Obama's parting gifts to the American people

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/01/23/us/politics/ap-us-united-states-palestinians.html?_r=0
WASHINGTON — Officials say the Obama administration in its waning hours defied Republican opposition and quietly released $221 million to the Palestinian Authority that GOP members of Congress had been blocking.

A State Department official and several congressional aides said the outgoing administration formally notified Congress it would spend the money Friday morning. The official said former Secretary of State John Kerry had informed some lawmakers of the move shortly before he left the State Department for the last time Thursday. The aides said written notification dated Jan. 20 was sent to Congress just hours before Donald Trump took the oath of office.

And more of Obama's sliminess at the link.

 

So the final total is in
BHO played 333 rounds of golf as President
A new world record, probably to never be seriously challenged

If you assume 4-5 hours per round then allow for travel time and time for "locker room talk," that is essentially 333 full days of vacation time for Barrack, or almost an entire year of his presidency spent golfing.

 

Total dick move

 

I know very little about what the $221 million is for or why it was being held up, so I can't comment on whether I think the move is good or bad substantively.

I do have a problem with the last minute sneakiness of how the administration went about releasing the money. If this was the right thing to do, it seems like it should have been done earlier. I suppose it's possible there was a reason to delay the payment until Friday, but I doubt it.

That said, other than the timing, I have no problem with President Obama exercising his lawful authority to make the payment. Congress included the money in its budged, then approved an appropriation, so it was President Obama's to spend or not spend. He chose to spend it.

The fact that two members of congress formally asked him not to spend it shouldn't matter. There may have been a long-standing norm to respect courtesy holds, but the parties have worked together on a bipartisan basis to throw extra-Constitutional norms out the window.

And regardless, why should individual Congressmen be able to block an expenditure? That's a norm that never should have existed.

 

Seems to me the power of the purse resides in Congress. Thus, Congressmen should be able have buyers remorse and request the spending they earlier approved not take place.

 

If I understand it that was a "hold" requested not a stop.
What a POS BO was to disregard the request and send it literally on his way out the door.
I wonder if Trump can stop it. Surely BO did send an unmarked plane with all 221 million in unmarked bills.

 

I don't know why I bother responding to this stuff, but alas I can't help myself.

Obama was president for 417 weeks, so he played golf less than once per week. That is hardly extravagant.

President Wilson reportedly played over 1200 rounds of golf while in office. I'm not sure I believe that because the paper trail isn't as thorough. More well established is the fact that President Eisenhower played over 800 rounds of golf while president. Link.

Let's say a hypothetical person spends 7 hours on a Saturday golfing (including preparation, travel, shower, etc.). The rest of his day consists of an hour eating, 6 hours sleeping, two hours farting around doing whatever, and 8 hours working. Is that a vacation day?

I have no idea whether Obama's weekend days really looked like this, but you have no idea that he took his weekends off, either. I.e., you are talking out of your *** (again).

Before you ask -- yes, the large majority of Obama's golf rounds were on weekends. I didn't look at them all, but I spot checked this List of Obama's golf rounds against a calendar. Other than when he took a real vacation (such as 6 rounds in 12 days while in Hawaii, or 10 rounds in 14 days on Martha's Vineyard), 90ish% of his golfing was done on a Saturday or Sunday, at a rate of roughly 2 rounds per month.

At the end of the day, we should be judging Obama for what he did or didn't do, and whether what he did do was done well or poorly. There is plenty to criticize him for on these issues. But criticizing him for how much golf he played just makes you look petty.

 

Congress should be able to do that. But individual Congressmen? Can an individual Congressman repeal Obamacare? Repeal a tax cut?

 

I dont know why I bother but ......

One full year spent golfing is "hardly extravagant?!!!" Newsflash -- this is more golf than retired seniors living in Arizona get.

And, this total, of course, does not include all of the extravagant, luxurious vacations he took with the family.

Add it all up, and you are approaching 25% of his entire presidency.
Add sleep and easily half the time Barrack was in office, he was either golfing or sleeping. And, getting paid for it. This bum needs to get a real job.

 

better formatting here -- "an average approval rating that falls among the lowest of any modern American president"
Worse than W!
Worse than Nixon!

 

I think the golf thing is overblown too. A lot of business can get done on a golf course.

 

OK, so Obama is starting his own Foundation
lol

Just like the Clintons used to do, he is now fundraising for his charity. How? By appealing to other rich folk
lol

His focus will be "developing the next generation of citizens — and what it means to be a good citizen in the 21st century." No specifics, of course, but it would seem his great post-presidency priority is to create more little liberals.
lol

It is interesting that Barrack Obama chose brainwashing/mind control over helping the people he said he was trying to help while President.
Remember his issues --
-- inequality!
-- lack of health insurance!
-- college debt!
Now that he can do whatever he wants, his new actions reveal more of his true character. He could use this platform to help the people who said he claimed he cared about the most. But he isn't. These issues were never really priorities for him. He just used them to advance himself in his political career and garner political power. It's all kind of sad.

