What are the top five things Obama should do on his first day as president?

By | November 7, 2008

What are the top five things Obama should do on his first day as president?

Forty-seven-year-old Illinois senator Barack Obama will be sworn in as the 44th president of the United States on January 20 next year. –irish

What would you like to see him do on his first day? My thoughts are:

1) Avoid getting assassinated

2) Close Guantanamo
[In progress, signed order to close within one year.]

3) Restore Habeas Corpus
[Unknown, but he said before elected that he wants to do it.]

4) Announce that he will form a Department of Peace.
[Kind of, H. Clinton tasked with restoring US image]

5) Announce a new nationwide alternative energy effort.
[In Progress, on the web site.]

What are your top 5?

Items in green updated 1/22/2009

13 thoughts on “What are the top five things Obama should do on his first day as president?

  1. TRO

    1) Avoid getting assassinated

    Why is it that only the left talks about him being assassinated? And what about all those death threats/internet postings/photos/drawings of Bush being assassinated that were very popular with the left? Seems the violence is on the other side, not ours.

    2) Close Guantanamo

    Yes, let those terrorists free. Perhaps they can come to a half-way house in your neighborhood?

    3) Restore Habeas Corpus.

    As a law enforcement officer I can attest that we never lost it. Seriously, we do have to produce the body.

    4) Announce that he will form a Department of Peace.

    What does a Department of Peace do exactly? Do Iran/North Korea/China/Russia each have one we can work with? Will its Offocial Seal have a Unicorn and marshmallow clouds on it?

    5) Announce a new nationwide alternative energy effort.

    Didn’t he already do that? It was called bankrupting the coal industry I think.

  2. Xeno

    Thanks for the comment. Rather than slam my ideas, I was hoping you’d offer some of your own. What would you like to see Obama or any new president do first?

    Sure, Obama’s win will be difficult for many Bush/McCain supporters. Conservatives: Don’t give up. Don’t spiral into hate and detachment. We need you. We need your balance. We are all in this together. Lets stop dividing ourselves into two camps who must blame each other. There are more than two types of Americans, and this is the UNITED States of America, after all.

    A few facts and some of my thoughts for your consideration:

    Neo Nazi Skinheads are not “the left”. Nor are they typical of most conservatives.

    – One deadly terrorist attack against the US in the past 8 years was supposedly carried out by foreigners: the attacks of 9/11.

    – Bruce Ivins was not a liberal. He won the highest civilian award from the Bush Defense Department in 2003. USA today tells us that he was one of the people on the Operation Noble Eagle team investigating 9/11, and the FBI tells us he committed the 2nd most famous terrorist act in US history: the Anthrax attacks. White House Neoconservatives said the anthrax attacks were due to foreigners, but Ivins ( a conservative Christian working for our military) killed US citizens with Anthrax and tried to frame Arabs.

    Timothy McVeigh, was another famous conservative American terrorist. Sorry. I wish it wasn’t true too. But those are the facts. You’ve got terrorists on your team. But perhaps I am just ignorant of some facts. Could you give me some examples of American deaths caused by liberal terrorists?

    – Conservatives are quicker to become afraid and a frightened animal is more likely to attack.

    – Liberals are the anti-war people, so, by definition, are more opposed to violence than conservatives.

    – If preemptive violence against the family and friends of criminals worked to stop crime, Isreal would be the most peaceful place on earth. Instead, the Middle East is still one of the most violent places on earth. Attacking people associated with those who did crimes does not work. It only causes more hate and violence.

    – Estimates of the casualties in Iraq vary greatly, but the violence is a Neocon action, not a liberal action.

    – We were not attacked by Iraq and Bush said Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks of 9/11.

    – Bush also admitted that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that he was wrong about that. My take is that his conservative paranoia resulted in thousands of needless deaths.

    – Are you willing to give up your Constitutional freedoms in hopes of avoiding death by lightening, which is 983 times more likely than dying because a terrorists crashes an airplane?

    – According to the Senate testimony, the faulty intelligence that Bush acted upon in deciding to invade was the result of a false confession from the torture of al Libi.

    – The “faulty intelligence” defense is a lie. A CIA cable “informed Washington that one of the key pieces of evidence for the Iraq war — the al Qaeda/Iraq link — was not only false but extracted by effectively burying a prisoner alive.” – abcnews

    – Habeas Corpus allows people to challenge unlawful detention. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that Bush’s Military Commissions Act of 2006 constituted an unconstitutional encroachment of Habeas Corpus.

    – Gitmo is another expression of irrational conservative fear. The reason people are held there for years without trial, is that there is insufficient evidence to convict them. If there is real evidence, then I agree they should be tried and convicted, by a legitimate court. I’m not soft on crime, but we don’t shoot someone dead or lock them up for life or torture them into falsely confessing based on our unfounded fears and suspicions.

