was square, NBC would find a way to back him up.

Obama's speech had two real goals;

1 - Distract the public from the ongoing crisis.

2 - Use it as an excuse to promote his far-left energy goals of raising taxes with cap & trade.

He failed on both counts.

Whatever happened to "drill baby drill" "We don't need any more studies on drilling" "Too much Govt regulation" "Govt needs to get out of the way" Now these same people want to know why the President hasn't stopped the leak. Republicans remind me of children. They don't want you to interfere in their lives until they screw up and get into trouble.

Sis-our government put a man on the moon......yet according to you we can't count on them to be able to stop a leak at the bottom of the ocean floor? Our government has the capability to rescue men and nuclear warheads from the ocean floor, yet we can't expect them to stop this leak?

NC55552-Don't forget who allowed them to drill before you want to cast blame on the drill baby drill team. And yes we want the govt to fix things when it goes wrong. If the oversight was there to begin (when it was supposed to be...you know under Obama's watch) then this explosion would not have happened. If people are going to blame this disaster on Bush, then they have to blame 9/11 on Clinton.

"Drill, baby, drill," was Sarah Palin's quote. The President originally didn't support off-shore drilling in his campaign, but recently said that he did support off-shore drilling. Last night, he admitted that his support came too soon considering the oil companies' technical ability to address spills like this. He presented plan was vague -- yes, it was a 15-minute speech, what can you expect?

I guess if his main point was to show America that he had his thumbs up his BUT for fifty plus days, I would have to agree Mark Murray. You surely haven't been down to the coast lately!!!! Stop carrying Obama's water for him. Obama is the love child of Jimmy Carter!!!!!!! At least left wing hacks like Chris Mathews & Keith Olberman got it right...Mark Murray needs to find a new line of work because he sucks at what he's doing now!!!!!!!!

"it certainly met expectations."

Clearly the author has extremely low expectations.

Go take a look at the cnn.com poll:

POOR: 48%

FAIR: 21%

GOOD: 31%

nc55552, we still think we should drill, we still think there is too much government regulation, and we still think government needs to stay out of the way (hindering containment efforts).

I don't completely blame the Obama administration for the blowout or failure to cap the well although it was his MMS that signed off on what BP was doing there and I think the administration should have been on BP's case to have plan B and C immediately ready when plan A failed, have plan D immediately ready when plan B failed, and so forth staying two or three steps ahead in case each successive plan failed to cap the well instead of going comletely back to the drawing board each time. However, if this administration was serious about this situation, they wouldn't be dragging their feet regarding and in some cases outright impeding containment efforts.

Several years ago there was a massive spill in the Persian Gulf. They surrounded the whole spill with oil pumping super-tankers who blocked the spread of the oil, pumped the spilled oil onto them, separated (scrubbed) the oil from the water, pumped the water back into the ocean, then carried the oil back to shore on a rotational basis. Their containment effort was extremely successful with very little harm to the surrounding environment. Unfortunately we are now 60 days into the circus and this administration is finally signing wavers to allow foreign ships into the area to assist in containment efforts instead of blocking them as they have been doing. That's 60 days too late. I'm sure his union buddies owe him a big "thanks" for that one. And how long was Bobby Jindal asking the administration for permission to build the berms that would protect Louisiana's sensitive wetlands? Weeks went by with no movement from the administration blocking Louisiana's chance to save those important areas.

New moratoriums, restrictions, and regulations are not what is needed. The problem is you want to pile more regulations on when we don't even enforce the ones we have in place now. If the current ones had been enforced we very likely would not be in this situation now. One other thing is absolutely necessary though...the administration needs to quit hindering containment efforts. It's almost as if he wants an ecological disaster. Of course I'm sure he thinks that would help his agenda and will gladly point to this during upcoming cap-and-tax discussions.

Talkingpoints:

I have a feeling that it's going to come up anyway. Republicans are already showing their hands. Boehner has suggested that the Federal Government (us) and BP should be responsible for this spill. They will stop at noting in attempts to fleece us...oh I have a feeling that it's coming up again...

After watching his speach I now know how BHO plans too stop the spil. He's going to use a junk shot with the BS coming out of the WH.

What in heaven's name did Olberman, Mathews and Fineman want from your President? MSNBC seems to be out for blood in this situation. Gosh, they could be likened to the Fox Network. What more can President Obama do? He has an obvious handle on the severity of the situation, he has a plan, he is holding those responsible accountable, and he is seeking support to find alternative forms of energy and new regulations to avoid such problems in the future. What more do Olberman, Mathews, and Fineman want? If they want more details about the clean-up efforts perhaps they should send news teams down to the gulf to check out the 17 Coast Guard control stations, and go from there.

Kingston, Ontario Canada

Ms Summers you hit the nail on the head THANK YOU

I think that Olberman, Mathews, and Fineman want the President to put on a cape, jump up on the top of one of the well sites, beat his chest and scream. Wait, maybe they would prefer that he just claim everything is OK, when it's not. No one knows exactly what to do, if they did, it would be happening now. Does the trio above think that ANYONE likes having Gulf crude and the toxic dispersant washing up on all the areas around the Gulf? They did not like what he said or how he said it, but I listened to all of them, none had a better idea of how to handle it. Got a better idea, send it to the President or the Administration or the Coast Guard.

