Follow Barack Obama prior and during his tenure as the 44th President of the United States. Read about my personal observations along with every day facts as they happen. This blog will only submit factual information about the first black President, now in his 2nd term of office.


Send E-mail to the Editor at:

Search This Blog

Obama Supports Easing Health Law Mandates for States

Monday, February 28, 2011

WASHINGTON — Seeking to appease disgruntled governors, President Obama announced Monday that he supported amending the 2010 health care law to allow states to opt out of its most burdensome requirements three years earlier than currently permitted.

In remarks to the National Governors Association, Mr. Obama said he backed legislation that would enable states to request federal permission to withdraw from the law’s mandates in 2014 rather than in 2017 as long as they could prove that they could find other ways to cover as many people as the original law would and at the same cost. The earlier date is when many of the act’s central provisions take effect, including requirements that most individuals obtain health insuranceand that employers of a certain size offer coverage to workers or pay a penalty.
“I think that’s a reasonable proposal; I support it,” Mr. Obama told the governors, who were gathered in the State Dining Room of the White House.
“It will give you flexibility more quickly while still guaranteeing the American people reform.”
The announcement is the first time Mr. Obama has called for changing a central component of his signature health care law, although he has backed removing a specific tax provision that both parties regard as onerous on business. The shift comes as the law is under fierce attack in the courts and from Republicans on Capitol Hill and in statehouses around the country.
The bipartisan amendment that Mr. Obama is now embracing was first proposed in November, eight months after enactment of the Affordable Care Act, by Senators Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, and Scott Brown, Republican of Massachusetts. SenatorMary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, a Democrat, is now a co-sponsor.
The legislation would allow states to opt out earlier from various requirements if they could demonstrate that other methods would allow them to cover as many people, with insurance that is as comprehensive and affordable, as provided by the new law. The changes also must not increase the federal deficit.
If states can meet those standards, they can ask to circumvent minimum benefit levels, structural requirements for insurance exchanges and the mandates that most individuals obtain coverage and that employers provide it. Washington would then help finance a state’s individualized health care system with federal money that would otherwise be spent there on insurance subsidies and tax credits.
“It seemed to make sense that rather than have states invest in a system that may not be best for them, you change the date to 2014 from 2017 and give them the flexibility to design it,” said one of several administration officials who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly before the president. “But it’s clear that states must do a number of things to qualify for a waiver.”
Mr. Obama’s positioning follows the post-election approach to the politics of health care that he outlined in his State of the Union address in January.
Responding to the Republican takeover of the House, and of many governors’ offices, the president made clear that he would fight those seeking to repeal the law but that he was open to changes that would improve it, including removing the onerous tax provision. The Senate has already approved the tax change, and the House is expected to follow.
“Instead of refighting the battles of the last two years,” Mr. Obama urged Congress, “let’s fix what needs fixing and let’s move forward.”
Public opinion polls generally show that the country remains divided over the health care act, which seeks to insure 32 million Americans by requiring coverage and offering subsidies to make it affordable. But the polls show that only a minority favors repealing the entire act, as the Republican-led House voted to do earlier this year.
In the courts, federal district judges have issued contradictory opinions that are now under appeal. The Supreme Court is ultimately expected to decide whether Congress’s constitutional authority is broad enough that it can require citizens to purchase a commercial product like health insurance.
In a nod to November’s results, the administration has worked diligently to create the image of a president who is willing to listen to Republicans — and the agitated voters who empowered them. Flexibility has become a White House watchword in putting the health care act into effect. The administration has made a series of announcements intended to encourage states to shape the law to their individual needs, even if the possible effect is to reduce the breadth of coverage in some places.
Monday’s announcement may not quiet the cries of Republican governors who are seeking immediate relief from requirements in the law that prohibit states from lowering eligibility for Medicaid until 2014. That is when the law calls for a significant expansion of the joint state and federal health insurance program to include low-income childless adults. Governors of both parties also are chafing at the added cost of the Medicaid expansion, as states will begin to pay a fractional share of the expense in 2016.
In January, 29 Republican governors asked Mr. Obama and Congressional leaders to eliminate the eligibility restriction. Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, responded by outlining provisions already in the law that provide states with flexibility, and by helping them identify permissible ways to reduce Medicaid benefits.
This month, Ms. Sebelius sent a letter to Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona, a Republican, to inform her that an expiring waiver meant Arizona would not need federal permission to eliminate a Medicaid program that currently covers 250,000 childless adults. On Friday, she informed states that they could raise premiums for Medicaid enrollees without running afoul of the federal eligibility requirements.
The administration officials said the so-called state innovation waivers in the Wyden-Brown bill might allow a state to experiment with ways to entice people to obtain insurance rather than requiring them to buy policies. It also might allow interested states to establish a single-payer system in which the government is the sole insurer. Gov. Peter Shumlin, a newly elected Democrat in Vermont, is pursuing such a proposal.
The officials said Congressional bill writers picked the 2017 date after the Congressional Budget Office said it would take three years of experience to determine how much a state should receive in unrestricted block grants if it opted out of aspects of the law. Otherwise, the budget analysts advised last year, the legislation’s 10-year cost estimate would be about $4 billion higher because Washington would probably have to make higher-than-needed payments to states.
The administration officials said they had not yet discussed where to find an additional $4 billion, but described it as “not a lot of money” when compared with the estimated $1 trillion, 10-year cost of the law. They said they had not yet consulted with Congressional leaders to map a strategy for enacting the amendment.


