We Will Not Be Silenced – The NObama Coalition Grows As Obama Treachery Surges To High Tide, Part II

As the NObama Coalition grows in numbers and strength, Obama’s treacheries surge to high tide. More and Americans abandon the Hopium dens and move to a posture of questioning Obama’s competence, character, and qualifications to be president. Those Americans who already questioned Obama’s competence, character and qualifications to be president move to our side of the equation and take our mantra to heart:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Today we survey the current disasters swamping the Obama dingy and analyze how Obama will respond. So imperiled are Obama and his Hopium Guzzler Thugs that race-baiting, personal destruction, and Latino duping are on the table. Abandon all Hope – we’re going into Obama-land “mentality”.

* * * * * *

Lately, even the most Hopium guzzling Dimocratic elected officials realize that Obama is a treacherous thug from Chicago only interested in his own self-advancement. The Boy Raised By Wolves does not care about anyone but himself.

House Appropriations Chairman David Obey recently said, “There are so many members of our caucus who think that this administration is willing to use members of Congress as cannon fodder.”

After Robert Gibbs declared the House to be up for grabs this November, Hopium Guzzlers in Congress spoke up:

“The broadest impact of Gibbs’ comments is to make public the long simmering tensions between House Democrats and the White House. Some of this tension is, of course, inevitable since Obama is, ultimately, on a 2012 electoral calendar while House Democrats have only this November in mind.”

Obama only cares about his self-advancement and no one else. The most dim-witted in the House begin to realize this fact:

“Yet, at times, House Democrats have expressed concern that the White House is playing fast-and-loose with their majority in order to help Obama’s re-election efforts in 2012. Those fears were expressed at a meeting with White House political guru David Axelrod in April and have only grown more acute since that time.”

Obama only cares about his self-advancement and no one else. The U.S. Senate of 60 votes then 59 votes is already but a memory. After November it will be yet another reminder that Obama cannot be trusted, believed, or relied on. The great “Summer Recovery” tour demonstrates how out of touch Obama and his drum beaters are. Brad Ellsworth of Indiana who sold out the interests of his constituents in order to “Save Obama” by voting for the health scam will be one of the first drum beaters to go. In Indiana:

“Sixty percent favor repeal of ObamaCare, as do 56% of independents. Fifty-nine percent favor passage of an immigration-enforcement law in Indiana modeled on Arizona’s, and half of independents agree (while only 31% disagree).”

The House of Representatives won by the Republicans is almost a foregone conclusion. The Senate won by the Republicans is now a very real possible future and discussed by strategists of all stripes. Now James Carville is stating that Obama Dimocrats better start praying to a traditional deity, not the golden calf they worship:



As elected Dimocratic officials wake up to the knives coming at their backs at the hand of Obama, the most obsequious of servants, Greg Sargent, raises a crucial question for Obama Dimocrats – “How do you make Dems care about the midterms?“:

“The thinking among Dem strategists appears to be that once Dems realize the midterms are a “choice” election, rather than merely a referendum on Dems, they’ll go out and vote. But what if Dems do see this as a referendum on their party’s rule, and base their enthusiasm solely on whether they are energized by the Dem performance?

The thing about Gibbs’s “shocking” declaration is that the White House and Democrats have been engaged in a full-blown effort for weeks now to persuade voters that the midterm elections could represent a return to GOP rule.

The White House and Dems have made this case every which way: They’ve charged that Republicans will again rule as stooges of Big Oil and Wall Street. They’ve claimed that Republicans will rain a blizzard of subpoenas on the White House if they take control of Congress. They’ve framed the elections as a choice between the policies that got us into this mess and those that are getting us out of it. And so forth.

Yet rank and file Dems don’t appear to care that much. The latest polling shows that the “enthusiasm gap” remains the same, with Republicans far more excited about voting than Dems are. In other words, Dem scaremongering about the GOP takeover doesn’t yet appear to be revving up Dems to turn out this fall. [snip]

How do you make rank and file Dems care about the midterms? It’s unclear that yelling about how mean and nasty Republicans are is going to cut it.”

Obama Dimocrats are in for a deserved beating due to their arrogance and stupidity. These fools actually believed Obama when he declared himself lovable and a savior unto them in 2010 such that 1994 would not repeat itself. But Obama always was a clownish figure. Big Media coverage which praised his bad campaign as “brilliant” and savaged Hillary Clinton and John McCain’s campaign as evil and incompetent is unable to hide the turd any longer.

“Candidate Obama used to joke about rays of sunshine coming in when he started to speak. Now he brings the clouds. He’s spent a great deal of time talking about the Recovery Act and health care reform, but the political fortunes of those programs are dismal, which suggests his ability to persuade and change minds is seriously damaged.”

Why the great awakening among the most avid Obama acolytes? It’s called reality. Reality is starting to bite and even the most Obama smitten see the irresponsibility at the core of the boy raised by wolves:

“President Barack Obama has long boasted about the transformative change he’s bringing to the country.

But by the time those reforms finally arrive, he could be long gone from the White House.

Some of Obama’s biggest promises won’t go into effect until long after his first term — and in some cases, well past a second. In fact, buried deep within some of the Democrats’ most significant reform bills are dozens of policy time bombs set to blow at more politically convenient times.

The Democratic reform triumvirate — health care, Wall Street and energy — is filled with provisions designed to front-load policy benefits and delay political pain.

Health care reform cracks down on insurers right away but won’t force people to buy insurance until 2014. A new consumer financial protection agency kicks in almost immediately under the Wall Street reform bill, but banks won’t feel its full force for more than 10 years. And even Democrats’ nascent immigration reforms include at least an eight-year wait before illegal immigrants can apply for permanent residency — after Obama leaves office.

The delicate balance aims to gradually get a skittish public accustomed to the enormous changes, while insulating lawmakers from potential backlash.”

The myriad Obama scams help Americans to realize more than ever that Obama cannot be trusted. Even his own aides know Obama has a “credibility crisis”:

“Robert Gibbs, Barack Obama’s chief spokesman, got into hot water this week for daring to speak the truth – that the Democrats could lose control of the House of Representatives in November. But it could be even worse than that.

Contrary to pretty much every projection until now, Democratic control of the Senate is also starting to coming into question. While Mr Obama’s approval ratings have continued to fall, and now hover at dangerously close to 40 per cent according an ABC-Washington Post poll published on Tuesday, the fate of his former colleagues in the Senate looks even worse.[snip]

“If you ask me where the silver lining is for President Obama, I have to say I cannot see one,” says Bill Galston, a former Clinton official, who has been predicting for months the Democrats could lose the House. “Just as BP’s failure to cap the well has been so damaging, Obama’s failure to cap unemployment will be his undoing. There is nothing he can do to affect the jobless rate before November.” [snip]

The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” says Rob Shapiro, another former Clinton official and a supporter of Mr Obama. [snip]

In private, informal advisors to Mr Obama are almost as negative. According to one, the US public’s loss of confidence in Mr Obama’s leadership is a factor above and beyond their dissatisfaction over the state of the real economy, which continues to slow as last year’s $787bn stimulus starts to run dry. The adviser, who asked to remain anonymous, said the public did not know what Mr Obama really believed. [snip]

I never thought I would say this, but even I’m unsure what President Obama really believes,” says the adviser.”

The question “Who is Obama” is getting answered – not by Obama protectors in Big Media – but by the sensible American public.

The answer is “No Confidence – No Trust – NObama“.

Even in a sample skewed for Obama Dimocrats Washington Post/ABC poll – No Confidence – No Trust – NObama:

“Four months before midterm elections that will define the second half of his term, nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country, and a clear majority once again disapproves of how he is dealing with the economy.”

Hours after that poll was released a CBS poll echoed and piled on the bad results for the Church Of Obama:

“Economists have declared the economic recession over largely over, but most Americans don’t share their optimism, and they are increasingly blaming President Obama for their money woes.

Mr. Obama’s approval rating on the economy has tumbled five percentage points from last month, according to a new CBS News poll, with just 40 percent of those polled expressing full confidence in his actions.

More than half of those questioned (54 percent) said they disapproved of Mr. Obama’s handling of the economy. Last month, 45 percent approved. The drop in approval has been seen mostly among independents, just 35 percent of whom now say they approve.”

Obama now owns the bad economy, or rather, the bad economy now owns Obama. Everywhere you look it’s bad news, bad economy, bad results for the boy raised by wolves:

“He has been trying to sell the success of his stimulus legislation for months in speeches, interviews, and events all over the country. In the CBS poll, only 23 percent think it has helped the economy. Only 13 percent think it has helped them personally. Despite all of his efforts, people are either ignoring him or tuning him out—or they can’t hear him over the bad economic news. Whatever the reason, the best argument Obama has for how he and Democrats have addressed the issue people care the most about is one that people aren’t buying.

The situation on health care is worse. There have been some signs that public opinion about health care was improving a little, but the Pew and CBS polls offer a darker outlook. Forty-nine percent disapprove of the new legislation, according to the CBS poll, and only 36 percent approve. Pew has nearly identical numbers.

This is not the way the president said things would turn out last March….”

It’s Not “Just The Economy, Stupid” this time:

“Let’s also take a look at the latest poll from Democratic polling firm Democracy Corps. They allowed people who disapproved of the President (50%, in their poll) to give an open-ended response as to why they disapproved of the President, and created a word cloud for the responses:[snip]

As you can see, health care overwhelms the economy in these responses, and policy-driven answers such as “spending,” “oil spill,” and “everything” are about as salient as “economy.” Indeed, on page 22 of the survey, the top reasons given for disapproving of the President were fiscal irresponsibility, health care, and the oil spill. More respondents expressed concern that the President was a socialist/communist (8%) than were upset about jobs and unemployment (6%).”

* * * * * *

So what to do? What will Obama do? What can Obama do? What has Obama done before? Race-bait. Race-bait. Race-bait. Get your allies to race-bait too:

“I believe that the NAACP is making a grave mistake in stereotyping a diverse group of Americans who care deeply about their country and who contribute their time, energy and resources to make a difference. [snip]

The only purpose of such an unfair accusation of racism is to dissuade good Americans from joining the Tea Party movement or listening to the common sense message of Tea Party Americans who simply want government to abide by our Constitution, live within its means, and not borrow and spend away our children’s futures. Red and yellow, black and white, this message is precious in all our sights. All decent Americans abhor racism. No one wants to be associated with any organization that is in any way racist in sentiment or origin. I certainly don’t want to be. Thankfully, the Tea Party movement is not racist or motivated by racism. It is motivated by love of country and all that is good and honest about our proud and diverse nation.”

Race-bait. Divide. Conquer. Race-bait again. Repeat. Even African-Americans will be race-baited. African-Americans will be race-baited and intimidated with the “Uncle Tom” epithet.



Race-baiting anyone and everyone is such a preferred Obama tactic that now race-baiting is viewed as the way to defeat Al Qaeda!

The only new twist to the race-baiting is that Latinos are being added to the mix. Barack Obama will try to use Latinos and the Arizona law on illegal immigrants to dupe white liberal Hopium Guzzlers, the mostly easier to dupe young, and assorted Big Blog Idiot Boys. But the “screw then re-use Latinos” strategy will not work:

“Obama was elected into office on the promise that he would tackle immigration in 2009. He decided, however, to give priority to health care reform, financial regulatory reform and energy legislation. As recently as two months ago, on Air Force One, just as Senate leaders were announcing a new push on immigration reform, the President was caught in a moment of candor. “We’ve gone through a very tough year and I’ve been working Congress very hard, so I know there may not be an appetite immediately to dive into another controversial issue,” he said of immigration reform.

That pretty much killed chances of reform [this year],” says Frank Sharry, founder and executive director of America’s Voice, a group that supports comprehensive reform. “Unless there is some miracle, we are talking about early next year.”