Catharina Summers. Thank you! Well said.

Every time I flip past MSNBC they show the same clip of oil in the marsh, that Rachael Maddow shot about a month ago. If they sent people down there since then I guess they didn't take any new pics.

I don't give a fck whose fault it was, we need to clean up this mess NOW!

In response to your comment regarding Chris Matthews, I was a little disappointed in him. Mr Mathews is an excitable pundit and he seemed disappointed that the president did not match his excitement level, it seems that the pundits are putting soundbites out there as bait and when the whitehouse fails to react to the bait they(the Pundits) are personally offended. I think that the speech was somber in tone for a somber event that need cool, calm problem solving,ok?

Oh good, why doesn't he just say the party of no is blocking him from fixing the leak and that's why he's sat on his aszs since the beginning? I guess it's just too bad that all of the morons that voted him in finally realize that he's full of hot air and wants someone else to take responsibility or take blame. Must really suck knowing that a poll (owned by democrats) showed that LA voters think Bush did better with Katrina than Obama is doing with this spill.

Summers-here's a thought, they want to know what the plan is, and why it's taking so long to work. And how long the plan has been in place. If you want to believe that the white house has done everything possible since the beginning, go ahead. I've got some beachfront property to sell you.

THe American press and the republicans are whining about the Presidents speech but I see it as another time the press was caught with their pants down..They decided what they wanted--did not get it--and are exposed for exploiting the news not reporting it!
Obama laid out what he was going to do--short, sweet, and to the point--Then he delivered the first step the very next day! This is another 'Gotcha' for him and egg on the faces of the 'all knowing' press and republican corporatists! Too funny!

I think you might have misinterpreted the portion of his speech about whom is to provide compensation. When I listened, what I heard that the administration intended to make sure that BP compensated those who were impacted, not that the government would, the government involvement would be in ensuring that this took place.

Hopefully, the second portion of your commentary is rhetorical. The end may very well be that BP folds, or is picked off by some other oil company, but as a nation, I don't think that the law will permit us to "take all of their money", without due process. Also, BP is not a U.S. Corporation, although I believe that they may operate ARCO and/or some other business entities as U.S. subsidiaries.

You are right. the $20 billions escrow account by BP is to pay for all compensations. Hope Obama, Pelosi and Reid don't get their dirty hands in the cookie jar before the American people. Remember the $800 billions stimulus bill, the money just disappeared into thin air.

bestfriend The money didn't dissapear. The Republican business buddies took it while the Republicans screamed bloody murder as a cover.

What exactly did the Obama administration do to be responsible for a Company building a well in the previous administration without the proper safeguards?

Don't you mean the Clinton administration that started off shore drilling in the gulf. Didn't Obama just give permission, last year to a foreign country to drill for oil off of Florida. Didn't Obama receive $1 million from BP for his campaign fund? Wasn't it Obama that signed something to allow BP to drill off shore, last year? Wasn't it Obama's inspectors that were suppose to be inspecting those off shore drilling platforms, instead of watching pron on the internet? If Obama spent as much time as it does in bashing America to the world, blaming the Bush Administration, playing golf, basketball, vacations and parties in the White House, he could be doing something. How much gas and carbon emissions does he use flying here and there? The Democrats in the Senate want to charge us $1 a day to cool the planet. Well maybe $1 a day to someone that makes over $200,000 grand a year is nothing but it is something to the unemployed and those of us in the middle class who are paying taxes. Enough taxes and stop the BS spending.

Is anyone buying BP gasoline??????????????

What republican is going to be the toastmaster? There is no current player that can touch him. The best part is that republicans can thank the tea people in part for this political reality.

A dog could run against Obama and beat him..

Obama and his administration are the toastmasters, themselves! No way will he win in 2012. He had his chance and has blown it. all talk and no action! Is he still campaigning or is he already in office? The real change is coming in 2012! Go Arizona! The people are "yelling", you better listen. Never mind it is too late.

Steve-505729

"A dog could run against Obama and beat him.."

Steve- That was tried once. It didn't work. And plese leave Ms Palin out of this.

then the republicans will have to nominate a dog.

souzan:

Thanks for echoing my sentiments! My God they all sound like a bunch of scared panicky old "titches" my God what happened to the real logical MEN.

the president did not use specifics,details on every move. closeing the other rigs will do nothing but hurt the people more. takeing thousands of jobs on top of the work that is already lost along the coast is not going to win him any support.the goverment should have been keeping these rigs in ck but takeing money from bp and other big oil during elections gives him motive. the people dont want to hear about cap+trade which will raise our fuel cost,raise our electric bills why should he care,he is rich.it is easy to push agendas when you have millions of dollars in the bank but I know I cant afford a new hybrid car or new green home. my neihbors cant afford it either. america will always move forward with inovations sure we all want to become less dependant on fossil fuels.right now is not the time to scare people about with something that we know is going to raise our cost of liveing.I worked twenty two years in oil industry in lake harles La ive been on dissability for five years caused by a pipeline leak. my wife ot twenty years died of an overdose on antidepressants becaue we lost everything.I still have two children to raise, the industry paid no pain and suffering money to my family, so when I get no cost of liveing raise this year but I see all the goverment jobs getting raises,I read where nancy pelosi takes an office that cot her tax payers 18,500 dollars a month which is more than I will get the whole year I get bitter.I want obama to suceed.I think he is a good man,Ihad hope but its fadeing quickly.

carlyss man, I have read your post carefully. I am NOT trying to dump on you. You sound like you are a hard-working, salt-of-the-earth AMERICAN that I would be proud to have as my friend or neighbour. However, in your post a few things came up that give me pause.