Rahm Emanuel wins the Mayor's Race in Chicago

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel

For a man that is so dedicated to the cause of President Barack Obama, the former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel took a very calculated risk. Rahm had decided to run in the Chicago mayor's race. Tonight, it is confirmed that he indeed won the election with 55% of the vote and is the new Chicago mayor. He didn't succeed without a few bumps though. For a while, he had to fight off an accusation that he was not a legal resident of Chicago and could not run. The reason for the accusation is because when he left Chicago to work with President Obama in Washington, he rented out his home in Chicago. But he maintained that he never gave up his residency, and in front of an election board hearing in December. There were various conflicting rulings but the Supreme Court finally ruled unanimously that he was allowed to leave his name on the ballot.
The great thing about his win was that prior to his running for Mayor, not too many people knew of him except with his association with Barack Obama as chief of staff. But he made sure that many people would know who he was. He delivered a variety of high-profile campaign speeches. He traveled like a madman, as he made at least 357 stops to meet with voters. He visited 229 community locations - schools, churches and grocery stores. How about 110 subway stations. It was like he was running for President. After he won, he spoke with President Obama this evening and the President congratulated him for a job well done.


Analysis: Trump gave money to GOP & Dem lawmakers

Friday, February 18, 2011

Washington (CNN) - As potential presidential candidate Donald Trumptouts his conservative credentials, a fresh analysis shows that the real estate mogul has donated money to Republicans – and Democrats.
On Thursday, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics released figures from its analysis of Trump's political contributions since the 1990 political cycle.

It says that the "Apprentice" host has given money to 96 federal candidates. Of those, 48 were Republicans when they received the money.
The analysis goes on to say name the top 10 recipients of Trump's political cash: six Democrats and four Republicans. Among those on the list: New York Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel, who received $24,750; Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, who got $13,600; Sen. Frank Lautenberg, the New Jersey Democrat, collected $12,000; and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who received $10,400.
Trump has also contributed to other politicians on both sides of the aisle. He gave $7,500 to former Republican New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani; $5,000 to former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich; and $2,000 to former President George W. Bush.
Trump previously called Bush, "probably the worst president in the history of the United States," citing Iraq which, Trump called, a "total disaster."
–Follow Shannon Travis on Twitter: @ShanTravisCNN


President Obama's Spending Plan is Revealed - Looks Favorable

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

A few days ago, President Obama presented his 2012 spending plan that undoubtedly will face at least 40 congressional committees, two doze subcommittees, and an indefinite amount of hearings and votes in Congress. His goal is to get the finding in place for the federal government when fiscal year of in 2012 kicks off on October 1st. At the present time, the only budget that the federal government is running on  is a "continuing resolution" with expires in less than 3 weeks. By then, there will have been countless debates in Congress, and hopefully there will be an agreed budget in place so that the Federal Government will not be shut down. Both the Senate and House will also submit their resolutions, and eventually a budget will be passed. At the present time, it looks as if it is in the President's favor and the budget may pass. There appears to be bi-partisan support as of this moment in both sides of Congress, so this may be a good indication for the President. If the budget passes with little opposition, then President Obama will have won another contentious battle with a very split Congress.


Rep. Michele Bachmann criticizes the First Lady Michelle Obama

Rep. Michelle Bachmann criticizes Michelle Obama
Well, now here is a news worthy story.. It's the battle of the women, not between White and Black the way you may take a racial fight, but between the 'right' going against the 'left', as Republican Michele Bachmann who happens to be a possible contender for the Presidency, squares off against the first lady, Michelle Obama. Now what in her right mind would you think she may want to feud with the Presidents wife. Ms. Bachmann was responding to a comment on the heels of Obama's recent contention that breast-feeding can play a key role in reducing childhood obesity. Here is what the first lady set to spark the outrage by Michele Bachmann...

"We also want to focus on the important touch points in a child's life. And what we're learning now is that early intervention is key. Breastfeeding. Kids who are breastfed longer have a lower tendency to be obese," Obama told a group of reporters last week, according to Politics Daily.

"Breastfeeding is a very personal choice for every woman," Kristina Schake, a spokeswoman for Obama, later said. "We are trying to make it easier for those who choose to do it."

In a quoted reaction, here is what Michele Bachmann told reporters.