Around the same time as Obama’s Air Force One comment, the Gallup poll noted a significant drop in Hispanic support for the President, a major concern for White House political advisers who need Hispanic votes in 2010 and ’12 in swing states like Nevada, Colorado and Florida. Gallup measured a 6-point drop in Hispanic job approval, from 63% to 57% between April and May. The drop was 11 points among Hispanics who were interviewed by Gallup in Spanish. During the same period, Gallup noted no change in the job approval for Obama among non-Hispanic black or white voters.”

Latinos are not stupid. They know Obama promised to “tackle immigration in 2009” and it was just a lie. Now in 2010 Obama is trying to bamboozle Latinos. But Latinos are not stupid. Latinos know they are being played by a master flim-flam man from Chicago. And in either case there is a mistaken assumption that Latinos will base their votes on illegal immigration:

“First, there’s an assumption underlying much of the Arizona analysis that Hispanics will base their votes on the immigration issue as uniformly as African American voters have historically based their votes with regard to civil rights. This seems unlikely. The exit polls suggest that as many as one-in-three Hispanic voters have voted directly contrary to their supposed interests on questions of ethnicity and immigration.

The second takeaway is on a touchier subject, but it is nevertheless important. Analysts assume that a Democratic coalition of Asians, African Americans, Hispanics and liberal whites would be a stable governing coalition supporting a liberal/progressive agenda. But building a political coalition is like pushing on a water balloon – you press in one area, and another area bulges. Sometimes the whole thing will explode.

The history of multi-ethnic coalitions is replete with examples of such explosions. [snip]

In the case of California in the 1990s, note that Asians and African Americans supported Prop 187 at substantially higher rates than did Hispanics, and that Asians were more supportive of Prop 209.”

The main lesson to draw from the Obama race-baiting tactics using Latinos as his cats paw is that this is a strategy designed to help Obama in 2012 by testing themes and tactics in 2010. Obama helps himself but hurts Dimocrats in 2010:

“The Obama administration’s lawsuit over the stringent Arizona border law might have just made the incline a little steeper for many Western Democrats, providing instant fodder to Republicans who are already optimistic about regaining ground lost over the last two election cycles.

The dust from the Department of Justice lawsuit filed Tuesday is just starting to settle, but the reflexive sense among strategists on both sides is that it will be a net negative for Democrats this fall.

The suit could, of course, help boost turnout among Hispanic voters in key areas across the West. And stridently anti-immigrant rhetoric could turn off independent voters. Yet many foresee a midterm electorate featuring an energized Republican base—for whom the immigration issue has emerged as a priority—prompting moderate white Western voters who are concerned about jobs to decamp to the GOP at least in the short term, political observers said.

“This is a tough issue for Democrats,” said former Colorado Gov. Dick Lamm, a Democrat who is co-director of the Institute for Public Policy Studies at the University of Denver. “Politically, I just can’t think of any place in the West where this is going to play well.”

If you look like you’re siding with illegal immigration, you’re in trouble,” said one national Republican strategist, adding that when it comes to the discussion of secured borders, “people think that’s what should happen.”


But Obama Treachery Surges in 2010 as he stabs in own most desperate supporters in the back in order to benefit himself:

While the suit could prove helpful to President Barack Obama by revving up his own base in 2012 – and, by extension, prove harmful to Republicans that year because they risk offending a key and growing segment of the electorate—the near-term impact is a different matter.[snip]

Wes Gullett, an Arizona political strategist and a former long-time aide to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), said the lawsuit was “manna from heaven” for Republicans.

“Obviously, the White House is tone deaf on Western politics,” said Gullett, who noted he personally opposes the law. “While a lot of people wish that our law wouldn’t go into effect, for the administration to sue on this is crazy. It is just a complete political loser.”

Republicans have failed in recent years to turn the anger towards illegal immigration into a winning election issue, Lamm said, but this year could be different.

This is an issue that is boiling and it is not one that is going to be a happy outcome for Democrats,” said Lamm, who favors tougher immigration and border enforcement policies.”

It’s about saving Obama and screwing his own allies.

“Both sides of the issue are well-aware that, in every survey since Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed the bill into law, voters have shown support for the measure, which greatly complicates the situation for Democrats. Now, at a minimum, they’ll spend what should be a relatively sleepy stretch of summer months defending themselves on a wedge issue.

A May national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found 73 percent of Americans support requiring people to produce papers verifying their legal status if police ask for them.

In Colorado, home to a competitive Senate and gubernatorial race this fall and several vulnerable House Democrats, a Denver Post/9News Poll conducted last month showed even 62 percent of Colorado Hispanic voters – roughly the same percentage as white voters (61 percent) — would favor their state implementing a law similar to the one in Arizona.”

Latinos are not stupid. Latinos do not necessarily support illegal immigration just because it is supposed to be, according to Big Media, what Latinos are supposed to do. It is soft bigotry which presupposes Latinos support illegal immigration from Mexico or anywhere else.

The Dimocratic governors are aware that Obama only cares about his 2012 worries and not about them:

“In a private meeting with White House officials this weekend, Democratic governors voiced deep anxiety about the Obama administration’s suit against Arizona’s new immigration law, worrying that it could cost a vulnerable Democratic Party in the fall elections.

While the weak economy dominated the official agenda at the summer meeting here of the National Governors Association, concern over immigration policy pervaded the closed-door session between Democratic governors and White House officials and simmered throughout the three-day event.

At the Democrats’ meeting on Saturday, some governors bemoaned the timing of the Justice Department lawsuit, according to two governors who spoke anonymously because the discussion was private.

“Universally the governors are saying, ‘We’ve got to talk about jobs,’ ” Gov. Phil Bredesen of Tennessee, a Democrat, said in an interview. “And all of a sudden we have immigration going on.”

He added, “It is such a toxic subject, such an important time for Democrats.

Independent voters are sick and tired of Obama and his dim-witted Dimocrats. The Obama race-baiting on Tea Parties and Latinos is a tactic to red-flag Dimocratic voters to vote.

Latinos are not going to be fooled. Recently another Obama Big Media ally race-baited over the possibility that in the next U.S. Senate there will be zero African-Americans.

“In modern times, four African Americans – Edward Brooke (1967-79) of Massachusetts, Carol Mosley Braun of Illinois (1993-99), Barack Obama (2005-08) of Illinois, and Roland Burris (2009-10) of Illinois – have served, and each has been the lone African-American Senator serving at that point. Braun, Obama and Burris all held the same seat, with Braun winning it during the “Year of the Woman” in 1992, Obama winning it in 2004 before winning the Presidency in 2008, and Burris now holding it as an appointed Senator who will not run for re-election.[snip]

Will the Senate return to its usual lily-white state (it has been segregated longer than it has had an African-American presence) after the 2010 election? That depends on whether Congressman Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.) is able to prevail in his Florida primary on August 24. While former President Bill Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden have held fundraisers for Meek, Meek is not the frontrunner in his primary. [snip]

If Meek can’t pull this one off, the United States Senate will become, again, a segregated body. So much for post-racial America.

The Obama loving, Hopium Guzzling, African-American writer (Julianne Malveaux) of the above article clearly does not believe that Latino Marco Rubio winning the Senate seat would NOT be a plus for “post-racial America”. According to the race-baiters unless your African-American candidate wins then racism has triumphed. Latinos need not apply for these race-baiters. And isn’t it ironic that “racist” Bill Clinton is one of the few doing anything to help the hapless Meeks?

With 74% support for the Arizona law on illegal immigration Obama’s Latino rehearsal for 2012 will not go well. Obama Dimocrats will pay for Obama’s self-centered rehearsals in the here and now elections of 2010. Obama Dimocrats are learning that Obama cannot be trusted by friend nor foe. He simply cannot be trusted.

As the NObama Coalition flourishes with additional millions of bitter, clingy, Americans, Obama’s treacheries are also surging.

On this Bastille Day, we celebrate Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. But we look forward to November when the guillotine will rend it’s justice at the polls.

Share

146 thoughts on “We Will Not Be Silenced – The NObama Coalition Grows As Obama Treachery Surges To High Tide, Part II

  1. BY NOW, THE U.S. PUBLIC IS ONTO THE SHAM ACT

    80% of surveyed Americans think “Obama’s Financial Reform Bill” will be as good as his HealthScare Bill.

    noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aclRkBNnumYo

    Wall Street Fix Seen Ineffectual by Four out of Five in U.S.
    =====================

    By Rich Miller

    July 14 (Bloomberg) — Americans harbor doubts that a financial-regulation bill about to be passed by Congress will do what President Barack Obama says it will: help avoid another crisis and make their finances safer.

    Almost four out of five Americans surveyed in a Bloomberg National Poll this month say they have just a little or no confidence that the measure being championed by congressional Democrats will prevent or significantly soften a future crisis. More than three-quarters say they don’t have much or any confidence the proposal will make their savings and financial assets more secure.

    A plurality — 47 percent — says the bill will do more to protect the financial industry than consumers; 38 percent say consumers would benefit more.

    “Banks and the government are making out, not the ordinary person,” says Lenore Critzer, a 70-year-old retiree and poll participant who lives in Nelson, Ohio, about 40 miles from Cleveland. “We’re going to have another crisis and worse.”

    While skeptical about the bill’s benefits, Americans don’t want a return to the days before the financial markets suffered their biggest turmoil since the Great Depression: A plurality of respondents says they have become more supportive in recent months of tougher regulations. By a three-to-one margin, Americans have grown more favorable to stronger regulation rather than less. Even Republicans have become more inclined to stricter oversight.

    ‘A Farce’

    “What happened was a farce,” says Victor Bruno, a 58- year-old surgeon in Westfield, New Jersey. “These guys were just gambling with our money. Something needs to be done.”

    Americans are about evenly divided on the question of government regulation in general. Thirty-five percent of those polled see the need for more oversight, while a third prefer less; 30 percent say the current situation is adequate. In some other national polls before the crisis, a plurality favored less government regulation.

    A plurality of respondents age 55 and older — 39 percent – – still favors a smaller government role. Younger Americans don’t agree, with only a quarter of those under 35 in favor of less regulation.

    Skepticism about the financial bill, which may be approved this week, cuts across political party lines. Seven in 10 Democrats have little or no confidence the proposals will avert or significantly lessen the impact of another financial catastrophe; 68 percent doubt it will make their savings more secure.

    Revamping Oversight

    The proposed legislation reshapes oversight of Wall Street, creating a consumer bureau at the Federal Reserve, a council of regulators to monitor firms for risk to the financial system, and a mechanism for liquidating large institutions whose collapse would threaten the economy.

    Obama praised the overhaul as “the most comprehensive reform of Wall Street” since the Depression, telling reporters at the White House yesterday that the measure “will prevent a financial crisis like this from happening again, by protecting consumers against the unfair practices of credit card companies and mortgage lenders.”

    Americans say the restructuring won’t make much difference in the way Wall Street does business. Almost half of those polled say banks will make few if any changes in the way they act in response to the overhaul; another 22 percent expect only minor changes.

    “They’re just going to find a way around the new rules,” says Pamela Evans, 24, who lives in Everett, Washington, and has two jobs, at a building company and a check-cashing firm.

    Democrats More Optimistic

    Democrats have greater optimism that consumers will benefit more than the financial industry from the proposals, with 51 percent saying that will be the result. Just 28 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of independents agree.

    Most Americans reject any new government rescues of financial institutions, such as arranged for New York-based Citigroup Inc. and insurer American International Group Inc., according to the poll.

    They also oppose letting the market work and having the private sector deal with the consequences of any collapse.

    Half the respondents think the federal government should force a company to work its way out of any problems, including bankruptcy, through the courts.

    Down on Bailouts

    Almost 60 percent of respondents say the $700 billion plan that Congress passed in late 2008 to help the banks — the Troubled Asset Relief Program — was an unnecessary bailout.