1. You state you worked for the Oil industry for 22 years and are on disability. You also state that you have lost everything, including your wife of 20 years (I am deeply sorry for your loss there). What strikes me is that the oil industry didn't do very much to help you when you DID work for them. Why is that? It's not that the industry did not make any money, correct? The industry paid NO PAIN AND SUFFERING MONEY to your family. WHY is that, especially when you have been harmed by a pipeline leak - enough that you are on disability?

2. You are saying that this is NOT the time to scare people about something that you KNOW will raise your cost of living. I can understand your reasoning and frustration, but did we ever think that if we DID have a differnt energy source that it may LOWER the cost of living?

All I am saying is that in your one post, you have encapsulated the mindset and argument(s) that this President is facing. We are so used to getting 'dumped on' that when we are not, we are surprised.

Sir, I don't have all of the answers nor the resources to fix your problem. But think we can understand why things are as bad as they are and MAYBE someone with the resources can help you. Thank you for your thoughtful post.

The republicans hate unions and regulations, but these union employers make money and still provide a safer workplace, healthcare benefits, pension benefits, and in many cases disability benefits. They treat this as a cost of doing business, and they make money. The non-union and unregulated sector of industry makes more money by leaveing it's employee's to depend soley on social security, government disability checks, medicare, and food stamps to exist on. Then they call us the socialists!

Forrest,

I'm a Republican, I don't hate unions (my wife belongs to SEIU), and some regulations are a necessary evil. I work in a firm that is an ESOP firm, we have union employees, and non-union employees, and last year we squeeked by with a profit, albeit a very small one. My firm provides a safe workplace, healthcare benefits, pension/ownership (under the esop) benefits, and long term disability benefits. All of these benefits are provided by the firm, but do require employee contribution toward them.

My point is pretty simple, generalizations such as the ones you offer above, marginalize the person offering them. Your commentary may be your experience, if so, I'm sorry for you, but it's not an accurate depiction of reality, at least in my case.

Point taken, thank you. I did in fact make a huge generalization as individuals are concerned. I say "republicans" but more as in reference to the party political platform. I have voted for a few republicans over the years who I believed would represent me best, but only a few. I do not mean to imply that every single individual republican is against unions. Good for your wife, and good for companies who try to provide fair compensation even if profits are reduced.

Depends on who you talk to as to whether or not the compensation is fair, obviously, mine is inadequate (just kidding). It's a beautiful day here in California, hope wherever you are is nice as well.

It is thank you.

Carlyssman:

Do you honestly think that we benefit at the pumps because of off-shore drilling on our coastal shores? Those are Republican talking points. Anything that Halliburton had a hand in needs investigating and any oil company that's doing business off of our shores should be MADE to have technology to clean-up their messes.

dear Pietro, thank you for your comments, I should have added that yes I am deeply upset with the oil industry,they have no regard for what their polution does to our people as long as they make thier billions evry year but and please correct me if I am wrong.A while back both parties made comments that if cap ant trade were passed the oilfuel prices would go up which would double our electricity bills and cost us more to fill our vehicles so even though they hurt my family and many others I can;t afford the money nor the pain of seeing my children give up any more material things . The goverment wants us to tighten our belts but yet they get the best of everything so even though we could have another oil spill as long as the oil rigs are shut down thousands of our La. people can;t work and now their children will have to do without,please tell me how you feel about the speaker makeing her tax payers spen 18,000 dollar a month for an office.one office I dont know who;s right or wrong anymore.everybody is fighting everybody instead of comeing together as the proud nation we once were. thank you for listning.

Pat:

Neither did I and they will pay for it. Keith does have a tendency to get worked up on occasion. What do these people really expect President Obama to say? Tell a lie? What's even disgusting is the FACT that it's NOT something that this Administration EVER had control over. It also appears to me that MSNBC has gotten marching orders and they are running scared; in so much that they are manufacturing fake drama. Fineman has always been pessimistic to me, I don;t really care for him.

Pat they've been waiting for quite sometime to get ANY opportunity to trash this President. But we control the vote and the REAL polls.

Pat,

I am also saddened by the trashing Obama took at the hands of the MSNBC crew last night. I thought the speech was about what was needed and expected. The media blowhards (on BOTH sides of the spectrum) have been screaming and waving their arms for Obama to do something. Ok, so he gave the speech and addressed all the issues and you are STILL not happy? Where was the critical microscope on the regulatory processes and inspections? This is a catastrophe that NO HUMAN TECHNOLOGY exists to address and we are beating ourselves raw that Obama needs to do something?

Lastly, why is it that I have the suspicion that as a branch of GE and the MSM, MSNBC is giving Keith, Chris, Howard, & Company marching orders to be more critical of the Administration? Could there somehow be yet another corporate profit motive at work here? I mean, the bigwigs at GE cannot be too comfortable with the rhetoric and negative perception of Mega businesses like BP can they?

