The mostly “unchecked” list of promises include immigration reform, health care, and new financial regulations. Many of Obama’s campaign promises are marked as “in the works”, however time is slipping faster than the progress of “change”.

As Obama campaigned his presidency he promised to return the troops in Iraq home in 16 months, and “finish the fight against al Qaeda in Afghanistan.” Those 16 months have turned into 19, and as the troops remain on Iraqi grounds, Obama has deployed an additional 20,000 with consideration of sending thousands more. Obama also promised to oppose mandatory insurance and fining people who do not have insurance. The health care bill is “in the works,” however, both oppositions will likely appear in his health care bill and chalk up broken promises. President Obama also promised that lobbyists “will not work in my White House,” yet they are still present.

Of all Obama’s promises, kept, broken, or in the works, there are also dozens of promises receiving “no action.” Nearly a quarter of his term is complete, and there barely seems to be a dent in the list of promises Obama has made. His presidential clock is ticking and he has about 3 years to start taking action on his list of “no action” and “in the works.” How many promises of “change” will be kept, and how many will be broken? Or how many will receive any action at all at this progressive rate?

The defense of the strategy reveals the Taliban members of Afghanistan are dissimilar to those in Iraq. They are less motivated by the extreme ideologies and religious fervor, and more motivated by employment or income. To them, their loyalty to the Taliban is conditional and can be reversed if their conditions from American forces are better. Senator Carl Levin said, “They believe an effort to attract these fighters to the governments side could succeed, if they are offered security for themselves and their families,” as well as granted amnesty. The offering of amnesty is not a new concept to separate Taliban members from their leaders, however offering monetary compensation is.

A similar tactic was applied in Iraq, however these “bribes” we called “employment opportunities.” Of the Taliban in Afghanistan, General McChrystal says, “Most are operating for pay; some are under a commander’s charismatic leadership; some are frustrated with local leaders.” Certainly, there is a lot of truth to this statement. However, relying solely on bribing the Taliban to join positive forces has little promise for long term stability for Afghanistan.

Long term success for Afghanistan and their people does not reflect some Blockbuster movie scene where some nations chalk up the “W” and others defeat. This has more to do with Afghanistan’s ability to maintain a stable government after the separated Taliban members are no longer on the American payroll. An expert on the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, Nicholas Schmidle, said “So long as the Americans are keenly aware of this, you’re buying a very, very, very temporary allegiance… If that’s the foundation for moving forward, it’s a shaky foundation.” At this point, there is a clear effort to rent some Afghans, however there is no promise we can buy them out permanently.

In mixed responses, some praise the President’s efforts for paying respect to the American heroes upon their arrival to their homeland, and appreciate the humanity of the Commander in Chief. Sadly, others believe it is just another publicity stunt as if Obama is still campaigning to the Americans and is beating around the Bush (no pun intended) in his decision for Afghanistan. Regardless of Obama’s agenda, those fallen sons and daughters deserve the utmost respect and honor for their service to our nation.

The GOP is really laying the pressure on Obama because they believe the troops overseas are in danger if they do not get more help. The additional 18 Americans killed Monday only reinforce their beliefs. Senator John McCain (AZ) is one who has strongly criticized Obama for taking too much time in his decision making, as he believes if decisions are made more swiftly, the President has an opportunity to prevent similar events.

Even the lefts are supporting the troop surge, as Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) stated on the deployment of more troops, ” In my mind, you should pay for the cost whatever way.” This is a valid statement from chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, in control of funding operations in Afghanistan. Murtha says, “You can take it out of other programs or you can raise taxes.”

From the White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, who accompanied Obama to Dover Air Force Base, stated the President’s decision proceeding in Afghanistan is near its end. But has it already been to long?

During a conservative gathering, President Barack Obama’s harshest critic, Cheney, is never hesitant to spare his two cents when it comes to the President’s actions. He declared, “The White House must stop dithering while America’s armed force are in danger.” Yes, it would seem impulsive for Obama to pull the trigger without much consideration (i.e. he doesn’t want to shoot his friend in the face). However, with the recommendations of General Stanley McChrystal, commander of troops in Afghanistan, this certainly is a time sensitive matter.

Obama does have an obligation to generate a solution or come to consensus for his commander. Cheney said, “Having announced his Afghanistan strategy last March, President Obama now seems afraid to make a decision, and unable to provide his commander on the ground with the troops he needs to complete his mission.” Surely, General McChrystal offered a lengthy explanation for his recommendation to deploy more troops, therefore Cheney’s statements are redundant. Cheney, have you been in a cave for the last two weeks?

Certainly, the President is playing a bit of a waiting game, however Obama’s decision truly will reflect whether he can “make good on his promise” as Cheney said. The critical element in this situation is prioritizing the support of the men and women overseas. If they need more support as General McChrystal recommends, it would be in the President’s best interest to act swiftly and responsibly.