    The Bloomberg National Poll was conducted July 9-12 for Bloomberg News by Selzer & Co. of Des Moines, Iowa. Based on interviews with 1,004 U.S. adults, the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

    “The mood of the American public is highly skeptical toward government and its ability to do right by the average person,” says J. Ann Selzer, president of the polling firm. “That explains some of the apparent contradiction in seeing a need for more regulation yet having little confidence that what is currently on the table will do much for consumers. They just feel they’ve been played and they don’t want to be fooled again.”

    To see the methodology and exact wording of the poll questions, click on the attachment tab at the top of the story.

  2. Rgb44Hrc, here is a brand new poll from a “D” firm PPP:

    http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/07/obama-approval-hits-record-low.html

    Barack Obama’s hit a record low in PPP’s monthly national polling on his approval numbers. 45% of voters approve of the job he’s doing while 52% disapprove. This is the first time he’s topped the 50% disapproval mark in our surveys.

    There isn’t any one smoking gun to point to in explaining Obama’s diminished standing. In the last month he’s seen small increases in the number of voters disapproving of him among Democrats (from 13% to 16%), Republicans (84% to 88%), and independents (55% to 56%) alike.

    The two most troublesome things for Obama in his numbers at this point are his standing among white voters and independents. Whites now disapprove of Obama by nearly a 2:1 margin, with 62% giving him bad marks and only 35% saying he’s doing a good job. With independents his approval is just 40% and 56% disapprove of his performance.

    Nearly four months after its passage PPP continues not to find any evidence voters are warming up to the health care bill. 40% of voters favor it while 53% are opposed, numbers actually representing a regression since a poll right before the final vote found 45% support and 49% opposition. That shift may be more reflective of the President’s declining popularity than anything having to do with the bill itself, but nevertheless it seems clear Democrats continue to lose the public opinion battle on the issue.

  3. admin,

    obama, his thugs (including the Black Panthers) are race-baiting/building on their race card tactics ahead of the mid-term elections. They know that chances are very dim that the dims will do well so they are firing up their fellow African Americans to fight to the death.

    btw…I love the clip from Casablanca.

  4. Great post Admin-

    Carville saying not to use 2010 as a protest vote against Obama or we might get stuck with an undesired policy.

    Hello!

    A vote against Obama is a protest vote, it means the voter thinks Obama’s policies stink to high Heaven.

    Does Carville imply that voters are to stupid to know what their votes really mean…

    Reading between the lines:
    To all the Democrats that have been shoved under the bus since 2008, white men, white women and everyone else that supported Hillary Clinton in the primaries…don’t vote for anyone but Obama or you will get stuck with a Republican.

    Maybe if they were sure all the stolen votes, the voting and election fraud could be duplicated, and all those same felons and kids could cast their votes in 2010 and 2012, then the Obama Administration would never need Hillary voters at all.

    ——

    The most valuable key I have is……………..
    the survey the DNC sent me yesterday asking if I wanted Obama to run for a second term.

  5. admin,

    Yes, admin. Obama, his minions and the ‘Barack Panthers’ are race-baiting ahead of the mid-terms. Obama’s way of non-repayment for their help getting him elected 2 yrs ago. Voters are not buying into him playing the race card this time around as Obama will realize soon enough. I’m smilin’-

  6. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39729.html

    Some African-American tea party candidates are displeased by a resolution that the NAACP approved on Tuesday calling the grass-roots conservative movement “racist.”

    “I have not experienced the charges of racism that the NAACP is touting,” Vernon Parker, an African-American tea party congressional candidate in Arizona, told POLITICO.

    Parker, former mayor of Paradise Valley, said that he has never felt out of place at a tea party rally because of the color of his skin.

    “When I go to tea party events, people don’t look at me any differently,” he said. “They didn’t judge me on the color of my skin, quite frankly, they judged me on my principles.”

    “The NAACP should be concerned about bringing jobs to people in depressed areas,” he added, “not the tea party.”

    Tim Scott, a GOP congressional nominee in South Carolina, echoed Parker’s sentiments in a statement.

    “I believe that the NAACP is making a grave mistake in stereotyping a diverse group of Americans who care deeply about their country and who contribute their time, energy and resources to make a difference,” Scott said.

    “As I campaign in South Carolina, I participate in numerous events sponsored by the tea party, 9/12, Patriot, and other like-minded groups, and I have had the opportunity to get to know many of the men and women who make up these energetic grass-roots organizations,” Scott added.

    “Americans need to know that the tea party is a color-blind movement that has principled differences with many of the leaders in Washington, both Democrats and Republicans.”

    The resolution the NAACP approved at its annual conference in Kansas City alleges that tea party groups have used racist epithets in attacks on President Barack Obama and have verbally and physically abused African-American members of Congress.

  7. The most valuable key I have is……………..
    the survey the DNC sent me yesterday asking if I wanted Obama to run for a second term.
    *********************8

    TOO FUNNY

    ********8
    ADMIN,

    What about Brown voting foe the finicial measure?

  8. Another too funny, but also too sad:

    Congressman Says He Didn’t Know Black Panther Case Because Media Didn’t Cover It
    A California congressman who drew shouts of disbelief at a town hall meeting when he said he was unaware of the voter intimidation case involving the New Black Panther Party explained that the reason he hadn’t heard about the story was because his news sources didn’t cover it. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., in a written statement released late Tuesday, accused Fox News of launching “attacks on me” for showing video of the meeting. He said he would soon send a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder regarding the incident and “the importance of allegations of voter intimidation,” but said the “major sources of information which I rely upon most” did not mention the issue.
    h t t p://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/13/congressman-shouted-claiming-know-new-black-panther-case/?test=latestnews

  9. admin, please pardon my ignorance. This is a wonderful, complete and engaging post. Thank you!

  10. Yipes the French national anthem is hard core.

    Slit their throats…..

    their blood on the fields like water…………..

    Sock-It to ‘um!!!!

  11. A common excuse used by the media for the Fraud’s plummeting poll numbers is that Americans are just too impatient; that the Fraud can’t be expected to fix the economy in such a short period of time. They don’t seem to realize that people are not angry because he hasn’t fixed the economy; they’re angry because he doesn’t appear to have the slightest idea what he’s doing – on the economy or on any issue! Surely the media can’t really be that clueless to believe their excuse, can they? The Fraud’s incompetence on every issue has exceeded our wildest expections.

  12. Mike M

    The Fraud’s incompetence on every issue has exceeded our wildest expectations.

    ——-

    YUP!

  13. When the dead start voting AGAINST Obama and his supporters–in this case Reid, you know they are in trouble.
    ———————–
    Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Wednesday, July 14th at 1:00PM EDT
    11 Comments
    Not even the dead want him re-elected at this point:

    Chances are good you never met Charlotte McCourt during her 84 years, but I’m willing to bet you’ll be hearing about her in the coming days now that her obituary has taken Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to task.

    Her obituary, printed in Tuesday’s Review-Journal, reads in part, “We believe that Mom would say she was mortified to have taken a large role in the election of Harry Reid to U.S. Congress. Let the record show Charlotte was displeased with his work. Please, in lieu of flowers, vote for another more worthy candidate.”

    And here we all thought that a Democrat could never lose the necro-American vote.

    Crossposted to Moe Lane.

  14. The Americans have every right to be impatient. He promised to do a lot of things early. He has done very little, and we are 1 1/2 years into his term. After all it was he that set the schedule. He also has failed to reveal any sembliance of a plan. How long does it take for him to get into the job. You onlY get a short period of time to impress people, and so far he had NOT.

    That interview with the Former Hillary Lady above indicates that he will come back by 2012. Other so called experts say it would take an event like 9/11 to bring him back. How can he impress anyone, if he no longer has a majority in the House of Reps, and maybe even the Senate.

  15. Boxed In. Which is why he plays the race card.
    ————————–

    OBAMA DIGS A DEEPER HOLE

    By DICK MORRIS

    Published on TheHill.com on July 13, 2010

    Printer-Friendly Version

    Any president facing a recession has a basic conundrum to resolve: If he doesn’t try to make people believe that a recovery is in progress, nobody will. But if he tries to make them believe that all is getting better, he risks being seen as out of touch at best or insensitive at worst.

    It was just such a predicament that landed George H.W. Bush in trouble in 1991 when he preached that the economy was emerging from the recession, only to be seen as rich and elitist for his efforts. Things got so bad that this verbally challenged president once blurted out his staff’s strategy memo by saying, “Message: I care.” That was about as well-received as Nixon’s statement that “I am not a crook.”

    Now Obama is trying to sell the unsellable — that the economy is getting better. In Nevada, he said: “But the question is, No. 1: Are we on the right track? And the answer is, yes.” Presumably those who are gullible enough to think they can beat the casino odds in Vegas are ripe for this form of self-delusion, but it leaves the rest of us cold. The fact is that, when asked directly in polls whether the U.S. is on the right or the wrong track, by more than two to one, Americans feel the nation is on the wrong track.

    Fifteen million are unemployed and, adding in underemployed, part-time workers and those who have given up looking, the total is 26 million. So Obama’s statements of confidence are a bit like Herbert Hoover’s ritual incantation that “Prosperity is just around the corner.”

    Polls show that 70 percent of Americans do not believe that the stimulus program has worked and a similar percentage feel the best thing we could do to create jobs is to cut taxes.

    But Obama’s conundrum is that if he is not the font of optimism, who will be? Economists are increasingly coming to see that the so-called recovery was, in fact, a false dawn and that we are entering a double-dip recession (if, indeed, we ever left the initial downturn). In our book 2010: Take Back America — A Battle Plan, we predict a false dawn followed by a double dip — and now it is upon us.

    It is now time for the Republicans to counterattack against Obama by calling him out of touch with the realities of the economy and to take advantage of the commonly held idea that the president doesn’t know what is going on in the streets. In Obama’s case, the GOP cannot then turn “out of touch” into an accusation of insensitivity (as the Democrats did to Bush-41). But they can push the idea that Obama is so wrapped up in his liberal ideology that he cannot see the reality in front of him — that big spending stimulus hasn’t worked and won’t work.

    The Fox News poll now shows that 55 percent of all likely voters feel that it is appropriate to call Obama a socialist. This epithet, which most Americans did not see fit to use even a few months ago, fits him well. Republicans should make the point that he is willing to sacrifice all for his ideology and that he is blind to the reality of the damage his spending and borrowing are causing.

    When a president runs around the country saying things that two-thirds of America does not believe, it is time to counterattack vigorously and show how out of touch he really is.

    Then, with every invocation of optimism, Obama will be digging himself deeper and deeper into the hole

  16. JanH
    July 14th, 2010 at 5:09 pm

    That Alicia girl is an asshat. Obumbles has had more successes than failures so far? Does she live in Neverland with Bubbles the chimp? President Clinton critisizing Obumbles is just Bill being Bill?? Asshat. Thanks for that link JanH!! Fox may spur the rise of Hillary yet!! 😀

  17. Today we find ourselves immersed in the worst economic downturn in 80 years. What kind of a president would fail to take appropriate steps to create jobs, and seek to divide the country along racial lines? Only a man with no conscience and no loyalty to the American People. Obama fits that bill. I do not think he gives a damn, and therein lies the tragedy.

  18. Hillary dives in to the mix……

    Clinton to look into senators’ request on BP, Libya

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday she would look into a request by U.S. lawmakers that the State Department investigate whether oil company BP Plc had a hand in the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D36P20100714

  19. The hardest working person in our goverment.

    Press Releases: Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Travel to Asia and Afghanistan
    Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:03:25 -0500

    Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Travel to Asia and Afghanistan

    Philip J. Crowley
    Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs
    Washington, DC

    July 14, 2010

    ——————————————————————————–

    Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will travel to the Republic of Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan July 19-23.

    In Seoul, Secretary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates will join their respective Republic of Korea counterparts, Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan and Minister of National Defense Kim Tae-young, for a 2+2 meeting to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Korean War. Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates will also meet with President Lee Myung-bak.