Yeah. That's right. They're your heroes when they are trashing Bush and republicans, but when they dare to criticize Obama, they're corporate shills. If it wasn't so pathetic, it would be funny.

Pat -

Thanks for the info on the books yesterday - I passed it on to my friend and may hunt them up myself - that's great that there are so many to choose from.

Back on topic - I'll confess I have no idea what any of the pundits had to say about the speech last night. As I've mentioned before, I'm the last hold-out in the world who still doesn't have cable. But even at that, as I mentioned late in the day on Monday when fewer people were probably reading here, I started making it a habit several years and at least a few Presidents ago that when the president is making any kind of major speech, I turn the sound down until he actually starts speaking because I don't need the regular network talking heads biasing my expectations. I turn it down - or off completely - once he finishes, because I need some peace and quiet to digest what he just said and consider my reaction to it, and I can't do that with a bunch of "experts" talking over each other trying to tell me what THEY just heard. As a matter of fact, I likened the annoying drone to those vuvuzelas everyone's complaining about at the World Cup games. Sorry, I just love saying "vuvuzela"!

In any case, unfiltered by anyone else's thoughts other than my own - and I'm writing this before I even read any of the comments here; I was looking for you first to thank you about the books - my opinion is that the President said almost exactly what I both expected and wanted to hear. He was serious yet optimistic, he gave me information on the current scope of our operations that I was not fully aware of, he didn't politicize the issue, and within the limits of an under 20-minute speech, spelled out where we go from here. Whenever I do listen to or read the pundits - including my fellow posters on here - I tend to start losing sight of the Barack Obama I campaigned so hard to get elected. Then every time I hear him speak directly, it all comes back to me. This is the man I voted for. And will again.

Maybe my opinions aren't as "expert" as those vuvuzelas on the networks. The difference is,, they get paid to have opinions, and the more outrageous they are, the higher the ratings and the more they get paid. My opinions are free. And they're really mine.

NOW I'll go back and see what everyone else thought!

Joanne, PA

I agree wholeheartedly with what you said. The pundits are making me crazy(er). What do they want? Nothing is ever good enough for them. Frankly, I'm tired of them and their so-called expertise. I listen to the President, that's it. I trust him a helluva lot more than I do these pundits.

BTW-this is a disaster for America - we would all do well to remember that instead of trying to score points, politically and ratings-wise, by trashing the President. We should all be coming together as a nation in the face of this disaster.

I was really shocked this morning to hear a moderate, thoughtful, and realistic Joe Scarborough on the President's performance. You know its really bad when Joe commented on the multiple criticisms aim at the President, and goes so far as saying "dammed if he do and dammed if he does'nt".

It is absolutely ridiculous the response to his speech. My bathroom pipe is broken and I have water all over the house. I had to turn off the main pipe leading to the house and call the plumber.

Lucky for me the main pipe leading to the house is in good condition, because there would be no stopping the leak until the city and plumber turn the water off. The same goes for the leak.

The American public needs to grow up and pray for a solution. Everyone is blaming BP (rightly so) and the Federal government, but what about Lousiana's responsibility?

Penny - Jody, Iowa said something similar a while back, in a discussion about doing the right thing - I believe her exact words were "Damned if you do, damned if you don't. So you might as well". I think they bear repeating.

Good luck with your leak - I think we've all been there and sympathize!

Are you referring to the same regulators who gave BP and other oil companies a passing grade, the same oil companies that have the same back up plan as BP?

Yes, but I imagine the regulators are shaking in their boots right now and are more likely to do the jobs they should have been doing all along.

Maybe you should turn to Fox News, Kate. You'll ALWAYS get the truth about the Chief Community Organizer who only knows how to flap his mouth about lawyers and suing, but has NO idea how to lead a nation!

Mathews has spent huge amounts of time mentioning over & over & over & over, ad naseum, about the mention of Sec. of Energy's Nobel prize. I used to watch, but think I may be over him. And Keith, well, I will just have to wait and see what happens with him. Surely GE is not pushing him to the right.

While flipping thru the channels for differing viewpoints, I watched Fox in addition to MSNBC. At the time, Bill O'Reilly was on, and he for one, made the point that the President has been (recently) working toward command and control, for the benefit of the country. Was he content with the President's effort, no, but he at least acknowledged that President Obama was making an effort. Not so much with Keith Olberman when I tuned into him.

I'd prefer to read the L.A. Times this morning, along with the Washington Post, to get a perspective with thought, not knee jerk reactions. Yes, I know that they're both liberal papers, and I'm a conservative Republican, but at least they're rational, and able to write reasonably well thought out articles. Try the papers people, the perspective is somewhat skewed, but at least they aren't dependant upon instant ratings.

Neither did Bush!

TRR,

What does that mean? I can't see any comments that reference either President Bush.

Living in L.A.

I forgot to put PHN. I was responding to his comment.

Pat you've been drinking the Obama koolaid! Matthews knows BO's number is up I guess. I don't like Matthews and as far as BO being smarter and more mature and a visionary, you've definitley had too much koolaid! Obama and his cronies are a bunch of Chicago thugs who have no idea how to lead. They have never, not one of them, run a company or met a payroll. They only know how to spend other people's money!!!! And that's the only thing they're doing a great job of!!!!

