Talk about rose- color glasses, or grasping for straws, or seeing the glass as half full … or any other metaphor you can think of. Surely, we can hope for something better than this. Being happy at a net loss of jobs?

Yes, there are some positive signs. Manufacturing jobs increased as did temporary workers — indicating a need for more labor hours even if businesses aren’t hiring new full-time employees. But with the number of people who’ve lost their jobs — what is it eight million now? And the continuing blight of foreclosures? And an increased likelihood of a double-dip recession?

We need some new legislation from Washington that addresses these problems. Just like the automobile industry was resuscitated by “cash for klunkers,” we need to resuscitate the out-of-work and under-employed in this nation. Only in that way will we start to generate the badly needed revenues that will bring us out of this mess.

Let’s hope the Democrats and Republicans can work together for a change to help a nation in crisis. It’s no longer just the tea partyers who are angry.

Since these countries share a common currency with stronger nations such as France and Germany, the whole continent is affected, and now the troubles have started to impact the Dow Jones index as well. In fact, the index temporarily fell below the 10,000 mark for the first time in months.

All this reminds us about the fragility of the global economy and the fact that things remain unsettled after the recent worldwide financial crisis. For those in the United States who are predicting a double dip recession, it does little to assuage their worries.

And what effect does news like this have on the individual investor, the middle class taxpayers who have seen a rapid decline in net worth thanks to events far out of their control? It’s just one more straw on the camel’s back regarding concern for the future.

Many have remarked how this generation of Americans is the first who believe their children will be worse off than they are. This is all a sad commentary on the hope that was once endemic in this nation.

Apparently, the men killed were part of a  Special Operations unit, and they were travelling in a dangerous area to help mark the opening of a new school for girls, built with U.S. funds. The Taliban typically destroy any attempts to educate the female population as inconsistent with the Koran.

The article hypothesizes one reason the soldiers were killed — as retaliation for the increasing number of drone attacks against Pakistani targets. There was also some question of betrayal among the government forces since the soldiers were well camouflaged and protected by a cordon of vehicles.

Despite this setback, the attack tends to show the effectiveness of President Obama’s increased attention to the region, the area where many believe Osama bin Laden is holding out. Otherwise, there would have been no perceived need to retaliate.

However, the sensitivities of the Pakistani government are another matter, and we can only hope to continue to downplay our role behind the scenes.

Apparently, President Obama’s projections call for significant deficits for the next ten years. This makes it highly unlikely that future Presidents will have the opportunity for any domestic programs. It is compared in the article to homeowners whose mortgage is greater than the value of the house; in other words, the American government is “under water.”

The article also makes several astute political observations including the unwillingness of the Republicans to raise taxes and the unwillingness of the Democrats to cut programs, especially Social Security. In light of these limitations, the article paints a very pessimistic picture of their implications.

The article concludes on a somewhat optimistic note, citing Stein’s law. “If a trend cannot continue, it will stop.” In fact, the addressing of the problem on the front page of The New York Times means that even a so-called liberal newspaper is increasing awareness of the situation.

Ideally, President Obama will stimulate the economy in the short run, boosting jobs, and therefore revenue, and will ride that additional revenue to reduce the deficit. Sounds easy on paper …

The change in decision came after Mayor Bloomberg changed his mind about the event, in turn influenced by the  plans presented by the New York City police commissioner, Raymond Kelly. Kelly had described a plan with multiple checkpoints, snipers on the roofs, etc., at a cost of up to $1 billion.

But, reading between the lines, the real problem came down to another form of money; the real estate agents for downtown had become extremely concerned about the fate of their businesses and the ability to lease downtown during the course of the trial, which could take years. It was their complaints and pressure that seemed to start the anti-trial ball rolling.

Of course, this just represents another form of NIMBY politics — not in my backyard. Many of these people are all for a non-military trial, just so long as they don’t have to deal with any of the repercussions. Trial at a military base may represent a possible alternative instead of the heart of Manhattan.

In any case, these terrorist trials and Guantanamo seem easy to resolve in terms of our values; it’s just the details that are slowing things down.

