When President Barack Obama was in Racine the other day, he had to face some unexpected questions about the success or lack of success with the so-called Recovery Act. As we know from previous experiences, President Obama does not do well when asked questions posed with an opposing viewpoint. Apparently he has gotten used to the notion that he will come into a city, make a speech, answer a couple of questions any long-winded fashion and leave with a higher approval rating.

When President, got asked about the success of the stimulus bill, his reply seemed a bit hostile. When looking for success, he had to point out that with out the $862 billion stimulus package, the recession would've been worse. How so? How can the "things could have been worse" basis be defended? Of course it can't be. There are no statistics for how bad things could've gotten. I'm sure there are just as many economists were saying that no difference at all has been made. The economy would've been exactly the same, only the money is gone. The portions that did not get wasted went to state governments so they could plug their huge deficits.

President Obama no longer can defend his promised that unemployment would not exceed 8%. It has been over 9% since February 2009. But, of course his great claim to success is that it did not go to 11 or or 12%. He was so proud of himself telling the city of Racine and unemployment did not go above 11 or 12%. The unemployment rate in Racine is over 14%. I'm sure the city was proud to hear the president boast.

In a report by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, President Obama also break that 73,000 people received extended unemployment benefits because of the stimulus plan. I thought the stimulus plan was supposed to create jobs. It only created census jobs, and those had to be counted twice in order to impress somebody. Yet the only impressed Joe Biden.

I'm sure President Obama is going to continue his summer tour going to states to help Democrats get elected so that we can continue on this road to ruin. You'll come to a town, dump some stimulus money, and then make political speeches.

Why is everything strictly political with President Obama? Wasn't he a like it to be president of all Americans? Every time he gets in front of his Teleprompter, he bashes Republicans about stances that are mostly made up. I can't believe he's been out of touch. Yet he blames publicans for being out of touch.

The Obama presidency was supposed to steal America. It was supposed to bring people together. It was supposed to unite the United States. Yet a year and a half later, this country is more polarized than ever before. Obama was elected to solve our problems. He was supposed to solve the economic crisis. He wanted to solve the immigration crisis, he wants to solve the oil crisis, he wants to solve the energy crisis, he wants to solve all of our crises. He sold America on hope and change. But we found out that the change is wrong and the hope is gone. He now says that no one can solve these problems. And when Obama says he can't, he won't. Now America is stuck with the failed presidency for another 2 1/2 years. We've gone from 'yes we can' to 'nobody can.'And when nobody can, nobody will.

This great country that will now celebrate 234 years of independence must now find a new direction. In  1776 this country began its destiny to greatness not by creating a government, but by getting rid of the old one. In 2010, it's time to get rid of the so-called leaders in the top level of our current government. Then, and only then we will be able to return to the greatness this country will be again.

Some days it's just plain difficult to understand what is going on in America today. One thing we do know is that the United States is on the wrong track. Unfortunately, the government seems content to not only stay on this track, but to pick up speed.

The Arizona immigration law seem to have been a situation that could and should have been handled by the state of Arizona and backed up by the federal government. Instead it has turned into an us versus them situation. Consciously choosing not to enforce the immigration laws that are on the books, the federal government is not letting Arizona worked on solving their own problem. There are either too many Republicans in Arizona or not enough unions in Arizona. During the summer of 2008, immigration was a hot issue. The many candidates for president at the time all have plans on how to handle the immigration problem on the border with Mexico. Then, the economy tanked and the priority shifted. Immigration was shelved albeit promised to be handled in the first year of the Obama presidency. We now know that a year and a half later, things are getting worse.

Arizona carefully crafted a law that would complement the federal law to give itself some power and authority to handle what it viewed as a problem. Although I know where Arizona is, I don't know firsthand the extent of their problem. However, they should be able to address the problem as they see fit. No one is coming to the rescue. Unlike the auto companies, unions, teachers unions, and all the other Democrat special interest, no one is coming to the rescue.

Until the federal government can construct their own immigration reform bill as promised, the least they could do is butt out and let Arizona take care of their problem in the interim. But instead, the Obama administration chooses not to enforce the current law, or create a better law, they want to tie the hands of the people of Arizona. The United States versus Arizona. Whatever happened to the promise of bringing people together and being one nation-the United States of America. Apparently, there is no political gain in approaching a vision of America as United.