But, I have a dream. That Obama will leave Wall Street, Martha's Vinyard and Palm Beach behind and get out into the real America. If he does that, maybe he will learn that taking a bigger chunk of the average American's paycheck to fund his social programs is not the best way to do things. Perhaps then he will see the actual path where private charities, like his, are often more efficient than Government in helping Americans. That Government is not always the only answer. Both he and the country would be better for it.

 

The individual congressmen put a hold on the funding, I can only assume for further review and a decision by the entire body on its continuance.

 

Sangre
yes business/policy can be done on a golf course but the people BO played with were friends and staffers or celebs. Hardly the ones to further our country's business or interests.

 

Since we love averages Obama is now surpassed only by Trump. Winning!

 

Isn't there a more formal mechanism for them to do it then request a hold? Congress owns the purse, Congress approved the appropriation then 2 Congressman requested a hold. Is the POTUS under obligation to respond to every Congressperson's buyers remorse?

I'd agree with NJ that doing this on 1/20 was a cowardly act.

 

You dont have an average for that, yet
Love to see your SAT math score

 

Uh...are you saying there is no denominator? If we have a 40% rating with only 1 poll then 40%/1 is still 40%. It may not be a quality data point but it is still an average.

 

No, one poll does not make an average

 

Now you have two data points, so you can start your running tally of Trump's average approval (have fun)

Approval hits 57%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_jan24

 

My running total yet you posted the original chart. LOL. JoeFan in the wild? Cha cha.

 

The only data points for this that count are those with Trump as President

 

Before leaving, Obama gave the Boss the coveted "Obedient Puppy" Award
Good boy!

 

Have you ever wondered why it is that the stock market would do so well over that stretch of time, and yet the GDP growth never cracked 3 percent (which coming out of a recovery is unheard-of?)

There are obviously a lot of factors, but the increasingly crushing regulatory burden on small businesses - which was the Obama administration's goal - along with the ever-changing health care regulatory climate caused an environment where businesses saw the goal posts being moved every year. I've read more than enough accounts from business owners to know that no one was particularly comfortable spending a lot of money and expanding a business with more human capital when they didn't even know how much that was going to cost them in three years. They sure weren't giving raises. The good liberals like Disney and Facebook applauded while they started outsourcing their labor to get cheap people who wouldn't care if they didn't get a 3 percent annual increase every year.

So the stock market went up (and btw, it didn't soar... it just kept going up, which is what the stock market is supposed to do, so let's not break our arms patting ourselves on the back with that one), and no one on "Main Street" seemed to notice a change. Wage were stagnant, but of course, that's the fault of big business. Wages had been raised in the past but all of a sudden businesses turned evil and decided to start exploiting the workers and cutting off all wage increases. That's the progressive/activist view of it, so it actually played pretty well for Obama. (And btw... I find it funny that people who bemoan the "2 percent" and all the Wall Street excess, who now trumpet the stock market as a sign that they've done a good job. Hey, wages are stagnant, but that 401K I haven't contributed to in five years is making a lot of hypothetical money!)

Remember how embedded big banks have been for the last few years. Obama wasn't the first, but he and Hillary were up to their ears in Goldman Sachs. I was talking to a guy yesterday who works at the treasury department, who pointed out that the whole mission behind most of the regulatory state in the past few years was to make sure the small banks folded and the big ones survived. Where do you think that came from?

Oh, and it's also pretty easy to triple the stock market when it just tanked before you took office, and then corrects itself which it ALWAYS does.

 

Part of the stock market increase is due to inflation. The QE money goes to banks (the same big banks Prodigal writes about above). Those banks dump that money into assets like stocks and real estate. Inflation takes time to affect the whole market, so in the mean time prices inflate in one area of the market, which is the first area those $s are moved into.

I hope I am wrong, but the stock market values look like a bubble waiting to burst.

 

I'm wondering about that as well. It seems more founded on expectations of how things will play out. My hope is that deregulation will fuel real corporate growth. I'm not a money expert by any stretch, so I can't speak to how the inflationary piece works.

 

I'm not an expert either. I have been reading a lot lately from mises.org, an Austrian economics website. I think economics follows some easy to understand rules. As I read their explanations about things vs. conventional, Keynesian explanations, it sounds like they have a better approach.

 

Trump just halted the 221 million giveaway to the Palestinians.
Good for him.
Let congress decide.

 

That is awesome news. Do you, by chance, have a link?

 

Inflation and speculation. The speculation since the election seems to be rampant.