    In Vietnam, the Secretary will meet with senior Vietnamese leaders to discuss key bilateral and regional issues. The Secretary will also attend a luncheon highlighting the 15th anniversary of the U.S.-Vietnam bilateral relationship. Later in the day, the Secretary will participate in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Post Ministerial Conference and following that she will join the Foreign Ministers of Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam for their second meeting to discuss the Lower Mekong Initiative. Secretary Clinton will also lead the U.S. delegation to the 17th ASEAN Regional Forum Ministerial in Hanoi.

    PRN: 2010/947

    The Office of Electronic Information, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
    External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

  20. Remember the 4 R,s of the Agenda for the two strangers in our WH BO and M

    Retribution
    Restitution
    Redistribution
    Revolution

    Hillary your country needs you and we are at your Back.

    By ABM90 A very worried old guy and a Patriot

  21. TheRock
    July 14th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
    —————-

    LOL…I couldn’t believe the garbage that came out of that clip.

  22. ABM90
    July 14th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
    Remember the 4 R,s of the Agenda for the two strangers in our WH BO and M

    Retribution
    Restitution
    Redistribution
    Revolution
    ______________________________

    It’s working for them until they experience the ills coming their way. Bill and Hill, that is! 🙂

  23. Well, Tingles finally came right out and said it. He stated that the Fraud’s problem is not his agenda but the fact that he has been unable to sell it to the country, and he needs BILL CLINTON to do the selling for him this fall in order to minimize the impending damage to Dims. He further stated that Bill Clinton is a real Democrat who presided over successful programs and a politician that people will listen to. Of course, that’s true about Bill but can you believe Matthews’s nerve, after he has based his career on trashing both Bill and Hillary. Now, he is so desperate that he’s moved his kneepads from the Fraud to BC. What a despicable, smirking, disingenuous blowhard.

  24. As smart and as well-respected as Bill Clinton is, I doubt even he can sell the swill obama is trying to sell.

  25. Mike Marks
    July 14th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
    __________________

    Righto!, Mike Marks-

    Whether BO realizes it or not- he is allowing the emergence and acceptance of the new head of the Dem Party, BC. A man people can believe in. Past performance extraordinare.

  26. Bill Clinton is selling himself. He is making himself available to the democrats who are facing the vacuum created by Obama’s erratic presidency.

  27. There must be many thoughts running through Bill’s mind right now. His presence will be reassuring to many democratic officials have lost faith in Mr. Obama. If he can mitigate the disaster in November then he will be the savior of the democratic party, and all the people whose jobs are saved will owe him big time. But I think there is a deeper logic here too. As recently as two weeks ago, Krauthammer stated that he doubted that there would be a second dip. Now there is more talk of that than ever, and the recent move by China will not make things easier. If the economy slips into a deeper recession then Obama will be blamed and so will the party. Hoover was blamed for the last depression, and his party spent the next twenty years in the political wilderness, i.e. 1932-1952. That is what they are looking at now. Therefore Bill can help sell these programs but he must not allow himself to become enmeshed in them since the odds of success are long indeed. Perhaps the best solution would be for Obama to take those Corinthian Pillars with him and hit the road. Yes, his golf game is improving since he is playing when he should be working. Frankly, he needs to focus on the job.

  28. Wow, I don’t live in Nevada so I wouldn’t have to cast a vote, but this is one powerful ad against Harry Reid….

  29. What they are hoping is that Bill can take the edge off the race card they have been playing, reassure nervous democrats and reverse the 2 to 1 disadvantage with indies. There needs to be an agreed to quid pro quo however namely that Barack steps aside in 2012, and Soros is no longer the kingmaker in the democratic party. The first may be easier to engineer than the second, because I think by 2012 Barack will want out, but Soros will not want him out. He worked too hard to get him in.

  30. Wow, I don’t live in Nevada so I wouldn’t have to cast a vote, but this is one powerful ad against Harry Reid….

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BzQvDVSUD8&feature=player_embedded#!
    —————————–
    Great video. The next one should highlight who Dirty Harry takes money from. The high donor list would include a lot of corporate bad guys. And it could note how much their profits have soared since Harry became Senate Majority Leader. The contrast between what Nevadans have gotten from Dirty Harry’s candidacy vs what robber baron corporations have gotten out of it would support the premise that he robs from the poor and gives to the rich. No reason to vote for him.

  31. I think most would agree that the Fraud is not enjoying himself these days. Despite the celebrity perks that are so important to him, the tanking polls and widespread criticism from all quarters are taking their toll. Even his speeches, one of which I was unfortunate enough to catch a snippet of, are listless with his predictable cadences and hackneyed “I-will-not-rest-until” cliches. He’s being tuned out in droves.

    When he took over, I figured that he would at least get people to do the hard work for him and then take the credit (his usual way). But it’s truly shocking how incompetent EVERYONE is in this administration (except HC, of course). It’s really defining the limitations of academics with no real-world experience making policy only from reading a narrow range of books.

  32. wbb
    Wow, I don’t live in Nevada so I wouldn’t have to cast a vote, but this is one powerful ad against Harry Reid….
    —————————–
    Great video
    ———————–
    Instead of spending more money on Reid, I wish Clinton supporters could hire this film maker to do a quick video of why Clinton supporters will not back the Democratic party until the corruption in the DNC and Obama Administration are eliminated. Short video clips of the caucus fraud, sexism against Hillary, racist remarks against Bill, delegate votes of Hillary given to Obama, etc…and ending with the final vote tally were Hillary wins.

  33. Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.
    =============================================================

    This is the message that you (admin) have said from the very beginning and no true word have ever been written.

  34. Shadowfax
    July 14th, 2010 at 8:57 pm
    ________________________

    Right on- Shadowfax. Yup, The ABHR factor. Anybody But Harry Reid.

    As I’ve said before, Obama is earmarked for the UN presidency or president of the IMF and why he doesn’t care what happens to the Dem Party. (They) served their purpose for Soros-getting him elected, “Politics for Dummies.” Is it any wonder why Paddy Kennedy is afraid of running for re-election? Safer for him jumoing off a cliff- at least he knows he’ll land somewhere with a bottom…

    Obama has somewhat accomplished the goals Soros set out for him- i.. wrecking the US economy, ii.. threatening war with Russia, iii.. upending relations with Israel, iv.. selling and passing Health Care Reform, v.. freeing up the Gulf’s oil rigs for use by Soros. Obama’s biggest failure was v.. the Global Warming initiative- TG!. Just to name a few. Obama’s biggest acomplishment? Making himself and his wife a joke and the laughing stock of the international community.

  35. WBBOEI@9:03PM

    “Barack will want out, but Soros will not want him out. He worked too hard to get him in.”

    Aside from the destruction to the country, that would almost be poetic justice, wouldn’t it? Reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode “Escape Clause,” where the protagonist made a deal with the devil allowing him to live forever, and then is sentenced to life in prison.

  36. obama doesn’t have a clue how to solve America’s biggest problems. He is an inexperienced wannabe teen idol who thinks that he just has to speak and everything will fall into place.

    Yes any potus should want to solve unemployment, poverty, immigration, etc…, but this one keeps screwing it up.

  37. JULY 15, 2010

    Hillary Clinton for President

    The secretary of state could mount a formidable challenge to Obama.

    By PETE DU PONT

    America’s economy is failing to produce jobs, increase growth or raise confidence, and it will likely get even worse next year. Our federal government’s spending has increased to $3.7 trillion this year from $2.98 trillion in 2008. Publicly held national debt is up by $2.4 trillion in less than two years, to about 63% percent of GDP from 40%, and is expected to reach 70% by 2012. Add in the unemployment rate, which has remained above 9.4% for over a year, and America is clearly failing economically.

    Next January the economy will be further depressed by increasing tax rates. The top income tax rate will rise to 39.6% from 35%, and the phase-out of itemized deductions and personal exemptions will effectively lift the top bracket to about 40.8%. On New Year’s Day the tax on dividends is scheduled to go up to 39.6% from 15%, and come 2013, ObamaCare will add another 3.8%.

    Other bad public policies will further drag down the economy. ObamaCare will increase individual costs and expand the deficit. Failing energy policies, from Washington’s inept response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to its effort to limit tapping America’s oil supplies, will drive up our use of imported foreign oil beyond the current 67% of our country’s oil consumption.

    ***
    Add together all these increases in government regulation, spending and taxes and a dim employment outlook, and the result is a dramatic national decline in support of the White House, Congress and their administration of our national policies.

    So what can be done to change America’s policies and make our economy stronger? For one thing, we could elect a president with different thinking. Almost any Republican candidate would have that, and, as we will see in a moment, there is one obvious Democrat who would change our course too.

    And why would the Democratic Party want to do that? Because the re-election of President Obama is becoming more problematic. The latest Rasmussen Reports polls show the dramatic decline of the presidential approval index, the difference between those who “strongly approve” of Mr. Obama’s performance and those who “strongly disapprove.” It began at plus 25% when the new president was sworn in, and has steadily declined to minus 13%.

    It isn’t just the president whose poll numbers are falling fast. According to recent Harris polling, Vice President Biden viewed favorably by 26% of the public and unfavorably by 45%. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does even worse, 20% positive to 49% negative. A June Nevada poll gave Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader, 33% approval and 52% disapproval.

    But the greatest contrast and most interesting statistic is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ratings: 45% favorable and only 35% unfavorable.

    That is not surprising, and there are some obvious factors that suggest she might have a chance of defeating President Obama if she were to challenge him for the 2012 Democratic nomination.

    First, as Peggy Noonan wrote earlier this month, the conclusion one hears from most “normal” American people is that the president “is in over his head, and out of his depth.” Even most progressives agree that “the Obama presidency has been a big disappointment,” according to Eric Alterman of The Nation. That means there’s a big opportunity for Mrs. Clinton.

    Second, she is physically and intellectually strong enough to take on a difficult campaign. She showed that running against Obama two years ago.

    Third, she is one of the most experienced prospective candidates the Democratic Party has had in a long while: wife of a governor, U.S. first lady, senator and now secretary of state. This is a good record to run on as someone who knows how the government works.

    Fourth, she is an experienced foreign-policy adviser who understands the threats to our national security: unresolved conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, rising threats of nuclear capability in Iran and North Korea, and uncertainties in Pakistan.

    Fifth, experience will be even more important to voters in the 2012 presidential election, whose 2008 gamble on someone with little experience is proving costly.

    Finally, Washington’s deadly left-liberal policies that have propelled the American economy in a very bad direction can be turned around. If Mrs. Clinton made the case that America must get rid of the huge debt the current administration has created, must create much better economic growth with lower tax rates, and must strongly assist employer job creation, she would appeal to a broad voter coalition.

    ***
    All this must be obvious to the inner circle of the current president’s administration. So what is he to do? That’s pretty simple–just add his secretary of state to the 2012 ticket as his new running mate.

    We don’t know whether Mr. Obama is already thinking about making this kind of change next year, but we do know he needs some very good policy outcomes to be re-elected. And if none of these Obama changes come to pass, Mrs. Clinton could put together a very effective campaign to get the nomination for herself.

    Considering how badly things are going in America just now, that could turn out to be a slam dunk for her and the disgruntled Democratic Party.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704518904575365482705270718.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

  38. Today we find ourselves immersed in the worst economic downturn in 80 years.
    **********
    A greater than 20% real unemployment rate…1 in 4 males in their prime working years are jobless, pending drastic cuts in the social
    “safety net” so that the sociopath in chief can continue to pay of the trillions to his corporate masters and that added on top of these stats:

    Total Net Worth

    Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

    2007 34.6% 50.5% 15.0%

    Financial Wealth

    Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

    2007 42.7% 50.3% 7.0%

    I suspect that since 2007 and the collapse of the housing market and deflation of real estate values, net worth and financial wealth are almost equal. With 20% unemployment and 80% of the American population having less than 7% of the countries financial wealth…those are social revolution numbers, IMO.