"This is very consistent with where the hard left is coming from," Bachmann told Ingraham. "For them, government is the answer to every problem."

"I've given birth to five babies and I breast fed every single one of these babies," she added. "To think that government has to go out and buy my breast pump for my babies? You wanna talk about the nanny state, I think you just got a new definition."

Interesting comments by Michele Bachmann, and I'm wondering what exactly set her off, unless it was her crazy way of getting noticed before some of the Republican contenders for the White House in 2012 come forward.  She may be right in everything she says, but what gives her the idea that Michelle Obama doesn't know about what she is talking about. After all, she had a few children of her own. Her comments also have come out right after another poll was taken indicating that Sarah Palin is running at an all time low as far as a favorite for the Republican nomination for President. I've got to give her an 'A' for trying, but the news she is trying to make will already be old news by tomorrow, and if she plans to run in the Presidential campaign, then maybe she needs to focus on President Obama, and maybe think about more serious worldly issues, like the Middle East, or Guantanamo Bay, or Iraq or Afghanistan.

Ok Michele Bachmann, you have my attention. Now, how about giving me a real story that I can write about.


Algeria tried to block internet and Facebook as protest mounted

Internet provision was blocked in parts of Algeria and there were claims of Facebook accounts being deleted as thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators were arrested in violent street demonstrations.

The Algerian government was blamed by protesters for preventing access to internet providers across much of the capital, Algiers, and other cities including Annaba for much of Saturday morning and afternoon in an attempt to prevent planned demonstrations gathering pace.
Algerian protesters chant slogans during a demonstration in Algiers
Plastic bullets and tear gas were used to try and disperse large crowds in major cities and towns, with 30,000 riot police taking to the streets in Algiers alone.
There were also reports of journalists being targeted by state-sponsored thugs to stop reports of the disturbances being broadcast to the outside world.
But it was the apparent government attack on the internet which was of particular significance to those calling for an end to President Abdelaziz Boutifleka's repressive regime.
Protesters mobilising through the internet were largely credited with bringing about revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia.
"The government doesn't want us forming crowds through the internet," said Rachid Salem, of Co-ordination for Democratic Change in Algeria.
"Security forces are armed to the teeth out on the street, and they're also doing everything to crush our uprising on the internet. Journalists, and especially those with cameras, are being taken away by the police.
"Many of our members are reporting that their Facebook accounts have been deleted. They can’t communicate with others via the internet so have to use word of mouth. There are reports of this across Algiers, and Annaba, and other parts of the country. The government is clearly behind this."
Mohammed Said, another activist based in Algiers, said: "It’s clear (that the government is) getting at the internet. Facebook is their first target – they are cutting off accounts. Internet use is impossible at the moment.’
The Algerian government later denied that access to the internet or social networking websites had suffered any disruption or restriction on its part. A spokesman for the Algerian Embassy in London dismissed the claim as "baseless". Meanwhile Facebook said there was no evidence of notable disruptions to their service, nor of accounts being deleted.
But a spokesman for Algerian internet monitor Remyses said: "It is possible that the blockages of the internet were not visible from abroad, according to the Iranian 'strangulation' model or by the cutting of domestic connections."
The Algerian pro-democracy protestors did not have the technological expertise to monitor nationwide internet use, nor indeed Facebook accounts, on Saturday.
President Hosni Mubarak had tried to shut down internet service providers during 18 days of protest before stepping down as Egyptian leader on Friday.
Mostafa Boshashi, head of the Algerian League for Human Rights, said: "Algerians want their voices to be heard too. They want democratic change.
"At the moment people are being prevented from travelling to demonstrations. The entrances to cities like Algeria have been blocked."
At least five people were killed in similar protests in Algeria in January, when the Interior Ministry said 1000 people were arrested.
On Saturday at least 500 had been arrested by early evening in Algiers alone, with hundreds more in Annaba, Constantine and Oran taking part in the so-called February 12 Revolution.
"The police station cells are overflowing," said Sofiane Hamidouche, a demonstrator in Annaba.
"There are running battles taking place all over the city. It's chaos. As night falls the situation will get worse."
Algeria has the eighth largest reserves of natural gas in the world, and is also oil-rich, but its youthful population suffers mass unemployment, a chronic lack of housing, and widespread poverty. Political corruption is also endemic.


'At least 297 killed in Egypt unrest' - rights group (HRW)

Sunday, February 13, 2011

At least 297 people were killed in the unrest in Egypt in the last two weeks, Human Rights Watch (HRW) says.
"It was the police's excessive use of force and illegal tactics that caused the vast majority of these deaths," HRW researcher Heba Morayef told the BBC World Service.
"The majority of deaths occurred on Friday 28th and Saturday 29th, and the primary cause was live gunfire," Ms Morayef added.
Ms Morayef told the BBC that other protesters "were killed because of the use of teargas at close range and officers firing it into the crowd as opposed to into the air".
The HRW report came as protesters on Cairo's central Tahrir Square have called for a new push to oust Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
Thousands of people still occupy the square but their lines have been gradually pushed back by the army, keen to get traffic moving again.