It is also downright idiotic for companies to think they can boycott the state of Arizona. It's even worse for government entities -such as the Milwaukee County Board-to think that they can effectively boycott the state of Arizona. What is to be gained? Do they think they can boycott by not drinking Arizona iced tea? If New York does something stupid, are we going to boycott them by not drinking Manhattan's? That seems to make sense to the Liberals.

Instead of using NASA as a way to reach out to the Muslim world, the Obama administration should reach out to its own citizens and work on the fundamental responsibility of the federal government -- keep Americans safe.

After a year and a half in office, President Obama seems directionless other than his desire to destroy capitalism and expand the government to all areas of our life. The government is not creating jobs, it is not solving the economic crisis, it is not helping Americans to achieve their true potential. Instead, the administration is creating an environment that will create more people will be more dependent on an overreaching federal government every day of their lives. It is spending money left and right which may be building GNP but it is not restoring the fundamental economic basis that has kept this country strong since the Industrial Revolution. Can America regain its greatness? Can America regain its greatness before it's too late?

President Obama is looking forward to the summer. Congress will be in recess and he can make appointments without the consent and advice of the Senate. He can tour the country using Air Force One to avoid the day-to-day responsibilities of his office and do the one thing he does well-campaign. He will be putting forth his best effort to further divide the country politically and do it all on taxpayers dollars.

Having little or no success of his own in his first half of his term of office, Obama will be preaching the rhetoric of his well-worn grooves-blaming Bush for the failures of the Obama presidency. Yes, according to President Obama, George Bush screwed things up so bad that President Obama cannot do what he was elected to do; fix-it.

Having no record of success to run on, the president must turn the election to being a choice. The choice being in what Obama and the Democrats describe as failed policies which led us into this financial mess or, the failed policies of taxing, spending, government takeover, pandering to unions, and excuse making. The latter of course is being re-branded as moving forward.

Americans have yet to find out who is spending nearly $1 trillion has yet to produce the jobs that America is looking for in order to consider the great recession as over. Passing health care reform via the rhetoric that it is going to reduce costs and solidify America's future is a long way from being realized. Jobless benefits are also being re-branded as stimulating the economy. Prominent Democrats have come out and used those very words. So just who is being bamboozled?

The favorite whipping boy of President Obama is anyone who is a Republican. Time and again President Obama has blamed Republicans for holding up key pieces of legislature which would require us to increase the deficit, raise our taxes, and surrender our civil liberties. If the Republicans had done this, I'd like President Obama to give an example. Democrats were swept into office with large majorities in both houses of Congress. Yet if they can't pass the socialist agenda of President Obama and the members of his administration, how can this be the fault of Republicans?

Whenever I see President Obama pending over and screaming into a microphone with his arms flailing back and forth like a young Joe Cocker, I just don't know what to think. It doesn't look presidential, it doesn't sound presidential, and it sends a message that President Obama is not interested in being president of all the citizens of the United States. His actions and his policies screamed to the American people that President Obama wants to divide further an already divided American people.

If we look at any speeches made by past presidents I think you will find that none have spent almost their entire term completely procreating their predecessor and the opposing party. President Obama's actions are illustrative of his inexperience's and his lack of skills of how to manage the government. There were warning signs in 2007 and 2008 that Barack Obama did not have the right kind of experience in order to govern effectively. Many voters did not heed this warning. But then again it does not take a Nostradamus to figure this one out. Once again we are entering into a in which a line of change is going to be needed at the federal level. Let's hope we can do it right this time.

We've all known for years that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel panders to the liberal and Democrat candidates no matter how bad they are. That's an assumption that we'll just have to live with. They are starting to come up with some so-called news stories comparing Senator Russ Feingold to candidate Ron Johnson. If we are aware of this bias, we sometimes have to remind ourselves that it exists in order to read these columns without having to be interrupted to run to the cabinet to get the Alka Seltzer.

In one article, we are led to believe that the deciding factor on who we should send to Washington for the next six years should be based solely on if the candidate owns any type of stock in BP. Well, Ron Johnson on some outright, and Russ Feingold old and some through a mutual fund. Gosh, Wally, this doesn't make the decision crystal-clear. But, let's think this over. Who in their right mind would invest in an oil stock for a company that would at some point in the future cause an environmental disaster? The only good news is, the wealth of these two candidates has also been diminished by the decrease in the stock price. That makes us all feel good, right?

Now, Russ Feingold is being painted as a fiscal conservative. Well, at least he won't be grouped in with those evil tax and spenders who voted for the stimulus program and health care. His Russ Feingold also in lockstep with the confirmation of Elena Kagan? There are so many Kagan lovers out there, I'm surprised she hasn't found a husband yet. Even Senator Herb Kohl loves her. But, let's change the subject.