  39. Bill Clinton’s 2010 Role: Validator for Endangered Candidates

    The White House and Bill Clinton have begun the process of gradually charting out the role the former president will play in helping Democrats maintain control of Congress in 2010.

    On Tuesday morning, longtime Clinton confidant Terry McAuliffe told MSNBC that Clinton had already been in talks with President Obama’s political team in an effort to coordinate his fall schedule. A person familiar with those and other conversations, meanwhile, elaborated to the Huffington Post about the extent to which the former president will hit the trail.

    Clinton, the source said, would be dispatched to places where he has a proven record of being a “validator” for endangered political candidates. On the Senate side, this means trips to Arkansas, New Hampshire, and potentially California. He’ll be “helpful in a place like Kentucky,” the source added. He has a special relationship with Florida Democrat Kendrick Meek as well.

    On the House side, the process is likely to be more improvised. At the behest of the White House, Clinton traveled to upstate Pennsylvania several months ago to campaign on behalf of Mark Critz. He ended up propelling the Democratic candidate to a surprisingly large margin of victory in the special election to replace the late Rep. Jack Murtha (D-Penn). Whether he can duplicate that effort will be determined by polling numbers and Clinton’s past performance in those districts.

    Finally, the source added, expect to see Clinton’s participation peak closer towards November than during the dog days of summer. This is, in part, because of the former president’s already exhausting schedule. Mainly, however, it’s because his effectiveness could be optimized during a campaign’s late, frenetic stages.

    “In the closing days of the campaign he has an ability to be a little more aggressive than a sitting president could be,” the source said.

    Clinton and the White House have not always had a coordinated 2010 philosophy. The president caused a stir when he publicly backed the election of Andrew Romanoff, the former speaker of the House in Colorado, over sitting Senator Michael Bennet, in that state’s Democratic primary. The endorsement wasn’t entirely unexpected. Clinton and Romanoff share ties dating back to his administration. But it caught the White House by surprise, with no heads up offered in advance.

    The two parties have worked out the miscommunication in subsequent conversations. And while the former president isn’t expected to simply do Obama’s bidding, he is viewed, within the administration’s political team, as a valuable weapon as Election Day approaches.

    “They did not want Barack Obama in Pennsylvania-12,” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough said during his interview with McAuliffe. “Bill Clinton goes up, wins. Arkansas? Holy cow. Other than what happened in Massachusetts, the biggest shock of the year — Blanche Lincoln winning in Arkansas. Bill Clinton’s got the Midas touch.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/13/bill-clintons-2010-role-v_n_644694.html

  40. JanH
    July 14th, 2010 at 9:56 pm

    Bill Clinton’s 2010 Role and Beyond: SuperDem, with a big red cape.

    And his lady love sidekick, SuperWoman Madmam President Hillary Rodham Clinton!

    I am proud to be living in the time of this duo.

  41. Shadowfax
    July 14th, 2010 at 10:07 pm
    JanH
    July 14th, 2010 at 9:56 pm

    Bill Clinton’s 2010 Role and Beyond: SuperDem, with a big red cape.

    And his lady love sidekick, SuperWoman Madmam President Hillary Rodham Clinton!

    I am proud to be living in the time of this duo.
    _______________________________

    Meee Tooooo! 🙂

    Anyone thinking these two aren’t of ‘one mind’ isn’t thinking correctly. They operate best as ONE person of ONE mind even though they are hardly seen together in the news. As they have done for over 35 yrs.

    The beginning of the Primary Campaign is the proof that proves the rule. Singularly, they are powerful in their own right. Together, as a Team, they are hard to beat… (aside) [didn’t want to jinx it by using the word ‘unbeatable’ is that sentence…]

  42. One thing I have noticed in all the films and pics of Bill, he seems to be having a great time doing what he is doing. It doesn’t look forced. I think he and Hillary have a plan and its going full steam ahead.

  43. I agree, Confloyd. Not only does Bill appear to be enjoying himself, he also comes off as extremely confident. Bill and Hillary are both brilliant in so many ways, but neither one of them can act their way out of the proverbial paper bag. Whenever they’re forced to say or do something for the Party or for That One or whoever, they either sound like they’re reciting prerehearsed lines or else their body language gives them away.

    Bill on the campaign trail does not help Obama. Can you imagine being an ordinary swing voter sitting in the audience at one of these events? All those folks are going to do is remember what a great President Bill was and how easy they had it back in the 1990s. Then they’ll think about Hillary, as in “Aww, shucks, it’s too bad she didn’t win in 2008. I hope she runs again.”

    I just don’t see how any of it makes Obama look good or helps further his cause.

  44. Jen the MIer

    I just don’t see how any of it makes Obama look good or helps further his cause.
    ———-
    Having to call in an ex-President because the current pResident can’t lead or has no competence…doesn’t make the Fraud look ligit, but it helps the country by having a real leader in charge.
    Hillary is off saving the rest of the world, Bill helps at home and in his group all over the world…while BO golfs.

    Talk about a lame duck.

  45. I have never known in my life time a past president who has been as busy of Bill Clinton. He has develop a deep sense of trust with the American People. I feel that same trust with HRC.

    Too bad many people voted for a myth, or for the party. As they say, the party, etc can be wrong, but your gut instincts usually are not. She won EVERY debate, even though the media tried to play it different. That was where the gut instincts should of told us who we wanted at 3 a.m. answering the phone call.

  46. Jen and Shadowfax, I agree, it will remind everyone how good Bill and Hillary are in every way. Gibbs did not help Obama and the dems. I read somewhere that Gibbs is sick of DC, my guess he said this to get out of DC. Obama appears to be doing the same thing.
    Hannity seems to think Rahm and Valerie will have to testify on the Blago trial. Also the testimonies conflict with what Obama has said about his senate seat.
    Something is just not right….Nancy coming out against Gibbs…it looks systematic if you ask me…they need Bill and Hillary and it appears that Bill is taking the reins of the DNC back.

    Jen, you are right…anytime Bill and Hillary are forced to do something it shows….Hillary is great on SNL and Jay Leno, but when she threw in the towel it was hard for her and it showed, and it was heartbreaking for me to watch it especially watching Jesse Jackson Jr. laughing/smirking in the background.

    The gulf that I saw last week had no dolphins…I think there has been a huge fish kill that BP is covering up….I hope they are able to cap the well because we had such a good time at the beach we want to go back next year.

  47. Today we find ourselves immersed in the worst economic downturn in 80 years.
    **********
    A greater than 20% real unemployment rate…1 in 4 males in their prime working years are jobless, pending drastic cuts in the social
    “safety net” so that the sociopath in chief can continue to pay of the trillions to his corporate masters and that added on top of these stats:

    Total Net Worth

    Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

    2007 34.6% 50.5% 15.0%

    Financial Wealth

    Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

    2007 42.7% 50.3% 7.0%

    I suspect that since 2007 and the collapse of the housing market and deflation of real estate values, net worth and financial wealth are almost equal. With 20% unemployment and 80% of the American population having less than 7% of the countries financial wealth…those are social revolution numbers, IMO
    ———————————————————————
    Those are definitely social revolution numbers. This is why jobs should have been the number 1 priority for Messiah Obama. Instead, he followed the Soros aganda of health care deform, cap and trade, financial reform with no teeth and soon amnesty. They had $100B jobs bill but Reid cut it down to $10B. The two years we have lost under Obama’s benighted leadership will cost us eight years to make up. The wildly inaccurate gdp projections, the prolifigate spending, quadrupling the deficit and adding over a trillion dollar in less than two years have dug us into a deeper hole. What we are left with is a greater maldistribution of wealth than ever, record levels of unemployment and no recovery in sight. Other countries are prospering now, but not here. I think it is madness to cut off unemployment until the job market recovers. As bad as that is the alternative is worse. Also we must lean very hard on employers who hire undocumented aliens to undercut labor markets. Jail time. The stage is set for a hard swing to the right. Obama opened the door for it through sheer incompetence and playing the race card in Arizona and Philadelphia. Finally, as Obama has to show optimism in the economy but the more he does so the more out of touch he looks. I do not see a short term cure, because this time it really is the economy stupid.

  48. Now that mr. ‘lack of experience’ called Bill to the White House to figure out how to fix the economy and jobs…I hope to God that Bill puts a big ‘Clinton’ stamp on it, so if it works, Barry will not be able to steal the credit for it.

  49. Instead of spending more money on Reid, I wish Clinton supporters could hire this film maker to do a quick video of why Clinton supporters will not back the Democratic party until the corruption in the DNC and Obama Administration are eliminated. Short video clips of the caucus fraud, sexism against Hillary, racist remarks against Bill, delegate votes of Hillary given to Obama, etc…and ending with the final vote tally were Hillary wins.
    ———————————————————-
    Good idea. Dr. Lynette Long could provide a lot of the data and help write the script. Live testimonials etc.

  50. Greta talked about this on her show and said 20 states might join Arizona…

    9 States Back Arizona Immigration Law Against Feds

    States have the authority to enforce immigration laws and protect their borders, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox said Wednesday in a legal brief on behalf of nine states supporting Arizona’s immigration law.

    Cox, one of five Republicans running for Michigan governor, said Michigan is the lead state backing Arizona in federal court and is joined by Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands

    more on HuffPuff

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/14/arizona-immigration-lawsuit-9-states_n_646997.html

  51. Good idea. Dr. Lynette Long could provide a lot of the data and help write the script. Live testimonials etc.
    ———-
    Yes, she has the goods but isn’t she in the tank for Republican’s now…and why did she close her data to the public?

  52. Now that mr. ‘lack of experience’ called Bill to the White House to figure out how to fix the economy and jobs…I hope to God that Bill puts a big ‘Clinton’ stamp on it, so if it works, Barry will not be able to steal the credit for it.
    ——————————–
    I do not believe this was Obama’s idea. I think higher ups in the party demanded that he do it. They know he has no coattails of his own. And at this point they are facing the possible loss of both houses of congress. To outsiders like us, this Administration looks more like a keystone cops operation with every passing day. To insiders it must be orders of magnitude worse. The rumor mill is churning out an Obama disaster a day etc.

  53. Good idea. Dr. Lynette Long could provide a lot of the data and help write the script. Live testimonials etc.
    ———-
    Yes, she has the goods but isn’t she in the tank for Republican’s now…and why did she close her data to the public?
    —–
    Not sure. I doubt she was in the tank for the Republicans. After witnessing how Obama stole the primary, she may have tried to help the McCain forces, but even if that is so I am sure she remains like many of us democrats in exile, unwilling to accept the legitimacy of the fascist Obamacrats who now rule the party, and are driving the country over the cliff.

  54. wbb
    You are probably right about Dr. Long being a dem in exile…I just thought she threw in the towel by not letting that caucus fraud data on her website visible to the public.
    I used it to prove I wasn’t wearing a tinfoil hat to Dems so they would see proof of Barry’s corruption, and then it was not available.
    We do have the documentaries, but the data is much more conclusive…especially since Hillary and Bill also have copies of all of it.

  55. national debt commission painted a gloomy picture as the United States struggles to get its spending under control.

    Republican Alan Simpson and Democrat Erskine Bowles told a meeting of the National Governors Association that everything needs to be considered — including curtailing popular tax breaks, such as the home mortgage deduction, and instituting a financial trigger mechanism for gaining Medicare coverage.

    The nation’s total federal debt next year is expected to exceed $14 trillion — about $47,000 for every U.S. resident.

    “This debt is like a cancer,” Bowles said Sunday in a sober presentation nonetheless lightened by humorous asides between him and Simpson. “It is truly going to destroy the country from within.”

    Simpson said the entirety of the nation’s current discretionary spending is consumed by the Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security programs.