New Man in Charge in Egypt - Mohamed Hussein Tantawi

Mohamed Hussein Tantawi
On 11 February 2011 when President Hosni Mubarak resigned, after 18 days of protests from the Egyptian people, he transferred authority to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, headed by Tantawi. The council will rule with the Chairman of the Supreme Constitutional CourtFarouk Sultan, and dissolve the Egyptian parliament.

Tantawi received his commission on 1 April 1956 serving in the infantry, and he participated in the wars of 1956, 1967, and 1973. He held various commands and was assigned as military attaché to Pakistan. Following the dismissal of Lt. General Yousef Sabry Abo Taleb, Tantawi was appointed as Minister of Defense and Military Production and commander-in-chief of the Egyptian Armed Forces on May 20, 1991; he became the first Egyptian since 1989 with the rank of Field Marshal. In that period, he also participated in the First Gulf War on the coalition side.
As of 2011, Tantawi is seen as a possible contender for the Egyptian presidency. Amidst the 2011 Egyptian protests, Tantawi was promoted to the ministerial rank of Deputy Prime Minister, while retaining the defense portfolio, on 31 January 2011. The Higher Military Council of Egypt is now in charge of Egypt. They are going to rule with the Supreme Constitutional Council as of the 11th February 2011.
Tantawi has served as Commander of the Presidential Guard and Chief of the Operations Authority of the Armed Forces.
And some more just released from Reuters:
Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, the head of the Higher Military Council that took control of Egypt on Friday after President Hosni Mubarak was swept from power, has spoken with U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates by phone five times since the crisis began, including as late as on Thursday evening.

The ties are long-standing and important to Washington, which provides about $1.3 billion in military aid to Egypt each year.

Pentagon officials have been tight-lipped about the talks between Tantawi and Gates but the U.S. defense chief has publicly praised Egypt's military for being a stabilizing force during the unrest. On Tuesday, Gates said Egypt's military had "made a contribution to the evolution of democracy."

But in private, U.S. officials have characterized Tantawi as someone "reluctant to change" and uncomfortable with the U.S. focus on fighting terrorism, according to a 2008 State Department cable released by the WikiLeaks website.

Tantawi, 75, has served in three conflicts with Israel, starting with the 1956 Suez Crisis and in both the 1967 and 1973 Middle East wars.

The State Department cable said he is "committed to preventing another one ever."

Still, diplomats warned ahead of a 2008 visit by Tantawi to Washington that U.S. officials should be prepared to meet a "an aged and change-resistant Tantawi."

"Charming and courtly, he is nonetheless mired in a post-Camp David military paradigm that has served his cohort's narrow interests for the last three decades," the cable said, in reference to the Israel's peace accord with Egypt.

Washington has long urged change in Egypt. But the cable notes that Tantawi "has opposed both economic and political reform that he perceives as eroding central government power."


Donald Trump states that Ron Paul is not Electable

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Opinion of 'James'.. Editor of  'Obama in the White House'  Blog

Just because someone makes an opinion about something doesn't make it right. For example, there has been allot of news lately about Donald Trump, as he has been in the news and talk being that he may run for President against Barack Obama. That in itself is not opinion, Mr. Trump has stated publicly that he will make a decision soon. But Donald Trump is already making decisions for example, that another Republican named Ron Paul "has zero chance of being elected" president. In the past, when I originally heard that Donald Trump may be running for President, I made my own opinion, stating that if he ran, that it wouldn't make a difference regardless of how much money he has, he would not ever get elected. That was my opinion, and I guess that Donald Trump has his. The only difference is that he now is already polorizing Republicans against him. Which Republicans? Republicans that support Ron Paul. Maybe he doesn't take in consideration what happened in the straw poll taken during the CPAC conference today, but again Mr. Donald Trump shows his arrogance. He actually thinks that he himself is better than Ron Paul. Now granted, I'm not a supporter of Ron Paul, as I support the Democratic Party, but I find it kind of funny, as did Rand Paul, a Kentucky Senator and son of Ron Paul, that Mr. Donald Trump would have the audacity in such an early stage to make such a comment, especially if he did plan to run. This comment by Donald Trump is surely a sign of ignorance of political savvy, and by that comment alone, should be told that he should not run. After all, political candidates need to be held responsible for their actions and their comments.
Here you have a successful businessman named Donald Trump, thinking that he is better than Ron Paul, and most likely thinks he is better than any other Senator, or Attorney, and wants to be President of the United States? One thing this guy is not short of is an ego. Wow.. Somebody needs to wake that guy up!!  Take it for what it is worth.. My opinion is that Sarah Palin has a better shot to becoming president than Donald Trump. Maybe we will just take a poll on our own to find out. Watch for it shortly....


