Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (97395)	1/28/2007 4:13:04 PM
From: SiouxPal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362563

Bush is preempting the Republicans in Congress. He is taking away their power. I think they do not like that. His "signing statements" do not just eliminate my party's effectiveness. It eliminates the Republican's powers also.

To: geode00 who wrote (97395)	1/28/2007 6:47:51 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 362563

New poll. Bush at all time low after SOTU. Hillary and Obama both beat McCain and Giuliani. Obama is actually a bit ahead of Hillary in the match-ups. A Sorry State Following his State of the Union address, President Bush’s approval rating hits a new low in the NEWSWEEK Poll, as Sen. Hillary Clinton enjoys an early lead among the field of likely candidates in the ’08 race. Only 42 percent think Bush's domestic-policy proposals will be seriously considered by the Congress By Brian Braiker Newsweek Updated: 10:46 a.m. ET Jan 27, 2007 Jan. 27, 2007 - President George W. Bush concluded his annual State of the Union address this week with the words “the State of our Union is strong … our cause in the world is right … and tonight that cause goes on.” Maybe so, but the state of the Bush administration is at its worst yet, according to the latest NEWSWEEK Poll. The president’s approval ratings are at their lowest point in the poll’s history—30 percent—and more than half the country (58 percent) say they wish the Bush presidency were simply over, a sentiment that is almost unanimous among Democrats (86 percent), and is shared by a clear majority (59 percent) of independents and even one in five (21 percent) Republicans. Half (49 percent) of all registered voters would rather see a Democrat elected president in 2008, compared to just 28 percent who’d prefer the GOP to remain in the White House. Public fatigue over the war in the Iraq is not reflected solely in the president’s numbers, however. Congress is criticized by nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of Americans for not being assertive enough in challenging the Bush administration’s conduct of the war. Even a third (31 percent) of rank-and-file Republicans say the previous Congress, controlled by their party, didn’t do enough to challenge the administration on the war. Still, the new poll, which examined the preferences of registered Democrats for their party’s presidential nomination in 2008, shows that Sen. Hillary Clinton, an initial supporter of the war, has a 20-point lead over junior Sen. Barack Obama (55 percent to 35 percent) and a 34-point lead over former Sen. John Edwards (63 percent to 29 percent). Obama has a marginal seven-point lead over Edwards (46 percent to 39 percent). On the other side of the aisle, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. John McCain are closely matched at this point among Republicans: the mayor is preferred over the Arizona Senator by a statistically insignificant margin of 48 percent to 44 percent. When each GOP frontrunner is matched up against former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, it is no contest. Giuliani beats Romney by 55 points and McCain outpolls him by 50. With about half (48 percent) of voters nationwide saying their opinion of Bush will be at least “somewhat important” in determining who gets their vote in ’08, the two Democratic frontrunners have narrow leads over their potential opponents. In a mock election, Clinton tops McCain by six points (50-44 percent) and barely edges out Giuliani by three (49-46 percent). Obama’s lead over both McCain and Giuliani is by the exact same margins (48-42 percent against the former and 47-44 percent against the latter). The races are tighter with Edwards as the Democratic candidate: the former vice presidential candidate edges out McCain by four points (48-44 percent) and is in a statistical dead heat with Giuliani (46-47 percent). With Bush widely viewed as an ineffectual “lame duck” (by 71 percent of all Americans), over half (53 percent) of the poll's respondents now say they believe history will see him as a below-average president, up three points from last May. The first time this question was asked, in October 2003, as many people thought Bush would go down in history as an above average president as thought we would be regarded as below average (29 to 26 percent). Only 22 percent of those polled think Bush's decisions about Iraq and other major policy are influenced mainly by the facts; 67 percent say the president's decisions are influenced more by his personal beliefs. This perhaps explains why only about half (49 percent) of adult Americans even bothered to watch or listen to any of the State of the Union speech as it happened. Of those, less than half (42 percent) think his energy, health care and other domestic policy proposals are likely to be seriously considered by the new Democratic-controlled Congress. Overall, 61 percent are unsatisfied with the way things are going in America; just 30 percent are satisfied. msnbc.msn.com

To: geode00 who wrote (97395)	1/28/2007 11:16:09 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 362563

Recall Notice: A Disastrously Defective Bush huffingtonpost.com

To: geode00 who wrote (97395)	1/29/2007 3:09:24 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 362563

Here's what the Number 1 Progressive Talk Radio Show Host (Ed Schultz) has to say about Hillary...from his website: (1/28/2007) edschultzshow.com Ed Schultz Editorial – Hillary on Iraq, where does she stand? Hillary Clinton, making her first trip to Iowa since her official notice of seeking the highest office in the land dropped another bit of news on the folks in the heartland when it comes to her position on Iraq. I have said on the show for months that I thought Hillary needed to be more defined on Iraq. This weekend we found out a little more but I'm still quite puzzled by what it means. Clinton on several occasions this weekend explained her vote back in 2002. Enough already! We know the Bush administration cooked the books and this entire war was a set up on the American people and the Senate. If she had known back then what she knows now, there would have never been a vote and no invasion. The key now is what do we do? What is the way forward? The New York Senator said this weekend all troops should be out of Iraq by January of 2009 and the next administration should not have to deal with Bush's mistakes. This is a new position for Clinton. After four years of war she picks January of 2009 as the end date? Excuse me Hillary, but the vote on November 7th 2006 was not about getting troops out of Iraq by January 2009 to match up with the timing of the next President. Where does the Senator stand on the surge? I still don't know. Where does the Senator stand on the funding of the escalation? Senator Clinton, are you in favor of the redeployment of some American forces today? It is clear to me Hillary is trying to stay hawkish so she doesn't run the risk of being framed by the righties as weak on terror. Forget that! Redeployment is a strategy and it stands just as much chance of working as anything Bush has come up with. For fear of looking weak, Hillary just can't seem to bring herself to outright supporting a scaling down of troops. In a round about way, she seems to be supporting the escalation with her own time table marked with the beginning of the next administration. Go figure! Hillary was asked one question about Iraq on Saturday and turned the answer into a response about veterans. O.K., but what about the situation on the ground and a change in strategy? What is your strategy Hillary? I think base Democrats want to know and at this point are somewhat uncertain of the Senator’s position. Maybe we'll learn more on the next stop to Iowa.