    “The rest of the federal government, including fighting two wars, homeland security, education, art, culture, you name it, veterans, the whole rest of the discretionary budget, is being financed by China and other countries,” said Simpson. China alone currently holds $920 billion in U.S. IOUs.

    Bowles said if the U.S. makes no changes it will be spending $2 trillion by 2020 just for interest on the national debt.

    “Just think about that: All that money, going somewhere else, to create jobs and opportunity somewhere else,” he said.

    Simpson, the former Republican senator from Wyoming, and Bowles, the former White House chief of staff under Democratic President Bill Clinton, head an 18-member commission. It’s charged with coming up with a plan by Dec. 1 to reduce the government’s annual deficits to 3 percent of the national economy by 2015.

    Bowles led successful 1997 talks with Republicans on a balanced budget bill that produced government surpluses the last three years Clinton was in office and the first year of Republican George W. Bush’s presidency. Simpson, as the Senate’s GOP whip in 1990, helped round up votes for a budget bill in which President George H.W. Bush broke his “read my lips” pledge not to raise taxes.

    Despite their backgrounds, both Simpson and Bowles said they were not 100 percent confident of success this time around.

    Simpson labeled the commission members “good people of deep, deep difference, knowing the possibility of the odds of success are rather harrowing to say the least.”

    Bowles also said Congress had to be ready to accept the commission’s findings.

    “What we do is not so hard to figure out; it’s the political consequences of doing it that makes it really tough,” he said.

    Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe was one of those leaders who sat in rapt attention during the presentation, one of the first in public by the commission leaders.

    “I don’t know that I ever heard a gloomier picture painted that created more hope for me,” said Beebe, commending its frankness.

    © Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights

  56. A couple developments on the world economic front which shed light on what is going on.

    1. I never realized how deplorable the working conditions were in China until I spoke to a lady who went did shoe design work for Liz Clayborn until she developed cancer and had to quit. She told me that China is a very difficult place to travel because the air is so polluted and the food is not sanitary. She spent her time in the southern provinces which she accessed from Hong Kong. She said the factories were state run, young girls (no child labor laws) work there under deplorable conditions with no ventilation and poor lighting (no safety and health regulations). She said they work seven days a week and it is not uncommon to work until midnight or later when they have orders. She said she was always having to speak to the state bureaucrats about the welfare of these children by largely to no avail. She said it is most definitely slave labor.

    2. And then there was this article in Mckinsey Quarterly the management consulting firm which is also relevant, and explains what big business is doing and why:

    The Great Rebalancing

    As the center of economic growth shifts from developed to developing countries, global companies should focus on innovation to win in low-cost, high-growth countries. Their survival elsewhere may depend on it.

    The vibrancy of emerging-market growth will not be the only major disruption reshaping the global economy in the next ten years, but it may prove the most profound. This decade will mark the tipping point in a fundamental long-term economic rebalancing that will likely leave traditional Western economies with a lower share of global GDP in 2050 than they had in 1700.

    Two socioeconomic movements are under way.
    • Declining dependency ratios. Virtually all major emerging markets are undergoing demographic shifts that historically have unleashed dynamic economic change: simultaneous labor force growth and rapidly declining birthrates. Simply put, there will be more workers, with fewer mouths to feed, leaving more disposable income.
    • The largest urban migration in history. Each week, nearly one-and-a-half-million people move to cities, almost all in developing markets. The economic impact: dramatic gains in output per worker as people move off subsistence farms and into urban jobs. China and India are seeing labor productivity grow at more than five times the rate of most Western countries as traditionally agrarian economies become manufacturing and service powerhouses.

    These same factors powered Western economic growth for the better part of two centuries. (And they should last well into the next decade—at least until China’s population, finally seeing the full effects of the one-child policy, begins to go gray.)
    In the next decade, emerging-market economies will rapidly evolve from being peripheral players, largely reacting to events set in motion by wealthy Western nations, into powerful economic actors in their own right. They will shed their role as suppliers of low-cost goods and services—the world’s factory—to become large-scale providers of capital, talent, and innovation. (One hint of what’s to come: the number of BRIC1 companies on the Fortune 500 has more than doubled in the past four years alone.)

    Nor is this trend just about China and India. To varying degrees, ASEAN,2 Latin American, and Eastern European nations, as well as portions of the Middle East and North Africa, are taking part in this economic renaissance. Even pockets of sub-Saharan Africa now demonstrate vigor after decades of stagnation.

    For all companies—both established multinationals and emerging-market challengers—this great rebalancing will force major adjustments in strategic focus. No longer can established companies treat emerging markets as a sideshow. Emerging markets will increasingly become the locus of growth in consumption, production, and—most of all—innovation. More and more, global leadership will depend on winning in the emerging markets first.

    Opportunity and adversity are the mothers of invention—emerging markets will be the world’s next fount of innovation
    Consider that more than 70 million people are crossing the threshold to the middle class each year, virtually all in emerging economies. By the end of the decade, roughly 40 percent of the world’s population will have achieved middle-class status by global standards, up from less than 20 percent today. This means opportunity in consumer markets: P&G, for example, hopes to add a billion new customers to its ranks in the next decade, adding to the nearly four billion the company touches today. In recent quarterly earnings reports, nearly every global consumer products company—from Kraft to Nestlé—noted upticks in profits, driven primarily by unexpected gains in emerging markets.

  57. WSJ:
    Almost any Republican candidate would have that, and, as we will see in a moment, there is one obvious Democrat [Hillary] who would change our course too.
    And why would the Democratic Party want to do that? Because the re-election of President Obama is becoming more problematic.

    ===================

    So why are all these GOP and conservatives giving the Dems good advice about how the Dems could win in 2012?

  58. Obama has somewhat accomplished the goals Soros set out for him- i.. wrecking the US economy, ii.. threatening war with Russia, iii.. upending relations with Israel, iv.. selling and passing Health Care Reform, v.. freeing up the Gulf’s oil rigs for use by Soros.

    ==========================

    1. “Sure it will get you bumped, but you wouldn’t have got a second term anyway, so better wreck it first term. And wreck it in the first 2 years, don’t even wait till after the mid-terms.”

    2-5 same, plus: “Now, to get those oil rigs out, we’ll start with a mile-deep oil gusher. So we’re getting you a Portuguese Water Dog.”

  59. “Oh, and before your dog breaks the well — just to throw everyone off the track you announce you’re opening the East Coast to MORE drilling. And after the well blows, you quietly approve a lot more drilling leases in the same area.”

  60. Shadowfax
    July 15th, 2010 at 12:18 am
    confloyd
    How is it down there in the Gulf.
    You and blowhim are, our eyes on the gulf????
    _______________________________

    I am told there have been oil globs washing up in spots on the barrier islands, but I’ve seen and heard of nothing other than very small, as in nickel-sized, tar balls on the beaches here in the Biloxi / Ocean Springs area.

    The way the current runs, the barrier islands act as a buffer which deflect the the gulf. The sound is really a backwater area. It results in the Mississippi Coast lacking the beautiful green / blue colored water that the Florida Panhandle enjoys, but in this case, it has acted as protection for us, so far.

  61. Obama thinks we’re dumb

    Op-ed: President belittling our intelligence, implying we don’t see his anti-Israel moves

    Amos Carmel

    The current White House resident requires the financial and political support of US Jews ahead of the November 2010 elections. He boasts of the fact that his two top aides are Jewish, hence making it clear that it highly values their wisdom, and moreover, that he should not be suspected of anti-Semitism.

    However, it appears the president belittles the intelligence of Israel’s citizens. Otherwise it’s hard to explain his claim that some of our suspicion towards him stems from his middle name being Hussein.

    We’ve been aware of this fact since Obama embarked on the political campaign that brought him to his current post. The highlights of his biography were extensively covered by global media and reached us too. These fundamentals, including his middle name, did not prevent many US Jews from supporting him in the Democratic elections and of course in the presidential elections.

    This information also did not undermine the enthused welcome he encountered when he arrived here as a candidate. His middle name did not prevent a great number of Israelis from being inspired by his election victory, even when his victory speech did not include any substantive declaration – with the exception of his pledge to buy a new puppy for his daughters.

    The fond attachment to his simplistic slogans – “Yes, we can” – to his looks, and to his impressive rhetorical abilities reached great heights in Israel to, with almost no attention given to his middle name. Didn’t his Jewish advisors tell him about that?

    Cairo speech
    So the man took office, joined the list of Nobel prize candidates in his first two weeks in office, yet in his view we kept on suspecting him because of his “Hussein.” By saying this he implies that we failed to notice his clear signals, as well as ones conveyed by his close associates and his US media fans, who indicated that Israel is about to lose some of the “special” status it enjoyed with Obama’s predecessors.

    As if we did not hear his Cairo speech, where he lavished inexplicable praise on Islam (including some nonsense about its tolerance “during the inquisition”) and linked Israel’s establishment to the Holocaust. As if we failed to notice that in the wake of that speech, he blatantly refrained from a called-for polite gesture of a brief visit in Israel.

    In short, Obama apparently estimates that we did not see what’s happening right under our noses, and that the only thing that scares us is his middle name, because we’re just so uncomprehending and dumb.

    Yet Obama may feel he can afford to belittle our collective IQ because we ask for it. This may be the lesson he drew from the repeated demand around here for him to address the Israeli public directly. It’s not the demand in and of itself, but rather, the magical qualities attributed to such direct approach.

    Experience shows that rhetorical stunts, such as the ones Obama and former President Clinton distinguished themselves with, cast a magic spell on quite a few Israelis. Nonetheless, a direct approach is no substitute for a to-the-point approach. Under the current state of affairs, the US president cannot deliver the goods he seeks.

    Regardless of the suspicions some Israelis hold, Obama has no applicable formula for establishing a demilitarized Palestinian state while annulling all “right of return” demands. If such formula appears, we will understand it even without him addressing us directly. As opposed to what appears to be his basic assumption, our intellectual capabilities are not particularly weak.

    http://www.worldjewishdaily.com/toolbar.html?4t=extlink&4u=http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3919829,00.html

  62. EJ DIONNE PILES ON: TEA PARTY IS RACIST BY ASSOCIATION, BUT NAACP NOT DENOUNCING BLACK PANTHERS…JUST FINE

    Dionne starts by admitting that most opposition to Obama is NOT racist. But then he goes on to say that the Tea Party has not done enough to purge bad elements out of it.

    Gee, I wonder how 100% unracist is the NAACP??? Here’s the end of his piece:

    “Guilt by association is wrong, but it’s entirely legitimate to insist that those who believe in democracy and freedom take forceful steps to disassociate themselves from people in their movement who peddle racism, intolerance and fear. That’s what the NAACP is asking. It’s your move, Sarah.”

    realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/15/tea_parties_make_space_for_bigots.html

  63. have not caught up with all the comments yet, just wanted to quickly say that evidently the joke going around these days is:

    …that O had to call in the President (Clinton) to do the President’s job…

    …boy the irony of it all…O disrespected BC & HC, tagged them as racists, old do nothing baby boomers whose page had to be turned…skipped over all the good work and deeds of BC’s presidency while conveniently praising Reagen (always ommitting BC)…and NOW…who has had to come to O’s rescue time and time and time AGAIN…

    …that’s right Hillary Clinton at the helm giving him any credibility…and President Bill Clinton…now suddenly, O is praising Bill Clinton’s surplus and using yet another Clinton person to help O with the economy he is helping to destroy…

    …why doesn’t O just get out of the way and let Bill and Hill run the show…and stop wasting more valuable time with more posing by O…

    …talk about Bill Clinton “schooling” the “little boy”…wow…direct Clinton Karma in action…

  64. S,
    Yes it is ironic isn’t it. I also agree why doesn’t he, Gibbs, and Valerie just go home to Chicago and let the real winners take over. The country would be better off.

    I am sick of listening to these rants from NBPP. Obama is letting them get thrown under the bus. I don’t think Obama is attached to the NBPP, he is connected to NOI. You notice you never hear anything about Farrakhan….that’s Bo’s organization.

