I watched a number of news shows today. I still can’t believe that WPSD, the NBC affiliate out of Paducah, KY, has cut the Chris Matthews show from it’s Sunday morning menu in favor of infomercials.

The topics of the day were Iran, Health Care, the Economy, Afghanistan, and the Olympics. I also saw, which was brought up today in more than one news show, the opening skit on Saturday Night Live last night which was a monologue by an Obama impersonator who was pontificating why the right wingers didn’t like him because he hadn’t done anything since he got in the White House. I wasn’t particularly impressed with the script or the performance, but the subject is one that is on the table, no doubt.

So the topic de jour was whether or not Obama is truly up to the task of being president . Can he handle all these problems in an effective way? Is he too much of a compromiser? Is he all promise and no deliver? Ultimately, is he all show and no go? Can he really get anything done? These are the questions that are being raised about Obama.

Is it fair? Not really. No single person or administration could turn around the momentum of the effects of the bad decisions made by our nation in the past in a matter of months. And, he is taking on more than one big problem. But, no doubt it’s like when you have a bunch of different programs running on your computer and you ask it to do something. It takes longer. And if he didn’t address all of these problems, he’d be criticized for not trying. But, national politics isn’t known for its fairness and compassion.

It is amazing to me how the republicans are getting away in the media with doing nothing. It isn’t that they have to rubber stamp Obama, I don’t do that. But, there is no doubt that they are playing a political game of not supporting any of Obama’s efforts to try and address the serious problems we face. The result is that nothing is getting done. Well, that isn’t exactly accurate. What it means is that things are moving really slowly at a time when we need faster action.

It’s a high stakes political game that the republicans are playing. A number of pundits today, including some that probably lean Democrat, although I wouldn’t them progressives, are predicting substantial losses in the House and Senate, although not enough to shift majorities, in Obama’s mid-term election. I’m still in the “too soon to tell camp.”

For one thing, people aren’t as stupid as the media seems to think. We all know how difficult our own jobs can be sometimes, and how a new person who may truly be trying to do somethings different might encounter resistance. Obama has more time with the general public to start showing more concrete results than the media is suggesting. But he doesn’t have forever.

I guess the safe punditry is that Obama’s fate in the mid term elections in 2010 is tied to the unemployment rate. I’m not sure that is a straight line connection. What people want to see is someone who is trying to do the right thing. I think Obama strikes people that he more sincere about trying to do that than anyone we have had for awhile. And he gets some leeway for that. I give him until Spring to be able to show more progress on the economy. If some sincere progress is being shown, and more could have been done except for the stalling republicans, they may find their strategy to be backfiring. Wouldn’t it be interesting if Obama bucked the trend and actually increased his majorities? I don’t think it is impossible.

Gosh, I could write as much yet on Afghanistan and Iran. Most all of the pundits, “liberal” and “conservative” thought that it was good that Obama was having diplomatic contact with Iran. But there was a lot of Iran trashing today. I think it’s a bad idea. Obviously, they, like North Korea, are not a derelict people, but one with intelligence, courage, and brutality. You add those up and it isn’t something you want to tangle with if you don’t have to.

Bush was so wrong to put them in the “axis of evil.” Now we are paying for it. But with Israel having, as some credible sources report, at least 150 nuclear weapons, can you blame them for wanting to get one? But this whole issue of Israel’s nuclear weapons program has simply got to be addressed. If they do have nuclear weapons, are they enriching high enriched, or do they have plutonium reactors? Or are we giving them everything, which I guess means we would be giving them the fabricated bombs?

Until we deal with that, there will be no peace with Iran. And calling them a “terrorist” state, and taking a hostile attitude toward them, Herzb Allah, and Hamas, will accomplish little in terms of stabilization of the situation.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not in favor of nukes - not for us, not for them, not for anyone. I don’t want Iran to build a bunch of nuclear power plants because it means that parts of the earth are going to get really contaminated. It all adds up. And not only that, but I don’t want us or anyone to have a bunch of new nuke plants. I don’t like the old ones. If we think health care costs are high now, just keep increasing the use of fission to create steam for electrical power. So if Iran thinks I think it is ok for them to get nukes of any sort - wrong. But I do understand why they are doing what they are doing. And, if we are serious about dealing with them, then we better start talking about the nuke bombs in Israel.

Afghanistan is a horrible situation. Obama did get criticized because he hadn’t given enough time to the problem, and for his on-the-fly meeting with Gen. McChrystal (or however you spell it.) But most people think that Obama is between a rock and a hard place with Afghanistan. His choice is between putting more troops into Afghanistan, which could mean more deaths, and may or may not mean improved political conditions, and for a large part, pulling our troops out and having an anti-AlQuaeda strike force only to go after Obama and his ilk. Either choice is going to have it’s ramifications. But one wise pundit said that Obama seems to look for the compromise, but that this may not be a situation where a compromise situation will work. But, as I wrote in a previous entry, it would ultimately one of the most ironic things of his presidency if he got tagged as the president that got us in the Afghanistan quagmire.

There’s a lot to discuss in the country at the moment. Is Obama biting off too much? Hell no. Are the rest of us biting off not enough? Yeah. But if the Supreme Court turns the corporations loose with unlimited spending on political campaigns, forget things getting better. But I do think that is what the court is going to do. If you think Obama’s job is hard now, wait until them.