Changes

Following the [[Recession of 2008]] Obama declared that failure to pass his [[Economic stimulus]]  would turn a "crisis into a catastrophe," and promised [[Unemployment]] would not rise above 7.8%.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1910208,00.html Obama's Stimulus Plan: Failing by Its Own Measure,]  Stephen Gandel, ''TIME'',  July 14, 2009.</ref><ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31165217/ Obama promises economic relief this summer], AP, 6/8/2009.</ref> The House on Jan. 28 passed a stimulus package‎ of $819 billion in new spending and tax increases, despite unanimous Republican opposition. A revised bill passed the Senate with three Republican votes. A compromise bill known as the "[[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]]" was passed, providing for $789 billion in new spending and stimulus.

Following the [[Recession of 2008]] Obama declared that failure to pass his [[Economic stimulus]]  would turn a "crisis into a catastrophe," and promised [[Unemployment]] would not rise above 7.8%.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1910208,00.html Obama's Stimulus Plan: Failing by Its Own Measure,]  Stephen Gandel, ''TIME'',  July 14, 2009.</ref><ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31165217/ Obama promises economic relief this summer], AP, 6/8/2009.</ref> The House on Jan. 28 passed a stimulus package‎ of $819 billion in new spending and tax increases, despite unanimous Republican opposition. A revised bill passed the Senate with three Republican votes. A compromise bill known as the "[[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]]" was passed, providing for $789 billion in new spending and stimulus.

Detroit spread gloom on Feb. 17 as GM starkly warned of impending bankruptcy unless it gets more aid. By August, both Chrysler and GM had entered bankruptcy, and come out again in much smaller size, as they closed a fourth of their dealerships, slashed wage rates, and repaid creditors with 29 cents on the dollar.  The government gave Chrysler away free to Fiat of Italy, which acquired ownership without investing any money. Meanwhile the part makers, which employ more workers than the Big Three automakers, verged on disaster and begged for billions.  The "[[cash for clunkers]]" proved to be a boondoogle for the rich at a cost of $3 billion to the Treasury.

Detroit spread gloom on Feb. 17 as GM starkly warned of impending bankruptcy unless it gets more aid. By August, both Chrysler and GM had entered bankruptcy, and come out again in much smaller size, as they closed a fourth of their dealerships, slashed wage rates, and repaid creditors with 29 cents on the dollar.  The government gave Chrysler away free to Fiat of Italy, which acquired ownership without investing any money. Meanwhile the part makers, which employ more workers than the Big Three automakers, verged on disaster and begged for billions.  The "[[cash for clunkers]]" proved to be a boondoggle for the rich at a cost of $3 billion to the Treasury.

