Perhaps I should clarify what I mean, and what I thought President Obama meant by, change. I thought his ideas about transparency in government, an end to the war in Iraq and a solid fiscal policy leading to economic recovery meant real, workable, monstrous changes for the good.

I did not expect to see the war in Iraq diminished and the war in Afghanistan elevated. Nor did I expect to hear that as many as 30,000 troops will be left in Iraq past the pullout date.

I did not expect to see poorly chosen cabinet member prospects fail muster. Certainly not ones who failed so quickly and easily.

I did not expect to see an economic stimulus bill that is not more agreed upon. Frankly, I don’t care if the Democrats and Republicans agree. I would, however, like to see more accredited economists agree that this is a program which will get the job done. Heck, if there just weren’t so many noteworthy economists and forecasters screaming that the stimulus bill is the worst thing that can be done I’d be happier.

President Obama said, clearly and on more than one occasion, that he would put an end to pork spending – aka earmark spending. When does that change start? I wanted to count the pork projects in the current stimulus bill but gave up. I think it’s also interesting that the then senator Obama had one in there. But his number two – Joe Biden – clearly upstages him with several pork adjuncts to the stimulus bill.

In closing, I’d like to congratulate President Obama for not allowing millions of dollars to be spent on new presidential helicopters. At least that’s the current word. Now, how about taking an axe to other unnecessary spending, and really doing away with pork spending.

Recently, while defending his unprecedented $3.55 trillion (with a ‘t’) budget, President Obama said “And that kind of dishonest accounting is not how you run your family budgets at home; it’s not how your government should run its budgets, either,”. I have a problem with President Obama making this statement.

Granted, financial management was not my college major. But I’ve been managing the family money, along with my wife, for decades. Our formula is pretty simple, and seems to work just fine. Here’s how our family budget works…

First, we figure out how much money we’ll have come in during the month. This is our combined incomes.

Second, we calculate the expenses that must be paid in the month – the necessary expenses. This includes mortgage, insurance, car payments – the things we simply must pay no matter what.

Third, we calculate the yearend expenses we know we’ll have to pay. This includes things like some insurance, taxes, car registration, etc. We divide this number by 12 to ascertain how much we’ll have to set aside each month in order to be able to make our yearend payments. This number becomes a necessary monthly expense.

Forth, we subtract the monthly expenses from the monthly income. Whatever is left over we decide what to do with. Some may go to savings, some to new shoes, maybe a DVD or something else. It depends on the month and the agreed upon needs, which are prioritized carefully.

If something happens to upset the budget, such as gas prices going through the roof, food prices going up, the car breaking down, and so forth, we adjust. We do without some foods, we don’t drive as much, new shoes wait, whatever is needed to stay within our means.

Sometimes the budget doesn’t work out. Something happens that increases the need to spend money. It NEVER happens that our budget doesn’t work because we got too much money in during one month. Examples of things that upset the budget are: my glasses got broken and I needed a new pair – $300. The transmission seal on the car ruptured and needed to be replaced – $900. When things like this happen, we give other things up and invade our diminishing savings.

We really have no way of suddenly increasing our income. Our income budget number stays pretty consistent. Sometimes there’s a small cash birthday gift from a family member, or a small bit of overtime, or we sell something. Otherwise, it hovers close to the same number each month.

The federal government’s budget is, quite obviously, nothing at all like the family budget – as President Obama implied that it should be.

The federal government decides what it wants and then tells the people to give them that much money. That’s backwards. Then, if there are more expenses than income, they ask for (demand) more money. And when staring down the barrel of a $3.55 trillion budget, it becomes obvious that nobody in the government is going to give anything up in order to make ends meet.

This is another reason that I am so offended when I am told to tighten my belt and get ready to make sacrifices for the good of the country. My belt is already so tight that my belly button is touching my spine.

I’d like to see wasteful government spending end. I’d like to see the government balance its budget. I’d like to see the end of pork projects. I’d like to see the end of politically rivalry and party fighting – and start to see a solid group of representatives serving the people who elected them. I’d like to see a budget arrived at reasonably. But as a friend of mine tells me – I likely have a better chance of being killed by a rabid unicorn than seeing any of those things happen.

Here is the purpose of the legislation brought forth by President Obama:

Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.

There is one inclusion in the purpose of President Obama’s bill which pretty much means that there really is not clearly confined purpose for the bill. It’s the last sentence: “and for other purposes.” It’s good that this was tagged on as it’s clear, after reading some parts of the bill, that oodles of the money ($850 billion) has absolutely nothing to do with recovery. Clearly, much of the money is being allocated to appeal to lawmakers and get them to pass the bill. The short name for this is “pork spending.”

First of all, I don’t recall President Obama saying anything (in his speeches or pleadings for the American people to back this bill) about “other purposes.” All I recall is President Obama saying that this bill is necessary for the recovery of the economy, that it will create jobs and must be passed quickly!