CPAC Concluded, poll conducted shows Ron Paul the Republican Choice for Candidate against Obama

To me, it's just a wish in the wind, as Republicans demonstate their choice in a CPAC starw poll. Who's the winner?  Who else but Texas Rep. Ron Paul with 30% of the vote. Second in line was Former Massachusetts Gove. Mitt Romney with 23%. How about the rest of the potential candidates that we know? In short, here's the complete list as reported by CNN in Washington...

Texas Rep. Ron Paul: 30 percent
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney: 23 percent
Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson: 6 percent
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie: 6 percent
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich: 5 percent
Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty: 4 percent
Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann: 4 percent
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels: 4 percent
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin: 3 percent
Former talk show host Herman Cain: 2 percent
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee: 2 percent
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum: 2 percent
South Dakota Sen. John Thune: 2 percent
U.S. Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman: 1 percent
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour: 1 percent
Others: 5 percent
Undecided: 1 percent

Notice the disparity from Mitt Romney and down the list. Everyone that you would think has a shot at Mitt Romney is rated at 6% or lower. Of course this straw poll only consisted of 3,742 ballots in this annual survey, but this at least can give you an idea as to whom may run. The only issue here is that none of the parties involved here have stated that they will run, and another not listed who is seriously considering running against Obama is Donald Trump who is not in the list.
So there is still allot of confusion with whom may run, but the fact is that some of these people will come out of their shells and make the announcement. What will follow into the Republican process to choose a candidate to run against Barack Obama will be a show by Republicans to show exactly what they are made up of, and their abilities to cut their own throats as they try to emerge above everyone else. This, is the  process, but to me it seems a waste of time, especially the primary elections that will take up so much air time and the real character of each candidate will come out to be either attacked and destroyed for the world to watch, or to be hailed and eventually a winner to emerge to run against Barack Obama.
This is assuming that President Barack Obama will run for re-election in 2012. Most Democrats speculate that he will run, but until President Obama states the fact, it still is just a guess. Much of his decision will depend on how he feels he is doing for the country, and if he has a continued chance to market his ideas with the American people. It is the guess of the author of this blog that President Obama will be willing to run against any competitor that decides to run.


What started the Egyptian Revolution?

The following is an account of what started the uprising against the government of Egypt, which lead to the mass demonstrations and the eventually ousting of President of Egypt after 30 years of rule.  

Background Story

Khaled… A story of many Egyptians.   
Khaled Said, a 28-year-old Egyptian from the coastal city of Alexandria, Egypt, was tortured to death at the hands of two police officers. Several eye witnesses described how Khalid was taken by the two policemen into the entrance of a residential building where he was brutally punched and kicked. The two policemen banged his head against the wall, the staircase and the entrance steps. Despite his calls for mercy and asking them why they are doing this to him, they continued their torture until he died according to many eye witnesses.   
Khaled has become the symbol for many Egyptians who dream to see their country free of brutality, torture and ill treatment. Many young Egyptians are now fed up with the inhuman treatment they face on a daily basis in streets, police stations and everywhere. Egyptians want to see an end to all violence committed by any Egyptian Policeman. Egyptians are aspiring to the day when Egypt has its freedom and dignity back, the day when the current 30 years long emergency martial law ends and when Egyptians can freely elect their true representatives.  
According to Associated Press, Khaled was killed “after he posted a video on the Internet of officers sharing the spoils from a drug bust among themselves”. After Khaled was killed, the Police authorities refused to investigate in Khaled’s death saying that he died because he swallowed a pack of Marijuana. When many Egyptians started to ask questions, the Police issued few statements saying that Khaled was a drug user (as if it is ok to murder and torture to death all drug addicts! – And everyone who knew khaled reject these claims completely). Another official statement said that Khaled is an army deserter (which was also proved to be false accusation afterwards and his army service report is now published showing that he has fully completed this service). The authorities then refused any further investigation. After pressure mounted, and the European Union representatives in Egypt asked for an impartial investigation, the Egyptian authorities finally decided to question and arrest the two Policemen and they were charged with two counts: “using excessive force”!!! and “unjustified arrest”!! of Khaled Said.. No one was charged with murder!  
The second official autopsy report now says that Khaled has cuts and bruises which “might be” because of hitting solid objects! The first official autospy report did NOT record any of the clear wounds, cuts and bruises on Khaled’s face.
We will let you see Khaled’s photos before and after the attack and let you judge yourselves: Does the following photos show that Khaled really died from swallowing something or was he killed from the banging of his head against several solid objects and the kicking and punching by the two policemen and as the many eye witnesses confirmed?  
Image of Khalid before the attack:   
    Images of Khalid Said before the attack   
Image of Khalid after the attack:   
Khalid Said after his torture to death
Khalid Said after his torture to death
Eye witnesses include the Internet Cafe owner who saw the two Policemen arresting Khaled, the residential building keeper (guard/bawab) & his wife, a pharmacist who tried to intervene and stop the torture, a teenager who watched the policemen while they were hitting him in the building entrance and many by standers. Fully documented video interviews with eye witnesses are available on this post here on our website (witness accounts are all in Arabic). Many more videos of eye witnesses are posted on Youtube.