What about Brush and his oil companies that didn't stay afloat very long.

Everyone is frustrated. No one ever expected President Obama to fix the leak himself. Everyone expects him to lead, to inspire, to communicate and have a plan. You say it’s naïve that people expect him to fix all the problems of the past in 18 months. Well, that’s what he promised he would do, and people – probably desperate for good news and good times – people believed him.

Americans have always been short sighted and selfish – on both sides of the aisle. But Americans are still compassionate. It’s our greatest strength. That’s why people are frustrated this spill is taking so long to get under control. That’s why people are heart broken over the mess down there and for the people who live and work there.

Everyone IS mad at the oil companies, and at what seems to be total oblivion to the idea of having a plan to respond to a disaster, let alone avoid one in the first place. Amazing.

And Democrats, too, including the President, were well funded by the oil industry, the same as Republicans.

These are tough times, Pietro. Unemployment is high. Families are struggling. The future is uncertain. Our coastlines are dripping with goo. We needed the President to focus on compassion and progress. Not pitch new legislation. Not set up a committee. We need some sort of hope! I don’t think he was able to deliver that tonight.

Very sad.

(By the way, Boehner is an idiot. But he's right that if we (the govt) have the resources, vessels, technology, supplies, the govt should be in there cleaning up. BP will be charged for costs, I'm sure. And I believe President Obama said "we" were doing that.)

Nothing to add to Pietro, perfect and on target. If we don't work together, our country will be in worse trouble than it is now. Wake up, work together. NOW, TODAY.

You want to be mad, OK, BP or any oil company who just did not even stop and think about ANYTHING but their bottom line. Be mad and them an the coal companies. Both companies are killing our citizens because they are greedy. That is just wrong.

We as Americans need to stop looking to other for the hope we want. I wake up in the morning in a country where I can do almost anything I want to do and not get arrested and shot for it. The government has its role but there comes a time when people have got to knuckle up. Cut the costs in your own homes, be more energy efficient, go to the grocery store instead of fast food, and save money. What we are forgetting about the generations of the past is that after a leader gave a good speech it was the people who made the change. The "I have a dream speech" would mean very little if individuals didn't get out and march. After Pearl Harbor it was the people that went to work in factories, bought war bonds, and were brave enough to go serve. Leaders do exactly what the President is doing they inspire, direct, and unify. Now it is time for us (and not many of us Americans like to hear this part) to roll up the sleeves and get to work. Whether that's doing some of the things above or going to volunteer in the gulf. Work to make this country what you want it to be do now sit back and wait for President Obama to do it for you. Time and time again he has led us to water so get to drinking.

Tom - Well said and a refreshingly different viewpoint. Keep 'em coming!

Candace, he never promise the problems facing the country will magically disappear in 18 months.

We need to be realistic and measured in our response and critique. This constant bashing in not good for anyone, especially the country. He is only human and no matter how thick-skinned a person is, after a time its....

Michael, I was thinking about what you wrote here. Even though I am exorting everyone to get involved and stop sitting on the sidelines, MAYBE the President is signaling to everyone that he is doing his utmost best to make things better, but he needs a little support. I know that people will argue that The President has 'stepped' on the Progressives amd has not catered to his base; I submit that the President is PROBABLY going to let things get a LOT worse so that the 'grassroots' will get up off their dead butts and DO SOMETHING to help him.

I think that your assessment of an opening for the right wing by the President is valid. However, the right wing CANNOT prevail unless we let them. If we let them, then we deserve what we get.

See Michael, he really isn't the Messiah, as you on the right were led to believe!

I never believed that the president was 'the messiah.' However, it does say something about us as a people when people in the nation find it worthy of mockery that other people in the nation were willing to be inspired. You seriously believe that it is somehow a character defect that people are willing to believe in the possibility of something better?

That is pretty sad when you think about it. Not attacking you... just a sad commentary that the right wing of the nation seems so cynical and jaded that they honestly believe that there is something wrong with the left wing because we were willing to allow ourselves to hope during the campaign.

My disillusionment with the people of America grows with each passing day.

Yesterday, one of the right wingers talked about how right wingers really love America. Another one a couple weeks ago criticized the left for not really loving America, but only loving some vision of what America would be. I would answer that unless you really love what America is, then you really are guilty of the very same thing that that right winger criticized the left for. Unless you love America as it is, then what you are loving is what you envision this nation will be.

You cannot hold half of the people of the nation in absolute contempt that the right wing holds the left and truly say that you love Americans. You cannot absolutely reject 50% of the people around you and tell me that you truly love this nation. That is utterly impossible. You might love what you envision that this country should be, but if you loathe half the people in the country, then I'm sorry... you loathe the country.

I make no overblown claims about my feelings about the country. I think the nation is diminished because we have allowed it to become diminished. We as a people are not what we once were. The 1990's were probably the last, best time for the United States. At this point, we are too divided and too willing to allow the small and evil among us to lead us back into a time of McCarthyism and partisan strife. When I was younger, I would have said that the 1860's demonstrated to us the true damage that overblown partisanship could cause to us as a people and that there could never be another civil war.

But there are too many among us who want only to dominate and who have absolutely no conception of the damage they do every day.