===Obama policies problematic, say economists and public===

===Obama policies problematic, say economists and public===

===Internet Regulation===

===Internet Regulation===

Before the Obama administration began forcing its [[big government]] agenda into all spheres of the economy, the [[Internet]] was open and adaptive because it was free of government regulation.<ref>Conn Carroll. [http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/27/if-the-fcc-had-regulated-the-internet/ If the FCC Had Regulated the Internet], blog.heritage.org, December 27, 2010.</ref> A ''[[Rasmussen Reports]]'' survey found that only 21 percent (21%) of likely U.S. Voters wanted the [[Federal Communications Commission]] (FCC) to regulate the Internet as it does [[radio]] and [[television]]. Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters said they believe that the FCC would use its regulatory authority to promote a political agenda.<ref>The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters nationwide was conducted on December 23, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. [http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2010/just_21_want_fcc_to_regulate_internet_most_fear_regulation_would_promote_political_agenda Just 21% Want FCC to Regulate Internet, Most Fear Regulation Would Promote Political Agenda], ''[[Rasmussen Reports]]'', December 28, 2010/</ref> But [[President Obama|President Obama's]] appointed FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, along with three other Democrats on the commission, helped craft a plan to impose so-called "[[net neutrality]]" rules on [[Internet service providers]], by taking an unprecedented step to expand government's reach into the Internet by attempting to regulate its inner workings.<ref>James Gattuso, “FCC’s Christmas Gift for the Internet: Net Neutrality Regulation,” The Foundry, December 1, 2010, at [http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/01/fcc%e2%80%99s-christmas-gift-for-the-internet-net-neutrality-regulation http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/01/fcc%e2%80%99s-christmas-gift-for-the-internet-net-neutrality-regulation].</ref><ref>'[[Net neutrality]]' sounds nice, but the [[World Wide Web|Web]] is working fine now. The new rules will inhibit investment, deter innovation and create a billable-hours bonanza for lawyers. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703395204576023452250748540.html The FCC's Threat to Internet Freedom], ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', By Robert M. McDowell, December 19, 2010.</ref><ref>The Federal Communications Commission approved a plan to regulate the [[Internet]] despite warnings that it could strangle industry investment and damage an economy that is still struggling to recover. [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/21/fcc-poised-pass-network-neutrality-rules/ FCC Approves Plan to Regulate Internet], [[Fox News|FoxNew.com]], Published December 21, 2010.</ref> In doing so, the agency will circumvent [[Congress]] and disregard a federal court ruling; a federal appeals court in [[Washington D.C.]] previously ruled that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 did not authorize the FCC to regulate Internet use, and therefore that the FCC had no statutory authority to do so.<ref>Lachlan Markay. [http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/12/21/opponents-fccs-new-internet-regulations-vow-swift-recourse Opponents of FCC's New Internet Regulations Vow Swift Recourse], ''[[NewsBusters]]'', December 21, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://blogs.findlaw.com/courtside/2010/04/fcc-and-net-neutrality-supporters-lose-case-against-comcast.html F.C.C. (and Net Neutrality Supporters) Lose Case Against Comcast], By Joel Zand on April 6, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/12/Red-Tape-Under-the-Tree-FCC-Plans-Internet-Regulation-for-Christmas Red Tape Under the Tree: FCC Plans Internet Regulation for Christmas], heritage.org, Published on December 17, 2010 by James Gattuso.

Before the Obama administration began forcing its [[big government]] agenda into all spheres of the economy, the [[Internet]] was open and adaptive because it was free of government regulation.<ref>Conn Carroll. [http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/27/if-the-fcc-had-regulated-the-internet/ If the FCC Had Regulated the Internet], blog.heritage.org, December 27, 2010.</ref> A ''[[Rasmussen Reports]]'' survey found that only 21 percent (21%) of likely U.S. Voters wanted the [[Federal Communications Commission]] (FCC) to regulate the Internet as it does [[radio]] and [[television]]. Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters said they believe that the FCC would use its regulatory authority to promote a political agenda.<ref>The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters nationwide was conducted on December 23, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. [http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2010/just_21_want_fcc_to_regulate_internet_most_fear_regulation_would_promote_political_agenda Just 21% Want FCC to Regulate Internet, Most Fear Regulation Would Promote Political Agenda], ''[[Rasmussen Reports]]'', December 28, 2010/</ref> But [[President Obama|President Obama's]] appointed FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, along with three other Democrats on the commission, helped craft a plan to impose so-called "[[net neutrality]]" rules on [[Internet service providers]], by taking an unprecedented step to expand government's reach into the Internet by attempting to regulate its inner workings.<ref>James Gattuso, “FCC’s Christmas Gift for the Internet: Net Neutrality Regulation,” The Foundry, December 1, 2010, at [http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/01/fcc%e2%80%99s-christmas-gift-for-the-internet-net-neutrality-regulation http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/01/fcc%e2%80%99s-christmas-gift-for-the-internet-net-neutrality-regulation].</ref><ref>'[[Net neutrality]]' sounds nice, but the [[World Wide Web|Web]] is working fine now. The new rules will inhibit investment, deter innovation and create a billable-hours bonanza for lawyers. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703395204576023452250748540.html The FCC's Threat to Internet Freedom], ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', By Robert M. McDowell, December 19, 2010.</ref><ref>The Federal Communications Commission approved a plan to regulate the [[Internet]] despite warnings that it could strangle industry investment and damage an economy that is still struggling to recover. [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/21/fcc-poised-pass-network-neutrality-rules/ FCC Approves Plan to Regulate Internet], [[Fox News|FoxNew.com]], Published December 21, 2010.</ref> In doing so, the agency will circumvent [[Congress]] and disregard a federal court ruling; a federal appeals court in [[Washington D.C.]] previously ruled that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 did not authorize the FCC to regulate Internet use, and therefore that the FCC had no statutory authority to do so.<ref>Lachlan Markay. [http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/12/21/opponents-fccs-new-internet-regulations-vow-swift-recourse Opponents of FCC's New Internet Regulations Vow Swift Recourse], ''[[NewsBusters]]'', December 21, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://blogs.findlaw.com/courtside/2010/04/fcc-and-net-neutrality-supporters-lose-case-against-comcast.html F.C.C. (and Net Neutrality Supporters) Lose Case Against Compact], By Joel Zand on April 6, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/12/Red-Tape-Under-the-Tree-FCC-Plans-Internet-Regulation-for-Christmas Red Tape Under the Tree: FCC Plans Internet Regulation for Christmas], heritage.org, Published on December 17, 2010 by James Gattuso.