The president, of just nine months, receiving a Nobel Peace Prize brings a lot of shock value. However, Barack Obama is not the first nor the last president to receive this prestigious prize. The real shock is what has he accomplished to receive this honor? It seems premature to award someone for their plans and ideas to win hearts and minds which don’t have much to be supported by at this point in time. Obama’s mouth has signed a check his actions can’t cash, yet. What happens if his presidential term finishes before anything positive results from his “ideas”? Does the Nobel Committee take his prize back, or give him a pat on the back and say, “Good effort, anyway”? He has received praise and congratulations from both Democrats and Republicans, but he has also drawn a lot of criticism.

The underlying element is Obama’s vision to end extreme ideologies isn’t his own. The desire to establish Israeli-Palestinian peace is not breaking news. Not only was it not Obama’s idea to fight extreme ideologies in Iraq and Afghanistan, receiving a Nobel Peace Prize on the same day as meeting with his war council to deploy 40,000 additional troops to a war seems worse than ironic. Did he define what winning would mean? He received an honor for something he figuratively represents. If he is in fact such a peacemaker, and worthy of this honor, why would he agree to deploy more troops? Not only is he pissing off the people who support him, he’s still pissing off the people who don’t. However, many people believe he should end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or at least establish some success, in order to be awarded this prize. Public opinion varies as some say his prize is well deserved, and some say it is a Nobel Speech Prize.

As if the demands from General McChrystal to deploy more troops were not enough pressure for the president, he is now holding the weight of this controversial peace prize as he makes a significant decision affecting the future of the war in Afghanistan. Therefore in the wake of this prize, the United States has a commander in chief playing rocks, paper, scissors in the Oval Office.

In his speech at the Rose Garden, Obama’s statement was, “I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments”. We understand Mr. President, that’s because nothing has been accomplished. Congratulations President Obama… for not being George Bush. Only the future will tell, but for now it appears a Nobel Peace Prize can just fall out of a Cracker Jacks box.

Adding to her list of complaints, she claims the payout at $80 a day isn’t nearly enough to cover living expenses. Hopefully, her $208,100 salary as Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court can assist with her financial troubles. Sotomayor additionally complains, “It’s so boring. I’m totally daydreaming most of the time,” she continues “Honestly, I don’t know how anyone could possibly pay attention to all that testimony and evidence and legal mumbo jumbo all day long.”

Justice system aside for the moment, this interview is a joke. As President Obama’s nominated Associate Justice, Sotomayor publicly claiming psychological problems and professing racism is not going help resolve the issues in the justice system or the American civil duty as a juror for that matter. How did she qualify for jury duty, let alone the Supreme Court?

As if Sotomayor had a choice, she has accepted serving as a juror and she prays “to God this thing doesn’t make it all the way to the Supreme Court.” Is she done talking yet?

Following in the tradition of the great kings of Europe, unelected Arizona Governor Jan Brewer proclaimed her divine right of rule over the people of Arizona Wednesday night.

The Arizona Republic is reporting that in an address to a meeting of Lutheran Pastors in Phoenix, Brewer said “And I firmly believe that God has placed me in this powerful position of Arizona’s governor to help guide our state through the difficulties that we are currently facing,”

Republican Gov. Brewer took power in Arizona last January when democratically elected Gov. Janet Napolitano left office to serve in the Obama Administration. Brewer had been serving as Arizona Secretary of State previously.

Seeing that her appointment, of should we say anointment to Governor was divinely influenced, you’d think she could use her God connection to fix the states $3 Billion budget shortfall, its 9.1 unemployment rate or its horrible education system which ranks one of the lowest performing in the country.

But then again, having an educated electorate probably causes fear in the mind of someone who believes their political success is governed by magical deity in the sky.

Joe Wilson’s interrupting outburst last week during the President’s speech on health care reform drew sharp criticism from all sides of the political spectrum. But to the ignorant army of Glenn Beck supporters, tea party extremists and others its become a rallying cry. And this new wave of right wing radicalism has many in the Republican Party worried.

Republican media consultant Mark McKinnon. says “Neither party has an exclusive on wack jobs, unfortunately, right now the Democrats generally get defined by President Obama, and Republicans, who have no clear leadership, get defined by crackpots — and then they begin to define the Republican Party in the mind of the general public.”

And no where was this growing movement of right wing wack jobs more apparent than last weekend’s “Tea Party” in Washington D.C. Newly published video from liveleak.com shows these right wing extremist wackos in their true form. Protesters showed their uneducated and generally confused views protesting everything from health insurance reform, the IRS, abortion, global warming, and our "socialist/communist/fascist/Nazi/Muslim " president, Barack Obama to calls for a return to McCarthyism, while others called for Glenn Beck to run for President.

Is this the new face of the Republican Party?

Former communications director for the Republican National Committee, Brian Jones finds it annoying when radicals and cracks like Joe Wilson and Glenn Beck try to hijack the parties image.

“You have a little bit of tyranny of the minority with these people, it may raise their profile, it may make them more attractive in their district — but does it really help the image of the party in the midst of an important debate? I think no. Obviously, there are some who will be cheering this, but I think the cake is baked with them in terms of how they feel about Obama and health care.”

But Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the chairman of the Republicans’ campaign arm in the Senate, suggests that it’s not fair to tar the GOP with its fringier elements — and that the criticism won’t last anyway.

“I think that it’s a free country,” he says. “Anybody can say what they want, they can identify themselves as a Democrat, independent, a Republican, a socialist or whatever they want to call themselves. That doesn’t mean they were representative of a political party or the mainstream of a political party.”

But with the recent rise in extremism from the likes of Sarah Palin, Joe Wilson, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, can the party really survive beyond relying on a base of uninformed, confused, uneducated and racist white people?

Watch the video and decide for yourself

Politifact asked the public affairs officer for the D.C. Fire and Emergency Department, Pete Piringer, ,if the rally was big enough to fill the space in the picture. He said no — and moreover, there’s no way that picture can be from 2009.

“It was an impressive crowd,” he said., but after marching down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol the crowd “only filled the Capitol grounds, maybe up to Third Street,” he said. But the photo showed the crowd reaching far beyond that to the Washington Monument, which is bordered by 15th and and 17th Streets.

But there’s a much bigger problem with the photograph which proves that it is indeed a fake and is much older than claimed. Where is the National Museum of the American Indian? A huge building that’s located on the corner of Fourth St and Independence Ave which opened over 5 years ago! (Looking at the photograph, the building should be in the upper right hand corner of the National Mall, next to the Air and Space Museum.) Apparently the organizers of these tea parties care about as much about the American Indian as they do in spreading the truth, because they missed this landmark when disturbing the fake picture. . So clearly the photo doesn’t show the “tea party” crowd from the Sept. 12 protest.

“I’ve seen bigger crowds at Montreal Expos games, but I still wouldn’t fake a photo just to justify your predictions of millions descending on Washington,” said one gleeful Democratic media strategist. “This is grade-A stupid and just plays into the argument that these were astroturf protests to begin with. They’ve always brought the noise, but the question that was supposed to be answered this weekend was, could they bring the numbers? In that respect this was an unmitigated disaster.”

Numerous conservative blogs and news agencies, including Fox News ran with this picture before removing it later in the day. Others say the circulation of the picture was a left-wing conspiracy to discredit the event. However, many of them are still claiming that at least a million people attended the march. Nate Silver estimates about 70,000 protesters showed up.

And this isn’t the first time the tea party organizers tried to lie about the size of the event. On Saturday organized Matt Kibbe announce on stage that ABC News had estimated a crowd of 1 to 1.5 million were in attendance. ABC news never reported anything of the sort.

He said he met her two other times, including their first meeting in 2001 at an open-air dance spot in Uruguay.

“There was some kind of connection from the very beginning,” he told The Associated Press, though he said neither that meeting nor a 2004 coffee date in New York during the Republican National Convention were romantic.

His interview was the first disclosure of any liaisons with Chapur in the United States and contradicted a public confession last week during which Sanford admitted to a total of five encounters over their eight-year relationship.

He previously announced he would reimburse the state for money spent during a government trip to Brazil and Argentina in June 2008 when he saw Chapur. It was then, he said, that their relationship became physical, and the e-mails they’d exchanged for years reflected their anguish over what they had done.

“Now I am frightened,” he told the AP, describing his state of mind at the time. “It was before safe. But now it’s not safe. We gotta put the genie back in the bottle.”

He insists no public money was used for any other meetings with her.

He saw Chapur again in mid-June of this year, visiting Argentina without telling his staff he was going to be out of the country. He instead led them to believe he was hiking on the Appalachian Trail.

By the time he returned to a puzzled public, staff and family, his public image and emotional state had unraveled. He admitted the affair at a rambling press conference.

Now Sanford is attempting to salvage his personal and professional lives. He and wife Jenny, parents of four sons, say they are trying to reconcile their 20-year marriage but have not been sharing the same house for several weeks. Jenny Sanford found out about the relationship in January when she discovered a letter the governor had written to his mistress. She did not immediately return a message seeking comment Tuesday.

The governor said he met Chapur in Punta Del Este, Uruguay, in 2001 after his final term in Congress and before his first term as governor. He said the two struck up an e-mail correspondence after meeting on a dance floor — a chance encounter during which he counseled her into the night about her failing marriage.

For the next seven-plus years, Sanford said, the two exchanged messages, sometimes sporadically.

They met in New York two more times in 2008: two nights in Manhattan in September and three nights in the Hamptons in November. Each time, Sanford claims he flew coach, paid for it himself, paid for the hotels in cash and told his staff he was reachable via cell phone.

“At that point I was very careful, everything was paid for in cash,” Sanford said. “And you won’t find a credit card record.”

In early 2009, after Jenny Sanford discovered the affair, the couple went into counseling. She has told The Associated Press that he asked her several times to visit the mistress and she refused.

But the governor claims he wanted to end the affair in person and, with his wife’s permission, went to New York with a “trusted spiritual adviser” serving as chaperone. The three went to church and dinner together and parted ways the same night.

But he visited Chapur again in Argentina on June 18, the trip that brought the whole affair to light.