The only thing that Obama has in common with Jesus Christ is that both of them asked things of us that cause the worst of us to behave in the worst of ways. Both of them appealed to the essential goodness of men and both of them, from what it seems, by the end, will have been punished for making that appeal and expecting too much of people who are essentially small, damaged, selfish, and pretty much little pieces of evil.

"You might love what you envision that this country should be, but if you loathe half the people in the country, then I'm sorry... you loathe the country."

******************************************************************************

I couldn't agree more. The way liberals condescend to the millions of people who are not Obama groupies is disgraceful. The Christian bashing, the ridicule of anyone who does not live north of the Mason-Dixon Line etc...

Michael,

Generally I disagree with many of your conclusions, probably because I'm a conservative Republican, but being conservative, or being Republican, doesn't mean that I always vote to the right. I voted for President Obama, primarily because he said he wanted a post partisan atmosphere in D.C., and in the nation. Just using this site as an example, it's obvious to me that post partisan is a stretch at this point. The President's problems stem (my perspective) from the perception that what he said as a campaigner to sway both Independents and Republicans into his column, is far from the mark, relative to what he has done to be a post partisan leader. Is he entirely at fault? No, my side of the aisle hasn't helped much at all on the big ticket items. Why is that you might ask, reasonably, and the answer probably devolves to something as simple as hurt feelings. Tit for tat politics is not what we the people expect, which is generally why the best legislation is bi-partisan, and generally occurs when the "ownership" of the power is split, Legislative one way, Executive the other. When power is shared, "we the people" benefit, as we are all vested in the outcome, not perceptually out of power and irrelevant. Again, my opinion.

Acknowledging that we don't know how to get there isn't necessarily a bad thing, if he had said he had a plan, everyone would want to know the plan right now, and he doesn't have one. On the opposite side of the coin, we Republicans don't have a plan to stop the spill either, so that in my mind is a wash. Will it cost the Democrats seats, probably, but the big question in my mind is not how many seats, but will power be shared in Washington, which is I think, what the President must have, to avoid the political issues of the past 18 months. Joint ownership gives everyone a vested interest in the outcome, single party ownership makes the opposing party frustrated and angry, and quite possibly, an impediment to progress. I don't agree with the President on many things, but in addition to being the Democratic President, he's the President of the United States, and as such deserves my respect. I think he's overreaching, in 18 months he's attempted to convince America to change the way Health Care is provided, he's absorbed the Student Loan function, he wants to work toward immigration reform, and now he wants energy legislation. Maybe all of these things are necessary, maybe all of them are good, but to be totally honest, change is always difficult, and piling significant change upon change upon change, generally makes the electorate unhappy.

1/3 Democrates, 1/3 Republicans, and 1/3 Independents. If as you say, Democrats vote Democrat, Republicans vote Republican, and the Independents decide the election, then the President needs to not only hold onto his base, but he needs the Independents to provide him the margin for victory. It appears as though right now, the Independents aren't going along, it appears even as though the Progressive wing of his own party is disgusted with him. That doesn't bode well for November, although, November is still quite a ways off.

Pietro, I wish people would stop using right wing for Republicans, just as I wish they would stop using left wing for Democrats. The problem (more than anything else) is that folks from the center, or center/left, or center/right, are being excluded from the discussions. I know, many on this site believe that the Democrats are centerist, and the Republicans are far right wing wingnuts. That's no more true than that the Democrats are left wing, and the Republicans are centerists. Division is what makes politics partisan, and while we are all somewhat driven by our beliefs, I personally believe that we all want good government, that's not driven by the extremists on either side.

We have to hold all of our politicians to being post partisan. It is not logical to make the demand of one and not all.

Agreed, post partisan comes out of the center, not out of either wing. Unfortunately, the President said that he would be a post partisan leader, which doesn't appear to be the case at the moment. Hewing a little more toward the center of the debate would give him more opportunity to provide that post partisan leadership, in my opinion.

A reasoned, cogent and civil exchange of differing viewpoints . . . I'm thoroughly, though pleasantly shocked. Good points from "both sides of the aisle" here.

Divisive, partisan politics is what happens when "we the people" rely more on the opinions of pundits (i.e. snake-oil salesmen and political mercenaries) than our own critical thinking skills. Refreshing to see an exchange in this forum clearly based on the latter.

It's a little different isn't it. Maybe, just maybe, reasoning will win out, and exchanging ideas rather than insults, won't mean you aren't politically pure enough.

Farley:

I don't think it is a particularly good idea for the right OR the left to claim any special love of the country if they demonstrate they demonstrate disdain or spite for the other side. The nation is what it is, warts and all, which is sort of a cliche, but cliches are generally born in truth. The only people that I really have disdain for, (and I admit there are a lot of them), are people who demonstrate that they have no capacity for reasonable discourse at all. If the tone of what they write or how they speak shuts down any response from the other side, or ironically given the topic, they immediately start with the stereotypes and ham-handed grousing about how one side or the other is 'destroying the country,' then for the most part I tune them out.

I pass by hundreds of posts every day here because I know usually by the first or second sentence exactly what the content of them is. We've already read those posts thousands of times and they'll be posted thousands more. They are the white noise of the internet. I generally shrug and write those people off because they are not going to be involved in the process of solving any of the nation's problems.

