by Dolf

Created on: April 08, 2009   Last Updated: April 23, 2009

One might conclude that President Obama has fallen far short of the immense promise that surrounded him like an aura during his election campaign. During his campaign one of his rallying points was "Change we need now". Even more important he promised it would not be "business as usual in Washington".

Why then, when given the perfect opportunity to rally america and give hope to its citizens that finally we had a leader and not a politician, did he fail so miserably when facing his first challenge? The spending bill as all americans knew was filled with wasteful spending and earmarks for special interests. If he truly meant what he said during his campaign, why didn't he veto the bill?

He could have gone on television and the internet and asked americans to rally around him. He could have requested that all americans who wanted to see the economy get moving again, write to their respective congressmen and senators to have them remove the "pork" and wasteful spending. If all of the congress and senate were deluged by a barrage of emails, letters, and phone calls in support of the president, the spending bill would have gone back to the president in a format and content that he could have signed. This would most certainly have shown that we had a leader who could lead us to change and prosperity. It would show we finally had a leader that realizes the only way to get the economy moving is to have congress work for the benefit of all the people and not just a select few. Yet what did we get? President Obama caved into the Washington elite and signed the spending bill. He made some lame excuse about it "not being perfect" when he could have seen to it that it was perfect.

Looks like four more years of "business as usual". Only now it is worse because we are printing money with nothing substantial behind it to give it value. Shame on us for saddling our children with such an immense debt load.

Why does he listen to his advisors and how did he find them? Who in their right mind would give billions of dollars to organizations (banks) that are supposed to handle money responsibly and didn't. Is it common sense to give money to these organizations and then allow them to continue to pour it down the drain! They couldn't handle their billions responsibly, so they are given more. Does this make sense to anyone?

Why didn't he set up a Federal Lending Institution that would have allowed homeowners who have lost their jobs to borrow federal money to save their homes? This institution

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>