*WebMemo On [http://www.heritage.org/Issues/Regulation Regulation], ''[[The Heritage Foundation]]''.</ref>

*WebMemo On [http://www.heritage.org/Issues/Regulation Regulation], ''[[The Heritage Foundation]]''.</ref>

===Afghanistan War===

===Afghanistan War===

{{main article|Afghanistan War}}

{{main article|Afghanistan War}}

The Afghanistan War is the Nato operation in [[Afghanistan]], 2001 to the present, to destroy the [[Taliban]] and prevent the formation of a base for Islamic militants to attack American interests. President Obama has declared it to be the central front in the war on terrorism and has ordered a buildup of American troops to fight a stubborn insurgency led by the Taliban. He has doubled American forces and is supported by most Republicans, but is opposed by many liberal Democrats, who fear another quagmire like Vietnam. [[File:Af-UStroops.jpg|thumb|left|350px]]

The Afghanistan War is the NATO operation in [[Afghanistan]], 2001 to the present, to destroy the [[Taliban]] and prevent the formation of a base for Islamic militants to attack American interests. President Obama has declared it to be the central front in the war on terrorism and has ordered a buildup of American troops to fight a stubborn insurgency led by the Taliban. He has doubled American forces and is supported by most Republicans, but is opposed by many liberal Democrats, who fear another quagmire like Vietnam. [[File:Af-UStroops.jpg|thumb|left|350px]]

Conditions have turned much worse in late summer, as the much heralded national election was marked by widespread fraud and pessimism is spreading. Increasingly the main justification for the war, now 8 years old, is to prop up the shaky regime in neighboring [[Pakistan]]. NATO commander [[Stanley McChrystal]] has requested 30,000-40,000 additional troops in Afghanistan. Obama, unused to such responsibility, dithered for three months before approving the urgent request. By early 2010 the US will have over 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, triple the number when Obama took office. Conservatives have applauded the buildup.

Conditions have turned much worse in late summer, as the much heralded national election was marked by widespread fraud and pessimism is spreading. Increasingly the main justification for the war, now 8 years old, is to prop up the shaky regime in neighboring [[Pakistan]]. NATO commander [[Stanley McChrystal]] has requested 30,000-40,000 additional troops in Afghanistan. Obama, unused to such responsibility, dithered for three months before approving the urgent request. By early 2010 the US will have over 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, triple the number when Obama took office. Conservatives have applauded the buildup.