Senator Feingold has come out against voting for the financial reform bill. He's claiming that it will help pinch pennies like we do here in Wisconsin. Well, pandering to cheapos may get some votes, but only from those who don't remember the expense of votes that Senator Feingold has cast. Will one of his votes have an effect on his reelection? Yes, but not this one. It will be his vote for health care.

The health care reform bill will not benefit the people of Wisconsin due to the programs that are already in place at the state level. But yet, the citizens of Wisconsin will be asked to contribute to the enormous price that is going to be expected to be paid by the citizens of the United States. It's not going to be a good bang for the buck.

Well, it doesn't take an oddsmaker to figure out who the Journal Sentinel is going to endorse come this fall. And hopefully we will have some actual issues that will come up that will help the voters of this state decide. Then, there's always the possibility that Ron Johnson may own stock in other evil corporations too. After that, our only hope is that Russ Feingold's fund manager got him out of those stocks in time.

Actually, the Obama administration admits to one mistake. I'm not going to take a lot of time to discuss the Shirley Sharrod episode, because that is an actual distraction of what is really going on in America.

During the so-called summer, the Obama administration is trying to propagandize their accomplishments with the economy. And having done, we need distractions so that there is not a lot of time to examine the actual facts.

The Recovery Act has been a dismal failure. Spending $1 trillion that we did not have as added to the gross domestic product, but has not created jobs. The administration has been totuing that it has created or the qualifying "saved" 2 million jobs. Yet the closely watched unemployment rate has been hovering above 9% for 18 months. Even according to government economists, the employment rate will be at or above 9% for the next 18 months. How's that hope and change thing working out?

Sensible spending is another area of great failure for the Obama administration. Since finding out that the president can spend money without limit, he has. Spending money any and everywhere is the administration's plan to convince people that the economy is getting better. Have you been persuaded?

Passing healthcare regulations and financial reform has caused more uncertainty in the economic outlook. Even Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has called the future unusually uncertain. That certainly is going to instill a great deal of confidence by investors to prevent a double dip recession. This should concern us all if we have any plans of seeking a sound retirement. Because of this financial reform bill, the days of getting a sound retirement are gone. Now days, if you get above 2%, you're really raking it in. Even during the Bush years, we were able to average 8 to 12%. Think Obama, 1% or below is the norm.

If we are to remember the worn-out rhetoric that the president has told us, everything is fine in America. Obama says he would not rest until every one who is seeking a job has one. Obama said he would not rest until the oil crisis in the Gulf had been stopped and cleaned up. Well, I don't recall hearing that these problems are solved, yet I do hear that Obama is taking a vacation. Liberals and progressives alike are coming to his defense saying that he is earned a well deserved vacation. My point is not to argue to the contrary, don't throw out a bunch of phrases that are meaningless if you're not going to live by them yourself. America was led to believe that an Obama administration would mean more transparency, better action, and strong results. I have yet to see any of these.

As we get closer to the election day, it's time to start paying attention to the U.S. Senate race. Do we want hope and change or do we want the status quo of the last 8+ years? It sounds like the 2008 election all over again. Only this time with the U.S. Senate.

Can Russ Feingold run on his record? Many of his votes cast in the Senate are in lockstep with the Democrat status quo. Feingold voted for the stimulus and he voted for healthcare reform. He voted along party lines in many of his votes at least the past year and a half. Now, all of a sudden he thinks he is a maverick and is bucking his party lines. He was the only Democrat to vote against the financial reform bill. Being on the losing end of this vote, that's not much consolation. Feingold said his vote against it was not because he didn't believe that he would be standing up for the freedom of Americans. No. He voted against it because it did not impose even more regulation. Feingold also voted against the patriot act. Yet, Feingold was part of a Congress that signed away more American liberties than the patriot act ever can or will.

But what is the big issue of the Senate race this year? Is it deficits? Is it the two wars? Is it out-of-control spending? Is it healthcare regulations? Not according to Feingold. The deciding issue in this year's Senate race is-drilling for oil in Lake Michigan.

Drilling for oil in Lake Michigan? Like many citizens, I was not aware of the impending drilling that was going to take place in the Great Lakes. And of course if it does, it will create a slick that will go all the way to Iowa. That's going to decide my vote.

Like many citizens, I'm trying to think of some tangible results for Russ Feingold that he has provided for the state in his three terms as senator. Can you think of any? Neither can I.