Living in LA:

I don't necessarily tactically need to know the plan, but I do need to know the vision. Giving me 10 easy steps on how we are going to reach energy independence, but saying 'we don't know what it will look like' is the essential problem. THAT destroys the confidence of the middle. That brings the storm of gloating from the right wing and shakes the confidence of the left wing and leaves the center scratching their heads.

Sharing power is great in theory because it appeals to the sense of 'fairness' that all right thinking people possess. All of us know intuitively that one of the fundamental principles of fascism is one-party rule. Since most of us reflexively recoil against the idea of fascism, (though many seem to favor the absolute dominance of their party over the other), we also recoil against one party being in control of everything.

However, in the current political environment, I tend to believe that a return to 2 party control of the government would result in nothing more than the hardening of the paralysis of the government. The president might be willing to slide to the center, but sliding to the center does not mean acquiesence to the entire right wing agenda, which appears to be the only way 'bi-partisanship' would actually occur... either Democrats rubber stamping everything the Republicans want or the Republicans sitting on their hands and allowing NO legislation to reach the floor.

I am unsure how the Republicans regaining one chamber or the other would help that situation unless it is, as you say, to assuage their feelings of being completely out of power. Can you honestly see, theoretically, a Senator Rand Paul actually crafting legislation that President Obama would sign into law?

The only way that it works is to have a healthy group of relatively centrist legislators on both sides of the aisle from whom the majority of the actual legislation emerges. However, one part seems to be in the midst of purging all of those centrist elements and the other party seems to be none-too-pleased with the centrist elements inside of it either. And when the center dominates and legislation emerges in the manner in which it has always emerged... through compromise and dealmaking, we the people rail against the 'corruption' and 'graft' and 'earmarks' and 'Chicago style politics.'

So what is the solution?

In this case, the solution CANNOT come from the government. The solution MUST come from we the people. We cannot reward politicians who seek to divide the electorate with divisive language with electoral victories. We can no longer reward media outlets who seek to divide the electorate with extremely high ratings. And we can no longer waste all of our time by posting internet white noise in blogs and message forums. Once we become substantive, then we move forward into the future... the one that the president doesn't know what it looks like.

Until then, we move back into the past. We already know what it looks like. It looks an awful lot like 1859, when the two sides of the nation were driven by their furthest extremes and the voices of the center were few and far between and bleated ineffectual protests against the coming storm.

Sort of like I do.

I don't know about the rest of you in this particular thread, but I've enjoyed today. Discussion, as opposed to talking points, reasoning as opposed to name calling, and overall, a sense that some folks on this board actually want to talk, not score points.

Michael,

I appreciate your response, although I tend to think we're alot farther from 1859 than just chronology would indicate. Your review of the state of politics is very similar to mine, neither party is willing to tolerate those in the center, and both extremes are at odds with each other, and the few that remain in the center. Perspective is key for everyone, while I will concede that the right wing elements of the Republican party are a bit off the deep end, I'll make the same contention about the left wing of the Democrats. I tend to believe that I'm one of the few center dwellers, in either party, but fortunately for the world, I'm not a politician, I wouldn't last ten minutes without a "politically incorrect"statement coming out of my mouth, and no doubt, that would be fodder for any and all that disagree with my statement.

My point about sharing power really comes down to ownership of results, right now, the Republicans have no ownership, and no responsibility, which no doubt, leads to the constant refrain of "the party of no". I'm not proud of the tactic adopted in the Senate to essentially require 60 votes on any given legislation, I believe 51 is enough, but that's a belief, and the procedures say otherwise. I don't condone the arm twisting done by Speaker Pelosi either, although, I recognize that this is politics as usual in the House. Once again, as we stand now, we have a face off, in which polarization is the norm, and cooperation is sadly lacking.

I think with your case of Rand Paul, (by the way, I got a chuckle out of that) you're right, President Obama probably wouldn't sign that. I also think that we need to get to the point where we understand bipartisan to mean an equal number of Democrats and Republicans (or close) vote for legislation, and and equal number in both parties vote against. Maybe on some legislation we get a 60/40 split, and on some we get 80/20, but in either case one party doesn't pound on their chest and say "We did this without any help from (fill in the blank). The efforts made in HCR I found offensive, and I hope I would find it offensive if a Republican dominated legislature did the same thing. Attempting to pick off one or two Republicans to be able to call it a bipartisan agreement, is at best, dishonest.

I've said this before here and elsewhere, and no doubt, I'll say it again, but in the event that the Republicans win back the Senate or the House of Reps, I hope that they learn from their time in the minority, and move past the very behaviors that they are currently complaining about, and try for inclusive politics. By the same token, if the Republicans do win, and learn this lesson, I would hope that if the Republicans offer Democrats significant opportunities to participate, the Democrats accept graciously, and particpate, and not emmulate the current behavior of the Republicans. Might be blue sky on my part, certainly there is no evident reason to expect it, but we can always hope.

Thanks for the opportunity, it's been a good day.

Living in LA - I REALLY appreciate your well reasoned and thoughtful posts. We may not always agree, but you have definitely given me 'food for thought' in more than one instance. Thanks again for posting.

Obama is just the typical Suave Demagogue, Now I just switch channels in the TV when they show his face, He (Obama) is becoming boring the same, campaigning and none of running the country. Bla! Bla!Bla! Bla!Bla! Bla!