    – More than 60 children have been held at Guantanamo.

    – Department of Peace: Marshmallows and Unicorns? That’s funny. I hope all of those Justices of the Peace out there aren’t too offended, nor your fellow Police officers who are sometimes called Peace Officers. What does the department do? It foster worldwide cooperation, strengthens relationships, rebuilds trust. It finds win-win situations. There are far fewer crazy terrorists than you think, and far more ordinary humans of all types who just want some life, liberty and happiness of their own. … and … for the real terrorists, Obama’s new US Department of Whoop Ass would get involved. (The CIA will probably stay under the same director for a while.)

    – Bankrupting the coal industry? Ever hear of black lung disease? It has killed over 10,000 American miners. Good riddance to the coal industry. No sympathy there from me.

    I think we each, on different issues, have some conservative and some liberal values, if you really look closely. Just my opinion.

  3. Ann

    Indict Bush and Cheney for crimes against humanity, for lying to the American people and to the US Congress and … .

    And, Rowe for outing an US intelligence officer and … .

  4. Obama hater

    Obama will make this country go bankrupt far quicker than bush ever screwed up. Hell he spent 170m on his inauguration alone while bush only spent 40m. Obama needs to cancel these bailouts first of all. He needs to let businesses fail and let the crooks go out of business that started this mess in the first place. The country needs to start over not go at the same pace. No matter how you look at it every part of this country is corrupt with greed and power. Now that Obama has all this power it will be only time that he falls into the trap. He may sound like a prophet now but thats because he is new. His main concern needs to be on energy. We need to be independent of foreign oils as well. If we strive for something like nuclear energy it will be much cleaner and we won’t have to depend on someone else. Gas prices will always fluctuate as long as we go overseas.

  5. Xeno Post author

    OH, I actually agree with much of what you have to say. I agree about energy, and I think Obama is going to be working on that. I think the bailouts are wrong and that we should let the market re-adjust naturally. The bubble has to collapse to the real value, as Ron Paul says. Otherwise, we are just setting ourselves up for another collapse, right?

    But, here is the real question: if we did let everything that is inflated just collapse, would we punch a hole in our own hull? In other words, would the Ron Paul solution really work, or would it be a disaster? I don’t have the macro economic background to answer that.

  6. ubercheesehead

    Xeno said:Could you give me some examples of American deaths caused by liberal terrorists?

    How about William Ayers and the rest of the Weather Underground. Then there was the Unabomber, and the guy who bombed the science hall at UW-Madison, etc.

  7. ubercheesehead

    Xeno said: – Bankrupting the coal industry? Ever hear of black lung disease? It has killed over 10,000 American miners. Good riddance to the coal industry. No sympathy there from me.

    Practice what you preach, sir. The electricity to run your computer, light your house, keep your fridge cold, and recharge the battery on your electric car, not to mention the huge amount of electricity needed to run the servers that make your blog possible, overwhelmingly comes by means of burning coal. The only folk who can unhypocritically whine about the coal industry are the Amish.

    As it sits now, you come across about the same as someone whining about the way cows are slaughtered for meat while chewing on nice, thick, juicy steak.

  8. Xeno Post author

    Uber, Most individual Americans do not have the option currently to choose the source of energy which reaches their homes (or their servers), unless they can afford solar, wind, or geothermal … I’ve looked into those options, but my local laws prevented me from acting on them. I have attempted to practice what I preach, but would not be able to do so legally. I stand fast on my point. I believe we can have clean energy without coal if we fund development properly.

  9. Xeno Post author

    Thanks for the answer.

    I agree, Kaczynski killed three people. Was he a liberal? Yes, I think so, but he was also an anarcho-primitivist diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic. Kind of a rare bird.

    William Ayers and the rest of the Weather Underground: Who did they actually kill??? Zero people as far as I can tell… Oh, three of them died trying to make dynamite. An accident. That’s it as far as I can find.

    The four young people, about 40 years ago, who planted the UW-Madison bomb did kill one person, but based on when the bomb was set to go off, this was not a planned attempt to kill.

    In the early hours of August 24, 1970, the Army Math Research Center in Sterling Hall at UW-Madison was bombed in protest of the Vietnam War. The blast killed a graduate physics researcher, injured four people and caused over $6 million in damage. –link

    The bomb, set off at 3:42AM on August 24, 1970, was intended to destroy the Army Math Research Center (AMRC) housed on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th floors of the building. – link

    Intent matters somewhat. I remain completely unconvinced that liberals are dangerous.