Mubarek OUT !! The Military is IN (at least for now)

Friday, February 11, 2011

All because of one Google executive named Wael Ghonim, the resistance to Hosni Mubarak became a monumental front that Mubarak could not overcome.

So why did the revolution start in the first place to overturn Hosni Mubarek after 30 years of power?

Besides the idea that the people of Egypt wanted a new leader and it was time for change, the Google executive Wael Ghonim wrote on his Facebook page two weeks before the uprising as he shouted for democracy and wrote his article called "We are all Khaled Said," which was his anti-Mubarek page. He was voicing his resentment  in memory of an Egyptian man beaten to death by police in June.
The Egyptian government tried to hush Ghonim, as on January 27th, 2011, on the 3rd day of the protests, he was picked up while he was on his way home by plainclothes security. On Monday, February 7th, he was released and quickly realized that was started out of a small public uprising turned into a major public uprising. Quickly the actions of the Egyptians became known on a National front, and at first, most foreign governments including the United States thought that President Mubarek could control the uprising and put the unrest to sleep. That was the farthest from the truth, as larger demonstrations in Tahrir Square took place, even during the times of a curfew set by President Mubarek. All businesses, all banks and all social services were stopped in their tracks. There was not internet, power services were terminated and the country was now crippled. The people of Egypt had now vowed to continue with the protests until Hosni Mubarek was out of power. Originally he did agree to leave, but wanted to stay into power until at least September or October, when regular elections would take place, but the people would have nothing of it.  Instead they would have nothing more of President Mubarek. Eventually he had resigned his Presidency on February 11 2011, and at the present time, the Higher Council of the Armed Forces taking control following 18 days of protests challenging his thirty-year rule.  is governing the country. It is unknown as to how log Egypt will be without an elected leader, but with Mubarek now gone, most likely an emergency vote by the people may turn out to get a new leader in place before September.


Bill O'Reilly(FOX News) Interviews President Obama during Pre-Game of the Super Bowl

Monday, February 7, 2011

President Obama interviewed by Bill O'Reilly in Super Bowl Preview
Just when I thought I would not see a developing story on TV that I could write about, I was proven wrong again..   So what happened during the airing of the Super Bowl of all things that can be a valid story for this blog? Besides the story of the destruction of the National Anthem by Christina Aguilera, and Jerry Jones upsetting fans because he sold them seats, for a very expensive price I might add, that were not available to the buyers when they showed up to watch the game, or to a sell-out of different food articles like hot dogs before the whistle blew to start the game, to early gate closings because of ice safety reasons!! Then there was a gift handed to me on a silver platter. Bill O'Reilly's interview of President Obama at the White House was aired during the Pre-Game show.  It was then highlighted in an opinion article of by Christian Whiton. Mr O'Reilly in a deliberate attempt, tried to get President Obama to slip up in his answers. Is the 'Reilly Factor' actually a factor that President Obama cannot handle? Maybe O'Reilly should run against President Obama in 2012! But in the end, it was the President who won what many would call a pre-calulated show by Bill O'Reilly in an attempt to get President Obama to say something contradictory to his party, his beliefs or promises, or his actions during his first two years in office. From the getgo, you just knew that this  conversation wasn't going to be anything normal. The tone of Bill O'Reilly was biased towards the conservative party as expected. It was the AFL vs. the NFL in Politics.  But what I didn't expect to see was the deliberate disrespect of President Obama by a  journalist/reporter by the name of Bill O'Reilly. (I will count the times he showed disrespect for the President). Maybe Mr. O'Reilly didn't want to hear the answers of President Obama, as whenever he didn't want the audience to listen to the President's answer, he would cut him off, and either make a comment of his own, or ask another question. It was obvious that he was doing this to try and catch the President off guard and say something that the President didn't want to say.

In a smokescreen, Mr. O'Reilly begins his question session of President Obama by thanking him for help saving Fox journalists in Cairo, Egypt, and others from around the world but then moves the credit of the save to the State department, not the President.

But then the barrage of questions by 'tricky Dick' O'Reilly began.

So what were the questions?

Question #1: Well, is Mubarek going to leave soon?

When Obama tried to explain his stance on Mubarek, O'Reilly interrupts the President and says "So you don't know when he's going to leave? So he (Bill O'Reilly) was not interested in listening to President Obama's answer, but instead wanted to hear the President say what he (Bill O'Reilly) wanted to hear. Is this the demeanor of a true, non-biased journalist or reporter? I don't think so.

