I am not so optimistic - Obama and his staff have variously given dates for closing Gitmo from immediately, to end of the first year, to disappointed if not end of the first term. So for people already unjustly incarcerated for 6 years, adding another 4 years or more to their time is disappointing to Obama. Good to know.

As far as torture, American presidents have been using the CIA to torture, or at minimum support and train people in torture since the CIA was started as a "spy" arm of the Administrative branch. The only difference with Bush and other presidents is that he was the first to be arrogant and stupid enough to try making it public. Getting on Bush for being an arrogant jerk seems like a a self-serving moral escape clause that allows one to ignore a long standing (but not spoken about policy until Bush) of using torture and torturers to further American objectives around the world.

A similar thing goes for lying about war, you'd have to ignore the Korean and Vietnamese wars to think no president before Bush ever lied about useless wars.

So the lesson for Obama and future presidents from this Bush outrage, is to not lie and torture as stupidly as Bush did.

Certainly the tone of Obama is fresh and new after the "We're arrogant jerks and we like it" tone of the Bush administration. Substantively though almost everything Obama is doing is just as shallow as Bushs acts - he just communicates with a much better demeanor and leans liberal.

A couple of examples from this article:

"First, I can say without exception or equivocation that the United States will not torture," Obama said. Bush said the same thing and neither is believable. Obamas order also creates a commission which has six months to examine whether to create “additional or different guidance” for the CIA in iterrogating detainees. Different from what? Does the Geneva convention apply or is torture still in the eyes of the beholder? That is one hell of a loophole. Ok so he has cleared stated no waterboarding. Good, but what about unlimited solitary, forced feeding, and various humiliation techniques. Obama offers no opinions. I guess that is up to the commmmission.

Obamas proclamation of prohibiting the CIA from maintaining its own secret prisons would be a great except that Bush already had already declared "suspended" the CIA secret prisons program in 2006. Ok so "Prohibiting" may be a stronger term than "suspending", but the net number of secret prisons closed after this proclaimation is zero. So I am still not cheering.

Instead I remain afraid we elected another imbecile but a liberal one with a much better demeanor.

...that the politics of winning the vote is more important than the bill itself.

It's probably what made the bill the piece of crap it is. If they really wanted to provide aid and relief to people at risk and in need during this recession, make a bill called "The Recession Aid" Bill targeted to poor and lower middle class people. Would that be so tough to sell considering the aid the financial sector and automotive sector is receiving in the form of bailouts. Putting aid related spending in a stimulas bill is stupid.

Since when did Bushes tax cuts create such a booming economy that it just has to be in a stimulas bill. Unbelievable that the bill is almost half tax cuts (the republican mantra) but still can get Obama hammered by Republicans that is not enough tax cuts. Ouch.

The stimulas bill needs to be 100% infrastructure improvements. This bill required vision, purpose, a highly visible and great upgrading of our infrastructure. I am sorry solar panels on a few more roof-tops is not gonna do it. I don't know, flying sucks, so build public super high speed railroads across the nation, do anything that has some freakin vision, creates jobs long term, and re-builds peoples pride and confidence in the nation. An aid and relief package, with idealogical porkulas spending, and republican pressured tax cuts ain't gonna do that.

I am afraid the democrats so far are showing themsleves to be practically and politically inept with the reins of power.

The "nothing here", "look away", apologists only have a point if her signature was not on the returns. If her signature was on the tax returns, she is accountable.

What is the problem here, is there a low supply of Democratic nominees out there who can handle their tax returns responsibly?

“People don’t care about these little items. I think the Republicans are looking for an excuse not to vote for the bill.” --Schumer

Ok, let the Republicans filibuster and bring out every "little item" that Schumer is certain the American people don't care about. Then Schumer can explain why there are so many "little items" of little importance in a bill that according to Obama is supposed to head off an economic dooms day.

The democrats do not want a filibuster with this bill - it would be an embarassment. They need 60 votes.

The reality is pork and earmarks do create jobs and boost the economy in individual states where they are targeted. Thats why senators look for any and every opportunity to slip them in.

The problem is we are supposedly teetering on the brink of an economic doomsday, and the best the Democratics can come up with is more porkulous spending and more republican fueled tax cuts. What underwhelming vision and "never ending recession" rhetoric eerily reminiscent of Bush administration fear mongering.

The needle on the change and hope meter is flat, dead, not budged a millimeter.