  10. ubercheesehead

    Xeno said: William Ayers and the rest of the Weather Underground: Who did they actually kill??? Zero people as far as I can tell…

    Not to be too snide here, but would the victims of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Brinks_robbery 1981 Brinks robbery not count because they: a) were not people; or b) because the Weathermen who perpetrated these crimes were by this point going by a different name? Either way, they killed three people.

    I think Timothy McVeigh served the useful function of helping conservatives gain clarity about the need to not tolerate violent cobelligerents in their ranks. I wish that liberals could find the liberation of an unreserved denouncement of violent and crazy individuals in their ranks, like, well, like William Ayers and his cronies.

    Just to be clear, I can find no justification for the actions of any of the “right-wing” vigilantes you mentioned. I think their actions were deplorable. Unlike you, I do not think that their “good intentions” in any mitigated the evil they perpetrated. Can you bring yourself to say the same about the terrorists I have mentioned to you?

    Anyway, your responses thus far have been quite civil. Thank you.

  11. Xeno Post author

    Terrorism of all kinds, no matter what ideology sparks it, is deplorable. We agree on that.

    I point out that there is an obvious legal and moral difference between killing someone on accident and killing someone on purpose. It doesn’t matter a bit to the dead person, however. The killers must still be held accountable, but our laws cover the differences.

    Thanks for the link and the info. Much appreciated. I see now why some people are drawing the connections they are. Poor Trombino!

    The BLA was a paramilitary group seeking a separate black state. Does that make them a liberal terrorist group? I guess, but is a bank robbery by the BLA an act of liberal terrorism? Seems more like some murderous fools attempt to steal money, not to influence people by causing fear. But, okay, they qualify.

    You did make your point about radical left groups. The SLA even more fits the definition of a left wing terrorist group (killed 3 ppl i think):

    Most of this stuff was 30 years ago which is probably why I wasn’t very familiar with it. The Anthrax attacks were within my time of having an interest in political world events.

    Ayers and the Weathermen (defined in its time as “Terrorist”, which Ayers disputes) still never killed anyone. Their thing was property destruction, which is lame and while technically a terrorist act, it is not the same as murder. Seems more along the lines of the Boston Tea Party in terms of intent. I don’t lump them in with Al Quada and obviously the FBI doesn’t either or Ayers would be in Gitmo.

    Anyway, the fear about Obama hanging around with terrorists seems weird and paranoid to me. Obama’s words and actions are those of a civilized individual who highly respects the rule of law, someone who works within the system to achieve ideological change.

    The left and right need to understand each other’s frustrations somewhat so we can get our country back on its feet. Let’s also do what we can to stop any radical fools who try to divide us.

    Only by listening to different views and challenging our own with the facts do we stay in touch with reality. And so, thanks back to you.

  12. ubercheesehead

    OK, now to give a little more background on William Ayers. It was determined that evidence gathered against him was, to use the President’s words, “tainted, but true.” Therefore he was released. Upon his release he said http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000%5C000%5C000%5C267rdlhy.asp
    “Guilty as hell, free as a bird—it’s a great country.”

    No matter what his current spin on the issue is, his past words convict him in the court of public opinion, though not in the law.

  13. Xeno Post author

    Context matters. What he said was “I don’t think we’ve done enough to stop these wars”. – suntimes Your conservative web site leaves out “to stop these wars” and makes it sound like he wanted to kill more people. That’s a big distortion.

    Ayers, if guilty, was guilty of property destruction using bombs to attempt to change public opinion about the Vietnam War. That war finally had something like 47,424 battle casualties of Americans and 153,303 non-mortal woundings. The government had stopped responding to the will of the people. It is our duty to alter or abolish our government in such cases. The correct way to do that is to work within the system, but the Vietnam War was dragging on for 30+ years, so people were losing patience. I’m not condoning the methods, but I do understand that Americans don’t like to see other Americans die needlessly.

    Ayers was trying in a non-murderous way to stop Americans from being killed. While we both agree that property destruction is stupid–and can also be a terrorist act–intent matters. People arrested in non-violent demonstrations are very often later released without charges.

    Here are more details on the Ayers trial. Do you think Nixon should have remained in office? The reason Nixon was impeached was the reason Ayers walked, it seems.

    Anyway, guilt by association that many years ago is a stretch. (Then again, Obama just bombed Pakistan, so you may be right. The two may be secret bombing buddies. What will they bomb next? )

    One response I found to this debate was this:

    “Guilty as hell. Free as a bird. What a great country”…. George W. Bush
    “Guilty as hell. Free as a bird. What a great country”…. Richard B. Cheney
    “Guilty as hell. Free as a bird. What a great country”…. Karl Rove
    “Guilty as hell. Free as a bird. What a great country”…. Alberto Gonzales

Leave a Reply