Question #2: The Muslim Brotherhood, a great threat to allot of people, are they a threat to the USA? While President Obama was answering the question, O'Reilly interrupts the President again and asks him another question.... "But you don't want the Muslim brotherhood?"  Then he interrupts the President again, and O'Reilly says "Those are tough boys, the Muslim Brotherhood; I wouldn't want them anywhere near that government" and then refuses to let President Obama continue with his answer by asking another question.

Question #3: The Federal judge in Florida said the new health care law is unconstitutional,  the Supreme Court may follow. Now it is going to be very close. Are you prepared for that law to go down?

President Obama then states that he doesn't want to spend the next two years fighting the battle of the last two years. That very obviously was an expected statement by the President, and O'Reilly may have even contimplated it, but as soon as President Obama made that statement, O'Reilly interrupts again and says, "You are going to have to." Who in the H__ _ _  does he thinks he is by telling the President what he has to do.? Pretty ignorant huh.. "The Supreme Court is going to hear this, one way or the other."  O'Reilly was implementing that President Obama didn't know of the procedure that was about to take place because one single judge ruled against the new Health Care law and also wanted President Obama to listen to what he had to say, not what President Obama may have said. The President explains what he expects to happen, but then O'Reilly interrupts again and says, "There're not going to bother with it though. They are going to wait until it goes through the court, and hope that it get's thrown out 5-4."(votes)

Question #4: (Run in from question #3) My question is, if it gets thrown out, what are you going to do?  Then the President tells O'Reilly what he is NOT prepared to do.  While the President is answering the question, he interrupts the President again by holding up his hand in a gesture to stop, but then makes a comment and reads from a quote from the 'Wall Street Journal'.

Mr. O'Reilly says quoting the Wall Street Journal... "Mr. Obama is a determined man of the left, whos goal is to redistribute much larger levels of income accross society. He may give tactical ground when he has to, as he did on taxes as to avoid a middle class tax increase, but he will resist to his last day in any major changes to ObamaCare, and the other low bearing walls to the entitlement state." "This is the wall street journal."

Question #5: Interrupting again... O'Reilly asks, "Do you deny their assessment?"

Question #6: Do you deny that you are a President that wants to re-distribute wealth? The President immediately says "absolutely". The President says that he lowered taxes, but then O'Reilly interrupts again and says, "but the entitlements that you championed do re-distribute wealth, and interrupting again, asks the following question....

Question #7: Then, why did the majority of the people in the polls, not support ObamaCare? When the President tries to speak, he interrupts the President and immediately says "it's close... and the majority of people support health care..

O'Reilly says, "Yea, some people see it that way, but most people see it as a hugh government intrusion, and you guys just wanna take over basically, decision making for Americans."The President responds but then he interrupts again and says,   "but it is an idealilogical argument. But let me move on. Then Obama interrupts him and gets the last statement for the question.

Question #9: Ok, but you understand that allot of Americans feel that you are a big government liberal that wants to intrude on their personal freedom. Now, they(the pundants) also say that you've been moving towards the center to raise your approval. Is that true? Are you moving toward the center?  Obama immediately says "No"  He interrupts him again and asks a retorical question... You are not moving to the center?   Mr. O'Reilly would not listen to his answer..  Then he interrupts again... "You haven't moved anywhere?"  "You're the same guy?"  He intrupts the president again and says "Listen", I hope you can do it after hardly listening to Obama's comments.

Question #10: What is the absolute worst part of your job as being President of the United States?  The President mentions "Being in the bubble"

Question #11: What is it about the job that has suprised you the most,that you weren't prepared more coming in here?

Question #12: How do you think you have changed as a person since becoming President? When the President tries to answer the question, O'Reilly interrupts and answers it for the President saying.. "Can I tell you what they say? You are much more guarded" He interupts the President in his answer again by saying, "Yea I know that, but even on the personal levels, some people that know you say that he does not as light as he used to be, he is not as spontaneous as he used to be". The President agrees.

Question #13: Bill Reilly says he asked President Clinton the same question..  Does it disturb you that people hate you?  When the President again tries to expain, he interupts him again and asks, "Does it annoy you sometimes?

Question #14: On the light side... Who is going to win the game?   Do you actually watch the game?

At the end of the interview,  Bill O'Reilly says that he enjoyed talking to him and that he hopes that the President thinks he is fair and that he tries to be. Now who in his right mind believes that. Mr. O'Reilly tried to trip up the President, trying to get a top story that would compete with the story of the Super Bowl, but he couldn't, as the 'O'Reilly Factor' was NO Factor at all.

Thank you Mr. President for bringing out a side of Mr. Reilly that most Americans already knew, the shrude side.
Now, for a treat, listen to the complete exclusive interview from the White House while Fox News O'Reilly interviews Obama in a preview to the Super Bowl.  Good job, Mr. President..



President Obama Speaks at a National Prayer Breakfast in Washington

Saturday, February 5, 2011

On Thursday February 3rd 2011, President Obama made a speech at a National Prayer Breakfast in Washington. He states that the past two years in office has deepened his faith. At the same time, President Obama stated that he is 'One very imperfect man'. Watch the video below as he talks about his faith and how it keeps him from being overwhelmed while acting as President of the United States.