Actually this comment was a reply to Pietro

Yeah Ace, we got it made with BO in the WH!! Puleeeze! BO is the worst Pesident we've ever had! He is driving this country into bankruptcy. Just wait til next year when your taxes go up and up and up.The way Health Care Reform was passed was disgusting... Chicago thug politics at its best! And now Cap & Tax??? Are you kidding me??? HURRY NOVEMBER..HURRY 2012....SO THEY ALL CAN STAND IN THE UNEMPLOYMENT LINE!!!!!

Who bankrupted the country? Who was the worst president in recent history? You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. If given the chance, this President could actually accomplish a lot to change the corruption in Washington. Health Care could have been so much better if not for a selfish, corrupt Congress to deal with. Both sides are to blame! There is much that needs to be changed but it can only happen if we get off of the merry-go-round politics of "us vs. them". Stop the hatefullness and try to think of the good of the country, try thinking for yourself and stop believing every word that the pundits spew out of their mouths. The speech was fine. Not so much the pundits.

Then maybe he shouldn't have spouted nonsense like this in his victory speech:

"I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.

But he sure can destroy everything at once!

Where is our Energy Czar?

Bravo sctennis!! But the difference between you & me is, I'll never start listening to Obama!

I agree with you, Anita. Olbermann and his cronies really made asses of themselves. They have very very short memories. These terrific journalists ought to be getting at why Halliburton has escaped scrutiny, Cheney has gone back into his hole, and the fact that Obama has hundreds more rigs out there to worry about, which certainly were given the same waivers as this disaster. He needs to prevent this happening again, and these buffoons keep shouting that he should be shouting. Act like a cowboy. That is not why Barack Obama was elected, in a rare spasm of adult behavior by the electorate. Only 4 Democrats have won the presidency with more than 51% of the vote: Andrew Jackson, FDR, LBJ, and Obama. Pretty good company. That's why morons like Palin keep nipping away. Let them.

The "spin"? This is the website for the Obama channel, for Chrissakes! If people on THIS network are starting to criticize him even a little bit, the magic's gone, the jig is up, the romance is through.

And I'm glad to see you blast the idiots of the 1960s that started this nation on it's death spiral. We'll make a rightie out of you yet! Bwahahahahahaha!

CU, go back to listening to WKKK and enjoy the Republican crooners who sell everyone else down the river.

Ace28:

Thanks for your response-- I've been meditating on this and I want to know why MSM isn't talking about Cheney and Halliburton. I also want to know why Jenna Bush has a job with MSNBC now all of a sudden they are becoming the right wing echo chamber of FOX noise. I never thought I'd hear Keith Olbermann drink the Chris Matthews and Fineman kool-aid until tonight.

Where is the logic behind their rants? We had enough of lies for eight years and I've come to the conclusion that BP just may be stringing this along as a favor of the last Administration and the Republican Party that supports "Drill Baby Drill" and spill baby spill. Think about it...this Administration are not oil men and whose to say that they aren't?

It would be to their benefit to sabotage this Administration; because we would want restrictions and regulations. They lied about the amount of oil that was spilling. How much money would our country be out of if they paid a certain amount of money according to the amount of oil produced from a singel well? Money is going in someones pockets...

Bush lie to the public in a speech to us taunting his reasoning behind overturning the ban that his Pappy put into place following the Exxon Valdez spill. Bush did that on July 14, 2008. I'm full of questions and distrust of our last Administration.

Back to MSM-- I no longer trust MSNBC because Jenna Bush landed a prime spot with the today show. Perhaps I'm being cynical...but I've been in corporate all of my career-- I was recruited while attending college (20 years old) I know how the game is played and I smell a dead cat on the line. There is something about this that just doesn't sit well with me.

BTW...thanks for shuting down CU.

Anita, your contrived conspiracy theories are ridiculous. You know the other side could say that Obama et al sabotaged the well so they'd have a chance to promote their energy agenda.

If you don't trust MSNBC, then don't watch them. Push the button on the remote that says channel.

dirt:

I've already pushed the button to total silence until 8:00 p.m. CST when Rachel Maddow comes on; furthermore I don't require instructions nor do I require advice as to my thoughts and news sources. As far as the "Obama" being sabotaged...if could very easily be conceivable since "Tony Blair" actually introduced BP into America during the Bush presidency in full force with the purchase of Amoco and concealed it's identity from the public by calling themselves "Beyond Petroleum", that actually amounted to "Beyond BS".

dirt:

One more thing that I FAILED to mention; the fact that Cheney had (has) control of Halliburton-- Cheny had full knowledge of the shoddy work performance they offer, he also had knowledge of the when and why of those oil wells because it's his business to know that-- with that knowledge he also had information as the amount of oil that the "gusher" most likely contained. Who would gain the most from the manufactured failure of this administration-- will it be clean energy or oil?

On top of my musings...Cheney isn't beyond evil as we're all well aware of that. No I wouldn't be surprised if his name is written all over this disaster in ways that will make you shudder.

Why did he not accept help from foreign countries, who are willing to supply oil skimmers and other clean technology? This is just a basic decision he could have made that would have helped.

I thought Bush did a poor job in Katrina. Thank God this is not another Kartrina with Obama in command.