Ben Bernanke is simultaneously viewed as the architect and savior of today’s economy. His lax policy positions caused it, and many view his rapid bailouts as saving it.  According to the article, Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon made one of the most strident remarks, accusing Bernanke of helping to “set the fire that destroyed our economy.”

The attacks on Bernanke, in my opinion, represent a desparate attempt to find a scapegoat. It’s easier to blame the Fed than your own institution. In reality, virtually noone anticipated the bursting of the housing or credit card market bubbles.

The attacks by Senators at the confirmation hearings were mainly meant for the general public who are outraged at the enormous bonuses still being awarded at major banks. This is an election year, and after the upset by Scott Brown, no incumbent feels very much at ease about their own chances.

The alliance of nay voters included some very unusual coalitions including, for example, the only Socialist, Vermont Senator, Barry Sanders, and the Republican conservative, Jeff Sessions of Alabama.

One can only hope the renomination will become less and less important as Happy Days Come Here Again.

The death of the commission in the Senate shows the hypocrisy of both parties in the attempt to get the budget under control. Democratic liberals were afraid of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security cuts while Republicans were afraid of an attempt to raise taxes. The Democrats were also upset by the exemption of the military from the Commission’s jurisdiction while social programs remained a prominent target.

Well, this new executive commission is a little flabergasting. It seems like a waste of time because Congress will do whatever it wants in any case. Meanwhile, the President is buffeted by two opposing forces: the pressure to create jobs in the short term, involving more spending, and the pressure to balance the budget in the long term, involving less spending. His proposed three-year freeze on 8 percent of the government’s expenditures already seems to have been discounted.

Well, let’s see how the State of the Union goes tonight. I’m still upset by the refusal of the House to pass the Senate’s healthcare bill!

Most announcers are describes the impact as a drop in the ocean, though a White House adviser tried to defend it as a first step. However, the program may upset the Democratic base because of the military exemption and upset Republicans because it isn’t big enough.

This represents a continuing conundrum for President Obama. By trying to accommodate everyone, he ends up pleasing noone. The area of the budget he suggested for initial cuts represents only eight percent of the total budget.

I guess we’re now living post-national healthcare in terms of White House priorities. It seems like they’ve forgotten all their other big programs as well and are focusing on an incremental approach. This is profoundly disappointing, and one would hope that President Obama fights with the House to pass the Senate healthcare bill, with a promise of changes later. But that will require leadership and a willingness to take another major risk ….

Negotiations are still ongoing regarding the healthcare bill, and it is unsure how the President will treat it. Most of the proposals are small-budget items, primarily because of the loss of the election in Massachusetts and the feeling that the people are angry about the rapidly increasing deficit. In fact, the article directly compares President Obama’s new agenda to the “go small” approach of the Clinton White House during a similar time of trouble.

As a political Obama fan, I can’t help but feel a sense of extreme disappointment and sadness while reading the article. There was so much hope for his Presidency, and the current floundering around represents a failure of what might have been. If it weren’t for the Massachusetts election, we would be finishing up healthcare and going on to the next step to help the American people.

How can the voters be so ignorant and manipulated by the Republicans? One day, they will realize they were duped, but it will be too late. Here’s a special dart aimed at you, Mr. DeMint. May it be on your conscience what you’ve truly done. Yes, you’ ve achieved the Waterloo you wished for, on the backs of the American middle class.

Mr. Bernanke helped to shape the highly unpopular bailout of Wall Street and has also been accused of allowing the housing bubble, that helped to cause all our difficulties in the first place. There appears to be opposition to him from both the left and the right, and a vote on his renomination had to be delayed.

Eventually Harry Reid provided a tepid endorsement, but the final result remains to be seem. It appears that nothing is the same after the shocking election in Massachusetts, and the politicians are finally considering the view of Main Street, a good idea if they want to keep their jobs.

Our economic system is so complex that it probably doesn’t make sense to start looking for people to blame. It just upsets the stock market and investors (the Dow is down almost five percent over the past three days), and that really doesn’t help anyone.

The difficult renomination, however, might make Mr. Bernanke think twice when he is adopting new policies, especially with 10 percent of our population out of work, and a good chunk of them, homeless to boot.