Rules to Follow When Leaving 'Comments'

Friday, February 4, 2011


Comments left with any article should be constructive and not try to destroy what this blog represents, and that's the views of the present administration, and the support that I have for the President. I do welcome comments to the articles, but certain people who consistently leave comments seem to only have biased, negative ideas surrounding President Barack Obama. If you have a certain view that I can have a chance to refute, then you are welcome to leave your comments, but understand that I take every comment seriously and will defend the President and what he represents with anyone who cares to detail their beliefs in comments that they make. For example, calling the acting President of the United States 'a jerk' on this blog is a pretty stupid thing to do. I recognize the author from previous comments that I did respect, and others that I did not. But again, the blog has an open door policy to people who have the ability to express their views intelligently, and not to others who claim someone namely the President of the United states is 'a jerk' without explaining to me why he thinks so.
I welcome any and all readers of this blog to make comments to the articles that I publish here. I also will publish articles that people would like to see published on this blog, as long as it does support Democratic policies and does not defame to name of the President of the United states. I invite any person who likes to make comments for publication on any blog, to create a blog of their own and really state their views totally, and allow others to refute their ideas. This is only fair. If you do not have a back-link or email address which I can visit and leave comments on, I will take it upon my responsibility as the the blog owner of  'Obama in the White House'  to eliminate your comment. Again, please leave a back link, or it will get erased, especially if it is a negative comment towards President Barack Obama.


Mubarek Stubborn - Won't Leave - Amidst the Fatalities of the Demonstrators

In hard words in support of a leader of a country that he supports, President Obama tells the President of Egypt, Hosni Mubarek that he needs to step down immediately and echo the desires of the people of his country. Still, President Mubarek, who has ruled the country for 30 years now, has decided that now is not the time. He feels that the country still needs an elected president before he leaves power, therefore he has decided much to the dismay of President Barack Obama, to stay in office until the elections in the fall. Unfortunately, his reasoning is flawed, as by the mere fact that he wants to stay in power, puts his life in danger, and all the people who are revolting against him, is so far may be considered peaceful demonstrations. But these demonstrations haven't gone without casualties. Now, over 100 Egyption protesters are now dead, because of the continued demonstrations, and the restlessness of the Egyptian army, who has to police the crowds. The regular police units are all but now non-existent. Recently, President Mubarek has returned Internet use to the country, and he initially took over the internet companies, less than 6 total, and made them shut down. Cell phone services were also interrupted to a point, but whatever landlines were still in operation, the people were able to pipe in dial-up internet and report to the outside world what was happening. Also, pictures on Flickr and other services have revealed how President Mubarek has tried unsuccessfully to contain his people from communicating from the outside world. The people of his country only want one thing. They are only interested in him leaving the country and are not willing to wait until elections in the fall. Every country concerned does believe that waiting until the regular elections for Mubarek to leave will spell out disaster for the people. Because of Mubarek's insistence to stay and rule from the mansion, all social services have literally stopped, along with the stock exchange when the internet access to the entire country of Egypt was stopped. People are not working, and banks are not open. They president seems to want to wade it out and in a sense starve his own people, hoping that they will return to work so they can buy food.
President Mubarek says that he had enough of the violence and demonstrations, but still he refuses to leave. Unfortunately for President Obama, he now has to tell one of his closest allies from the Middle East that he needs to step down. But President Obama is concerned if he stays, but he is especially concerned if there is no known name to take his place until the elections. Putting the wrong man in power in Egypt can completely throw off the balance of democracy in the Middle East, and long ranging effects can take place. Originally just before he did announce that he himself believes that it is time for him to go, he has set up his cabinet with his son as possible successor, but now President Mubarek refutes the idea that his son will rule after him. Other rumors state that his son is not resident in the country at the present time.
Unfortunately, the continued saga of the troubles in the mid-east continue, in spite of a President who seems to refuse to do what is best for him and his country. He is trying to make another decision and wants to decide when he should go. But again, it is unfortunate that he believes that he could make at least one more decision that the people of Egypt will respect.
In the coming week, if President Murbarek doesn't step down and leave the country, the bloodshed will continue in the midst of a curfew that no-one is honoring, as it seems that he himself doesn't have any desire to enforce.
Possibly, the only out would be if the military eventually took sides with the people and then go against the president. If President Mubarek is offered a safe exit by the military, then he should take it while he still has his own life. Presently, he needs his own army to surround his mansion from his own people. This is definitely not a way to rule a country. He is now not just considered a 'lame-duck'  president that we people in the United States use as words more often than not these days to express power of the President, but should be considered a 'dead-duck' president until he leaves office. He cannot legislate another law or rule that anyone in his country will respect.


  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by 2008

Back to TOP