  65. Drudge has a huge headline about the book written by George Bush being released in October before the elections-he calls it a “gift to the Democrats”

    I don’t think Drudge should necessarily call it a “gift” until he sees what Bush wrote in it–maybe he has some revelations about Democrats they won’t like. I wonder though if his publishing company trying to stir things up by releasing at that time–it seems suspicious timing to me….

  66. I think the headline implies the dems will use the ‘”bush derangement syndrome” to rally the base to get out the vote. It could have that effect .

  67. Have I ever told Big Pink what an intelligent group of Hillary supporters reside here?

    If not, let this be my first time. 😉

  68. blowme0bama
    July 15th, 2010 at 7:51 am

    _______________________________

    I am told there have been oil globs washing up in spots on the barrier islands, but I’ve seen and heard of nothing other than very small, as in nickel-sized, tar balls on the beaches here in the Biloxi / Ocean Springs area.

    The way the current runs, the barrier islands act as a buffer which deflect the the gulf. The sound is really a backwater area. It results in the Mississippi Coast lacking the beautiful green / blue colored water that the Florida Panhandle enjoys, but in this case, it has acted as protection for us, so far.

    ——-
    Thanks for the update, what is ‘black water’? Is it just deep water?
    I went though Biloxi when I was young and I still remember it as one of the most beautiful coasts on the southern border. I live in Calif. and lived in Hawaii, also Fla. so I love the beach/ocean and it’s wildlife.

  69. #
    confloyd
    July 15th, 2010 at 12:04 pm

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704518904575365482705270718.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLESecond

    Hillary Clinton for President
    The secretary of state could mount a formidable challenge to Obama.

    By PETE DU PONT

    America’s economy is failing to produce jobs, increase growth or raise confidence, and it will likely get even worse next year. Our federal government’s spending has increased to $3.7 trillion this year from $2.98 trillion in 2008. Publicly held national debt is up by $2.4 trillion in less than two years, to about 63% percent of GDP from 40%, and is expected to reach 70% by 2012. Add in the unemployment rate, which has remained above 9.4% for over a year, and America is clearly failing economically.

    Next January the economy will be further depressed by increasing tax rates. The top income tax rate will rise to 39.6% from 35%, and the phase-out of itemized deductions and personal exemptions will effectively lift the top bracket to about 40.8%. On New Year’s Day the tax on dividends is scheduled to go up to 39.6% from 15%, and come 2013, ObamaCare will add another 3.8%.

    Other bad public policies will further drag down the economy. ObamaCare will increase individual costs and expand the deficit. Failing energy policies, from Washington’s inept response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to its effort to limit tapping America’s oil supplies, will drive up our use of imported foreign oil beyond the current 67% of our country’s oil consumption.
    ***

    Add together all these increases in government regulation, spending and taxes and a dim employment outlook, and the result is a dramatic national decline in support of the White House, Congress and their administration of our national policies.

    So what can be done to change America’s policies and make our economy stronger? For one thing, we could elect a president with different thinking. Almost any Republican candidate would have that, and, as we will see in a moment, there is one obvious Democrat who would change our course too.

    And why would the Democratic Party want to do that? Because the re-election of President Obama is becoming more problematic. The latest Rasmussen Reports polls show the dramatic decline of the presidential approval index, the difference between those who “strongly approve” of Mr. Obama’s performance and those who “strongly disapprove.” It began at plus 25% when the new president was sworn in, and has steadily declined to minus 13%.

    It isn’t just the president whose poll numbers are falling fast. According to recent Harris polling, Vice President Biden viewed favorably by 26% of the public and unfavorably by 45%. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does even worse, 20% positive to 49% negative. A June Nevada poll gave Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader, 33% approval and 52% disapproval.

    But the greatest contrast and most interesting statistic is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ratings: 45% favorable and only 35% unfavorable.

    That is not surprising, and there are some obvious factors that suggest she might have a chance of defeating President Obama if she were to challenge him for the 2012 Democratic nomination.

    First, as Peggy Noonan wrote earlier this month, the conclusion one hears from most “normal” American people is that the president “is in over his head, and out of his depth.” Even most progressives agree that “the Obama presidency has been a big disappointment,” according to Eric Alterman of The Nation. That means there’s a big opportunity for Mrs. Clinton.

    Second, she is physically and intellectually strong enough to take on a difficult campaign. She showed that running against Obama two years ago.

    Third, she is one of the most experienced prospective candidates the Democratic Party has had in a long while: wife of a governor, U.S. first lady, senator and now secretary of state. This is a good record to run on as someone who knows how the government works.

    Fourth, she is an experienced foreign-policy adviser who understands the threats to our national security: unresolved conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, rising threats of nuclear capability in Iran and North Korea, and uncertainties in Pakistan.

    Fifth, experience will be even more important to voters in the 2012 presidential election, whose 2008 gamble on someone with little experience is proving costly.

    Finally, Washington’s deadly left-liberal policies that have propelled the American economy in a very bad direction can be turned around. If Mrs. Clinton made the case that America must get rid of the huge debt the current administration has created, must create much better economic growth with lower tax rates, and must strongly assist employer job creation, she would appeal to a broad voter coalition.
    ***

    All this must be obvious to the inner circle of the current president’s administration. So what is he to do? That’s pretty simple–just add his secretary of state to the 2012 ticket as his new running mate.

    We don’t know whether Mr. Obama is already thinking about making this kind of change next year, but we do know he needs some very good policy outcomes to be re-elected. And if none of these Obama changes come to pass, Mrs. Clinton could put together a very effective campaign to get the nomination for herself.

    Considering how badly things are going in America just now, that could turn out to be a slam dunk for her and the disgruntled Democratic Party.

  70. FYI

    A great tool I started using a couple of weeks ago is Google Alert.

    If you go to their site and want to watch a specific topic, say… Hillary Clinton, it will pull up all the new articles each day about her and send the links to your email.

    I put in, ‘We will not be silenced’ a couple of days after Fox and Friends showed the caucus fraud video to see if this info was getting around the internet or it was dead.

    Here is what links I was sent today to show how this great tool works.

    —–

    Web 5 new results for We will not be silenced

    ‘We Will Not Be Silenced’: Democrats Produce Documentary Alleging …
    A group of lifelong Democrats recently produced a compelling documentary allleging rampant voter fraud by the Obama campaign during the 2008 election.
    http://www.propeller.com/…/lsquowe-will-not-be-silencedrsquo-dem...

    We Will Not Be Silenced” – Patriotic Resistance
    Dear Patriots, Democratic Party activist Gigi Gaston was on Fox & Friends this morning. We Will Not Be Silenced is a documentary produced by Gigi in 2008.
    http://www.resistnet.com/forum/topics/we-will-not-be-silenced

    Heritage New Media Partners, Inc. – NMA TV – We Will Not Be Silenced
    A documentary about voter fraud in the 2008 Democratic Primary.
    http://www.nmatv.com/video/6130/We-Will-Not-Be-Silenced
    ‘We Will Not Be Silenced’: Democrats Produce Documentary Alleging …
    Gaston presents compelling evidence in We Will Not Be Silenced that Barack Obama was selected by the DNC, not elected by the people. …
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2550817/posts

    Finally! 2 Years Too Late, “We Will Not Be Silenced” Documentary …
    I am beyond annoyed and disgusted with Fox… Why was the documentary, “We will Not Be Silenced” not worthy of play in ’08, when it mattered… …
    dailyradar.com/…/finally-2-years-too-late-we-will-not-be-silen…

    Tip: Use a minus sign (-) in front of terms in your query that you want to exclude.. Learn more.

    Remove this alert.
    Create another alert.
    Manage your alerts.

    ———-
    As you can see, at the bottom of the email you can cancel the alert any time and create a new alert.

    On the email, the links are live, and lead you to the article.

  71. Well I think Bill and Hillary realize that Oprah has a lot of weight with a group of voters they will need if they ever get the nomination, so I think they are using their heads. Sometimes we have to overlook what folks have done to you in order to attain what they want. I am proud that they are politically savy enough to realize that.

    You may not like it but they have to be cultivated if Hillary is to be Potus.

    Personally I don’t evah have to watch Oprah again, but Hill and Bill don’t have that luxury.

  72. turndownobama
    July 15th, 2010 at 4:15 am

    …. there is one obvious Democrat [Hillary] who would change our course too.
    And why would the Democratic Party want to do that? Because the re-election of President Obama is becoming more problematic.

    ===================

    So why are all these GOP and conservatives giving the Dems good advice about how the Dems could win in 2012?

    ——-
    Turndown, I had the same thought. Don’t get me wrong, I am thrilled to see so many Hillary 2012 articles, but it hasn’t escaped me that many of them are coming from traditionally Republican sources.

    Now, maybe some Republicans are realizing privately that they really don’t have anyone among their ranks who could easily beat Obama, and so they are doing what is best for the country and encouraging Hillary since it’s obvious people want her — but such honest self reflection and transcendence in politics? Hmm, as Hillary would say, “maybe I’ve just lived a little long”….but I think there is more than meets the eye going on here.

    Also, I can’t help but remember the way that Republicans behaved during the primaries. Sure, they may act like they’re all anti-Obama now, and yes, while I will always maintain that the bulk of the culpability of the primaries remains far and away with the BOTs…….I also remember that many Republicans were actively participating in pumping up Obama when it suited them too. Would we really put it past them now then, to not game the system again?

    For instance, I was just rereading the other day, an article from Feb 2008, right after the South Carolina primary, in which conservative columnist Armstrong Williams denounces a figment of his own imagination, ie. “The Clinton Brand of Racism”, and tears into Hillary wrongly, while extolling the virtues of Obama. Now, of course, you see the same Armstrong Williams trashing Obama on Fox News (he was just on FOX yesterday or the day before, with Megyn Kelly and Juan Williams, re: the NBPP case).

    Then there is Andrew Sullivan. A sometimes conservative, sometimes liberal, but mostly schizophrenic personality. Really, the Republicans just need to take that piece of trash back in their party; we’re tired of baby-sitting him.

    And finally, Peggy Noonan, with whom we are all familiar. Another conservative who trashed the Clintons and boasted about how great Obama is, and is now having to eat crow.

    Anyway, my point here is, the Republicans are all too happy to tell people what they want to hear if they think it may help the Republicans later down the road. We saw it during the primaries; they were obviously successful in playing the more dim of Dims, who ate up the Republican supplemental narrative of “The Clintons are horrible, Obama is great.” I mean, to this day, some Dims don’t even realize that the Republicans wanted Obama in the WH, specifically because he’d be a much easier target than Hillary.

    Fortunately, for the country, Hillary Dems are just tad bit more intelligent than that. 😉

  73. #
    confloyd
    July 15th, 2010 at 12:58 pm

    Well I think Bill and Hillary realize that Oprah has a lot of weight with a group of voters they will need if they ever get the nomination, so I think they are using their heads. Sometimes we have to overlook what folks have done to you in order to attain what they want. I am proud that they are politically savy enough to realize that.

    You may not like it but they have to be cultivated if Hillary is to be Potus.

    Personally I don’t evah have to watch Oprah again, but Hill and Bill don’t have that luxury.

    —-

    I agree, Confloyd. I think Bill and Hillary still have smile and play nice for now, so that people can’t accuse them of anything when Obama is dragged kicking and screaming off stage.

  74. #
    confloyd
    July 15th, 2010 at 12:58 pm

    Well I think Bill and Hillary realize that Oprah has a lot of weight with a group of voters they will need if they ever get the nomination, so I think they are using their heads. Sometimes we have to overlook what folks have done to you in order to attain what they want. I am proud that they are politically savy enough to realize that.

    You may not like it but they have to be cultivated if Hillary is to be Potus.

