Stimulus, well it was better than nothing, but it wasn't progressive. Stimulus dollars showed no significant correlation between unemployment and money revived. Dollars went to buy votes from legislators in low population states, like Montana and South Dakota that had unemployment levels far below states like Oregon and Michigan. It was better than nothing, but as far as helping put people back to work in areas devastated by the downturn it was poorly targeted and wasted an enormous amount of money if reducing misery and stimulating the economy was concerned. An obsession for shovel ready projects meant that the ability to prove you could spend the money fast rather than the enduring value that a project would have for future growth meant a bunch more money was wasted on projects that showed little promise for helping the economy.

So Stimulus, it wasn't focused toward efficiently ameliorating unemployment or helping to ensure long run growth. It did alleviate some unemployment, and did build some good infrastructure, but it really wasn't targeted in the way that a policy wonk or economist would choose. Obama put very little on the line to stimulus passed, he mostly sat back and let congress fight it out, sent some cabinet officials around to make some speeches. He could have aggressively campaigned for a program targeted at helping those most in need or focused it toward projects that have a good track record of providing growth. Like I said, better than nothing, but calling it a triumph is like being glad you you finished third in a four man race.

Healthcare. Obama managed to be the sitting president at the time a formerly Republican think tank healthcare bill got passed. We now have nationally subsidized insurance companies, that will continue to rake in the money by denying as much care as they can, Huzzah!!!!! Really the republicans were pushing this kind of plan as an alternative to single payer years ago, the new republicans don't like it but the old guard loved to think of more ways to transfer government tax receipts to the private sector. I'm not a huge fan of privatization, I don't believe the myth that business is always more efficient then government, especially when it comes to public services and best outcomes that can't be measured in purely in $$$. The single fastest way to decrease heath care spending would be to cut the layer of profits that insurance companies make, there is little evidence that insurance companies will do a better job at rationing care than the VA or Medicare dollar for dollar. A progressive health care policy would be a single payer system, people say that it would be impossible to set up single payer in the US, but you don't know if that is true if you don't try. Trying would entail some pretty big risks...... Sooooo... I think the health care bill is an expensive subsidy to the private sector, you may think it's progressive, we can disagree.

Financial Reform, it's a mixed bag. I was for TARP, but that was the Bush administration, I'm for clearing houses for derivatives and while not perfect it's a step in the right direction. Most the progressive stuff like not kicking people out of their homes when the guy holding the mortgage can't prove he owns the place are being done judicially, so maybe we have progressive judges, but actually I think it's just the law being the law. Regulation is still much loser than it was pre-Reagan, and in my opinion not really as stiff as it could be, there are a variety of regulatory measures that could be brought back from the past to strengthen government over site and reduce risk. I like the new Consumer Protection Bureau who knows if it will amount to much, but seems like it could be one of the only "Progressive" things this administration manages to accomplish.

I said before the man runs a good war, we'll see about draw down and how soon the we will really get out. I remember on the campaign trail when he said the first thing he would do as president was pull our troops out of Iraq, oh the memories.... Don't ask don't tell, a progressive move that I like, doesn't really add up to a record of achievement, it's nice to see gays get enfranchised, it was a terrible waste to let a large pool or talent sit on the sidelines.

Still waiting on that immigration reform, judges ended the worst of Secure Communities, not the administration. A bit of good legislation has been passed on immigration, but I haven't seen Obama taking the lead on it (or on much of anything).

Is he a terrible president, no, he's decent, not progressive, not much of a leader, runs a pretty good war, appoints competent people to run agencies, avoids bang up fights, settles for lousy compromises instead of fighting for good ones. For a grade I'd give him a B, but if you broke it down he would his report card would have a few D's, maybe enough to knock him to a B- or C+ if I took a hard look. I'm disappointed, mostly on civil rights stuff, there shouldn't be 50k warrentless searches of Americans a year that can in no way be challenged judicially, it's blatantly unconstitutional. People in wheel chairs in their 70's and 80's shouldn't be forced to remove their depends and have their genitals inspected by a TSA employee that would have been working at Wall Mart or McD's if they government hadn't put on the enormous security theater production which they have. It makes me sick, and angry. I would vote for a republican if he would promise to end these types of abuses, I don't understand why the courts can't. It fills me with contempt for our president, that he doesn't have the decency to accept a bit of risk to maintain our rights as citizen. He is risk adverse, you see it every time he don't fight for better legislative outcomes, it just sucks.