Replies

• 

  Malcolm September 4, 2014 at 11:03pm

  NANCY: I have to disagree with you about Harry Truman.  Truman's loss of popularity was based on a desire of a majority of Americans wanting to dismantle The New Deal due to out-of-control inflation caused by that act (along with post-war inflation), and this resulted in a majority of elected Republicans in Congress in 1946 (which gave the Republican party a Congress majority for the first time in 16 years at that time). I do not believe that the Pentagon ever had a gun to Truman's head, and Truman's firing of MacArthur had very little to do with Truman's loss of popularity in 1947 since the U.S. was having heavy inflation problems at that time, similar to what Jimmy Carter had to experience with post Vietnam War inflation and the formation of OPEC (as a response to Nixon closing the gold window in 1971, which allowed conversion of dollars for gold). 

  I like your explanation regarding the Clinton impeachment rationale about Clinton hiring Summers to protect the U.S. Treasury Department (which included their dirty deed at that time of protecting the gold lease-out program designed to strengthen the dollar via leasing out gold that they didn't own). But I suspect that another angle with Clinton's impeachment is that Clinton was subject to impeachment possibly by Israeli interests in Washington D.C., since Clinton refused to release Israeli double-agent spy Jonathan Pollard.  Pollard was caught obtaining (and sending to Israel) top secret information related to U.S. nuclear weapon secrets.  Clinton's sexual phone conversations with Monica Lewinsky were reportedly being recorded by Israeli Mossad, and Clinton may have been subject to blackmail by Benjamin Netanyahu to release Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, of which Clinton refused. This was explained in the book Clinton Inc.: The Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine, and this  may also  be one of the reasons for Clinton being impeached, along with protecting the U.S. Treasury scam.

  Obama won't go after ISIS in Syria since they are a C.I.A. front that may be involved with trying to inflame the U.S. public into another Middle East War, which is something they don't want at this time.  This ISIS front is a very similar scam to what the 9/11 hijackers did (and note that some of these "hijackers" were reportedly seen alive by several sources outside the U.S.A.), and this war made the bankers and their military industrial simplex clients oodles of money.  

  Obama's current  unpopularity is a result of his actions on the domestic front.  This includes the Obamacare financial scam, Attorney General Holder's fast-and-furious gun-grab scandal (and he is still not fired), the V.A. scandal, the IRS scandal with the Tea Party, SEAL Team 6 getting murdered, etc.  The situation in Syria has very little with the reason for Obama's popularity.
• 

  Pet Rock September 4, 2014 at 12:51pm

  I bet baraq could care less
  • 

    Malcolm > Pet Rock September 4, 2014 at 1:43pm

    PET ROCK, you're probably right.  People with narcissistic disorders tend to wonder why bother with toilet paper since they believe their fecal matter doesn't stink.  The problem is that this job disapproval rating has been a developing downtrend that can result in major social unrest, and this is something "baraq" may have to seriously look at and definitely care about in the future if this downtrend continues.
    • 

      Pet Rock > Malcolm September 4, 2014 at 4:15pm

      and now-with the real or faked beheadings the narcissist puppet and puppet congress are going to send troops BACK to iraq-more blood and treasure(16 trillion in debt) sick f-bankers and ceo's running the world-one of my brothers is a pres of a large company and he won't talk politics on the phone!-1984 on steroids and using capital-
• 

  Avatar September 4, 2014 at 2:02am

  Poll: Congress approval hits new low

  By KENDALL BREITMAN | 8/5/14 7:41 AM EDT Updated: 8/5/14 7:08 PM EDT

  The number of Americans who approve of their own representative in Congress has reached an all-time low, according to a poll released Tuesday.

  In a Washington Post-ABC News poll, 51 percent of Americans said that they disapprove of the way their own representative in Congress is “handling his or her job.” Forty-one percent approve of how their member handles his or her work, the lowest approval rating that The Washington Post and ABC News has found. This is the first time in 25 years that the number of Americans who disapprove of their own Congress member has risen to more than 50 percent, according to the Post.

  Still, Democrats are seeing more favorable ratings than Republicans. Of those polled, 49 percent said that they have a “favorable impression of the Democratic Party,” while only 35 percent answered the same for the GOP.

  These results come on the same day that voters in Kansas, Michigan, Missouri and Washington will be casting their ballots for midterm election primaries. On June 15, a Gallup poll found that only 15 percent of Americans approve of the way Congress is handling its job, with a plurality answering that the solution for fixing the legislative branch would be to clear house.

  This poll was conducted July 30-Aug. 3 among 1,029 people and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

  http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/poll-congress-approval-rating...

  Obama is not running for re-election but most in Congress are. Looks like they've got a lot more to worry about than Obama does.
  • 

    Malcolm > Avatar September 4, 2014 at 2:43am

    GOOD POINT AVATAR: I say throw all of these bums out, and replace them with people who will put financial priority on helping the people of the United States first, second, and last, as opposed to placing financial priority on Wall Street bankers, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, and Israel.

    WHAT HAVE THESE FOREIGN INTERESTS EVER DONE FOR U.S. CITIZENS, EXCEPT POLISH THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THESE (s)ELECTED U.S. CONGRESS LEADERS (as well as provide underage individuals to polish their private body parts)??? 
    • 

      Avatar > Malcolm September 4, 2014 at 3:41am

      I agree, Malcolm. I've got news for you we give money to a lot more countries than those you mentioned...it's obscene.
• 

  Malcolm September 4, 2014 at 1:42am

  And here's another perspective on U.S. Presidential history, and possible proof that fluoride in U.S. tap water really does dumb people down:

  
  • 

    Picaro > Malcolm September 4, 2014 at 10:35pm

    To be fair, Obama wasn't directly responsible/even aware of most of that. He was pinned for it because that's a President's primary secret job.

    They take all of Congress' secret trolling.
    • 

      Malcolm > Picaro September 4, 2014 at 11:57pm

      I disagree. Obama appointed and hired IRS director Lois Lerner, selected and appointed Dept. of Justice director Eric Holder, signed the Affordable Care Act, and is the Commander in Chief for important military operations.  You are making a similar assertion like the same people who claim that Nixon wasn't responsible for the Watergate break-in since he wasn't there when it happened.