With all this said, here are some of the examples of pork included in this latest attempt at repairing the rapidly failing US economy:

• $345 million for Agriculture Department computers.

• $650 million for TV converter box units.

• $15 billion for college scholarships.

• $1 billion for coping with Census glitches

• $88 million to help move the Public Health Service into a new building next year.

• $2.1 billion to pay off the deficits in public housing.

• $870 million to fight flu.

• $400 million to impede sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV and Chlamydia.

• $40 million to change health statistics collection from paper systems to electronic systems

• $380 million for the Women, Infants and Children program. (This is on top of the $1 billion the program received late last year.)

• $3.5 billion for health research.

• $14 billion+ for education grants. This would be in the form of Pell Grants.

Now before you go saying ‘hey – grants for education and food for women and children are good things’ please remember that this bill is supposed to be about providing jobs and jump starting our ailing (near comatose) economy. I have nothing against helping women and children, and I certainly have nothing against helping our youth with their education. But those are separate matters which must be dealt with separately – and not cloaked inside of a bill which garners support from people who need help to survive – people who need jobs NOW!

President Obama’s American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 doesn’t seem to contain enough of what’s needed. In fact you have to look hard at the hundreds of pages of proposed legislation to find anything that looks like it will actually help the American people right now.

I liked the idea of one Senator: give anyone who wants to buy a new car a $5,000 voucher. This helps those who need to have transportation to get to work, and would also help the ailing auto industry.

I am going to waste some time today. I’ll be writing my representatives and expressing my disgust with The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 as proposed by President Obama. I know it won’t do me any good, but I hate the thought of just sitting still while I’m abused. I also don’t like thinking that the government thinks I’m so stupid that I don’t see what’s really happening. Even my stupidity has limitations.

“That is the height of irresponsibility,” “It is shameful, and part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

“The American people understand that we’ve got a big hole that we’ve got to dig ourselves out of, but they don’t like the idea that people are digging a bigger hole even as they’re being asked to fill it up,” “There will be time for them to make profits and there will be time for them to make bonuses. Now is not that time.”

Mind you, President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner are putting together more “stimulus” and “recovery” projects. To the tune of something getting closer and closer to a trillion dollars.

Maybe instead of telling the American people how disappointed he is in the greedy financial executives involved, President Obama should disallow any future financial aid to their respective institutions. I mean really, the best he can do is to say ‘bad boys and girls!’ and not even directly to them?

I am also disgusted/disappointed/angry – but at our new president for such a useless and ineffective punitive action. Well, I also feel the same way about the bankers involved, but I am confident nobody cares…

I keep waiting for meaningful HELPFUL change…

President Obama, who is known for his speaking abilities, did not disappoint listeners at his inaugural ceremonies this January. President Obama’s 20 minute speech was stirring, motivating, hopeful and he delivered it almost flawlessly.

President Obama’s inaugural address was obviously quite well received by visitors to the mall. In fact, based on subsequent media reflections of the inaugural address, Americans everywhere were impressed with the new president’s comments and presentation.

Perhaps the only people who did not thoroughly enjoy President Obama’s inaugural address were George Bush and his administration. President Obama made some references in his speech which were anything but complimentary to the outgoing president and his associates. There was nothing said that was aggressive, but the message was clear nevertheless. Another tribute to the writing quality of the landmark inaugural address.

The only downside in the entire inaugural address was a necessary one. President Obama did not sugarcoat the current situation America faces. His speech brought hope, but not for anytime in the near future. For the near future the new president spoke of hardships – and propped Americans up for the incumbent challenges.

I would have to give President Obama the highest marks for his inaugural address. I hope his presidency is as prominently successful.

President Obama wanted to keep using his Blackberry, despite suggestions to the contrary from advisors and Secret Service. The new president won the debate, of course, and will keep and continue using his faithful pocket friend. No doubt with some inventive security measures added.

With all the press President Obama and his Blackberry are getting, it might be a good idea to look into adding some Blackberry stock to the portfolio.

There is a requirement on the books which precludes people from working for any agency they have lobbied within the past two years. President Obama circumvented this requirement by simply forwarding a “waiver” to Capitol Hill which exempts William J. Lynn from the rule. This allows Mr. Lynn to be appointed to the post by the new president.

The above seems a lot more like what has been happening for the past eight years than “change.”

Further, President Barrack Obama previously stated that no lobbyists would be part of his administration. A reporter in the White House Press Room recently asked the new president how he could reconcile appointing William J. Lynn, considering his statement. President Obama did not respond to the question.

Senator John McCain, the ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee, has said he will not be able to support William J. Lynn’s appointment until he is able to get some more information about him. Senator McCain wants to know if President Obama’s pick will remove himself from dealing with certain issues – those relevant to his past dealings with the Pentagon in the interests of Raytheon.

Senator McCain added that he is “disappointed” in the president for providing the ethics waiver for Mr. Lynn.