    Personally I don’t evah have to watch Oprah again, but Hill and Bill don’t have that luxury.
    _____________________________

    Yes, Confloyd- Brilliance is as brilliance does. Some people are so hung up on their cultural snobbery, they will cut off their noses to spite their faces. Then wonder why they remain in suspended animation suffering in solitude within the boundaries of the purgatory of life. Bill and Hill are too smart for falling for that trap. They have better things to do than crowing in the wind. This is how they have earned respect from the international community leading productive lives in earnest rather than talking about it and doing nothing, waiting for the mountain to come to them, much like our presidential-intern in training.

  75. Shadowfax
    July 15th, 2010 at 12:33 pm
    The sound is really a backwater area.
    ___________________________________________
    Thanks for the update, what is ‘black water’? Is it just deep water?
    I went though Biloxi when I was young and I still remember it as one of the most beautiful coasts on the southern border. I live in Calif. and lived in Hawaii, also Fla. so I love the beach/ocean and it’s wildlife.
    __________________________________________

    not “black water”, but “backwater” or “back water”. I literally mean back water. Between the beach and the barrier islands is the Mississippi Sound. It does not get a strong gulf current through it. It is a back water area. In fact, there is insufficient current to bring sand to the shore. The beaches were artificially created some time in the late 50s. My understanding was that the water just came up to the seawall which protected the highway.

    But the water in the Sound is dark grey / brown. On the barrier islands fronting the gulf, which have natural sand beaches, the water is aquamarine.

  76. I think Chelsea’s wedding should be a personal affair, not a political one.

    Too bad she is allowing politics to mar her special day. Of course, there is the possibility that the Clntons really like and can stand these people. They are very different from me in that regard.

  77. Shadowfax
    July 15th, 2010 at 1:48 am

    wbb
    You are probably right about Dr. Long being a dem in exile…I just thought she threw in the towel by not letting that caucus fraud data on her website visible to the public.

    —-

    Yeah, I too wish she would open her site back up to the public also. I know she had made it private for a while, and then back to public (at which point I grabbed a copy of all her PDFs and saved it on my computer, in case anyone is looking for a copy), but didn’t realize she had made it private again. That’s too bad, she has a lot of good analysis on her site.

  78. some Dims don’t even realize that the Republicans wanted Obama in the WH, specifically because he’d be a much easier target than Hillary.
    —————————————————————————————

    yup, that’s right…they had saved all the info they are using now for this day….stupid dims…some rethugs did even know their party was doing this…lots of dumbasses out there.

    I imagine the rethugs don’t really know what to do about the economy either and do realize that Bill and Hill fixed it once….they are losing money…so they might think they want Bill and Hill back in there to work 24/7 until its fixed.

  79. Dan Qualye is about to make an annoucement…he thinks will make news….Geez I wonder what it is??? Its on Fox’s Megan Kelly’s show.

  80. Big Dawg news from CNN

    Analysts: Bill Clinton can help Democrats, but how much?
    By Ed Hornick, CNN

    Washington (CNN) — Former President Bill Clinton, the man once described as the “comeback kid” during his 1992 presidential bid, has now become something of a go-to guy for Democratic candidates facing a tough election battle.

    Economic woes and fears over the rising national debt have weighed heavily on voters — especially independents, who are leaning more toward Republicans than Democrats, according to recent polls.

    The Obama administration is now putting together an aggressive schedule to deploy Clinton to campaign appearances and fundraising events in key states around the country, Democratic officials familiar with the plans told CNN.

    Read more on Clinton’s schedule

    Herb Asher, professor emeritus of political science at Ohio State University, said a Clinton appearance is an extremely helpful move.

    “I think it’s advantageous for the Democratic candidates to have someone like Bill Clinton, because when he comes into a community, there will be all that wonderful media coverage. And Bill Clinton is certainly extremely capable of making the point about the Republican opposition and what they’ve been doing and not doing,” he said.

    The White House wants to use the former president in swing states where Obama is not necessarily popular, such as Arkansas and Kentucky, the Democratic officials said.

    Asher calls that “basic common sense.”

    “It makes a hell of a lot of sense to have the more popular fellow come into your community and campaign for you,” he noted.

    In his home state of Arkansas, Clinton helped Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln survive an intense primary challenge in a runoff election. His efforts will once again be used to try to keep her in office as she faces a tough Republican opponent in John Boozman.

    In Kentucky, Clinton is expected to help Democratic nominee Jack Conway in his campaign against Tea Party favorite Rand Paul, who has faced criticism for comments he made about the Civil Rights Act, among other things.

    Asher said that Clinton has the ability to speak to many regions of the country — even solidly red or leaning-red states.

    “He’s not just going to go to urban areas,” he said. “Coming here to Ohio, he can go to Cleveland just as readily as he could go to southeastern Ohio in the Appalachian area, and he’d be equally well received.”

    Jennifer Duffy, a senior editor for The Cook Political Report, said Clinton’s appeal to moderates and independent voters will help boost confidence in Democrats. And that’s certainly what Democratic leaders in Washington and their campaign organizations are hoping.

    But a Washington Post/ABC News poll this week showed Americans are leery about whether Democrats are leading the country in the right direction.

    The poll indicated that just 26 percent of registered voters said they will most likely support their current lawmaker in the House, with more than six in ten saying they may look for someone new to represent them in Congress.

    A slim majority questioned in the poll said they would prefer GOP control of Congress so that the legislative branch would be able to keep in check the Democratic president. For likely voters, the margin of those preferring a Republican-controlled Congress jumped to 15 points.

    And when it comes to the coveted independent voter, the news is not so great for Democrats. Forty percent of independent registered voters surveyed said if they were voting for Congress today, they’d choose the Democrat; 47 percent favored the Republican.

    So can Clinton’s efforts on the trail help reduce that gap? “I don’t know if he can get them back,” Duffy said. “But it’s worth a try.”

    She added that while he can rally a rather lethargic Democratic base, it’s unlikely he will be able to get the Obama surge voters — independents, youth voters and minorities — to go to the polls as they did in 2008.

    While it’s unlikely Clinton can transfer his popularity to individual candidates in local elections, Asher said he can help Americans recall the Clinton years as “very, very good” ones, when the country had a budget surplus — and remind them of where the economy went during George W. Bush’s administration.

    “He can do a wonderful job in describing what Republican policies were — what the Republican party wasted in terms after he left office.”

    ———-
    Okay…

    Bill called to the White House to tell the Obama Administration how to fix the economy.

    Bill called to the White House to tell the Obama Administration how to make new jobs.

    Bill sent to N. Korea to bring an imprisoned American women home.

    Bill sent to Haiti to fix that disaster.

    Bill sent all over the country to campaign because no one likes the current President.

    Who the F is running the show here?

    What an embarrassment to our country, and what a pleasure to us, to know our competent Clinton’s are now being begged to run the country.

    Obots tried to destroy the Clinton’s and now they are begging for their help.

    Impeach the lackwits and get in the REAL Leaders of the Democratic Party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    link to article: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/15/bill.clinton.campaigning/index.html?hpt=C1

  81. #
    confloyd
    July 15th, 2010 at 2:22 pm

    Dan Qualye is about to make an annoucement…he thinks will make news….Geez I wonder what it is??? Its on Fox’s Megan Kelly’s show.

    ——–
    Here’s a few guesses:

    He is going to host the Oprah show
    He is taking over the Larry King spot
    He is holding his own spelling bee
    He is releasing a new book
    He is still alive

  82. confloyd
    July 15th, 2010 at 12:04 pm

    “All this must be obvious to the inner circle of the current president’s administration. So what is he to do? That’s pretty simple–just add his secretary of state to the 2012 ticket as his new running mate.”
    &&&&&&&&&

    Ummm, if Hillary is going to be on a ticket in 2012, I highly doubt it would be as Obama’s VP.

    Challenge him for the nomination? Who knows, quite possible.

    But her being VP would probably not be enough to drag him over the finish line ahead of the Republican challenger.

    I think she’d find a graceful way of refusing such an offer. And if pushed further, she probably would bail out, with grace.

    Just think: Why would Hillary want to be the last rat to stay on the sinking ship. Probably Obama himself might pull an LBJ, and jump off his own ship before anyone else.

  83. Just think: Why would Hillary want to be the last rat to stay on the sinking ship. Probably Obama himself might pull an LBJ, and jump off his own ship before anyone else.
    ———————————————————————————————

    I have been praying for this to happen…sooner than later! The Blago trial is showing no fruits of Obama getting impeached. Darn it!

  84. GET OUT THE POPCORN, AND ENJOY THIS ONE!

    Gee, having a clueless, inept, disinterested president is not so great for the party that bent over for him.

    washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/14/AR2010071406006.html?hpid=topnews

    House Democrats hit boiling point over perceived lack of White House support
    ========================

    By Paul Kane
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Thursday, July 15, 2010

    House Democrats are lashing out at the White House, venting long-suppressed anger over what they see as President Obama’s lukewarm efforts to help them win reelection — and accusing administration officials of undermining the party’s chances of retaining the majority in November’s midterm elections.

    In recent weeks, a widespread belief has taken hold among Democratic House members that they have dutifully gone along with the White House on politically risky issues — including the stimulus plan, the health-care overhaul and climate change — without seeing much, if anything, in return. Many of them are angry that Obama has actively campaigned for Democratic Senate candidates but has done fewer events for House members.

    The boiling point came Tuesday night during a closed-door meeting of House Democrats in the Capitol. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) excoriated White House press secretary Robert Gibbs’s public comments over the weekend that the House majority was in doubt and that it would take “strong campaigns by Democrats” to avert dramatic losses.

    “What the hell do they think we’ve been doing the last 12 months? We’re the ones who have been taking the tough votes,” Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (N.J.) said in an interview Wednesday.

    Attempting to quell the uprising, Obama met privately with House Democratic leaders Wednesday evening to reassure them of his support. Aides said the meeting went well and focused on the agenda in the run-up to the elections.

    Before the meeting, Gibbs sought to play down the tensions, describing his relationship with Pelosi as “cordial.” He stood by his earlier remarks that the House could flip to the Republicans but again expressed confidence that Democrats would retain control. Another Democratic official, familiar with White House strategy, said that there is a “misperception” among House Democrats that Obama, a former senator, favors his old chamber over the House. The official placed the blame largely on polling data that continue to show the president and Congress in poor shape.

    Though politically provocative, Gibbs’s comments — first on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday and again at his regular briefing Monday — were largely seen as accurate in Washington. Analysts estimate that about 60 Democratic House seats are in jeopardy; Republicans need a net gain of 39 to claim the majority. But the press secretary’s public airing of the dire situation reinforced the feeling among House Democrats that Obama’s priority is building a firewall around the Senate majority.

    (Photos: How Bill Clinton has evolved into Obama’s Mr. Fix-it)

    “What they wanted to do is separate themselves from us,” Pascrell said Wednesday. He accused the White House of wanting to preemptively pin the blame on lawmakers running poor campaigns should Democrats lose the majority and not on Obama’s own sagging approval ratings.

    At the Tuesday night meeting with Pelosi, lawmakers groused that the White House was taking them for granted. Pascrell was especially vocal and punctuated his complaints by reading Gibbs’s comments word for word in front of the caucus. After he spoke, Pelosi interjected. “I disagree on one point — I think you were too kind to Mr. Gibbs,” she said, according to Democrats familiar with her comments. Publicly, the speaker and other members of the leadership have distanced themselves from Pascrell’s view that Gibbs’s remarks were part of a White House plan.

    Pascrell and Pelosi were the most vocal in their direct, blunt criticism of the White House. But interviews with more than 10 lawmakers and senior aides, from liberal and conservative districts, made it clear that scores of House Democrats at the gathering shared Pascrell’s and Pelosi’s dissatisfaction. Most of those interviewed did not want to be quoted by name criticizing the president.

    Before the meeting, Gibbs sought to play down the tensions, describing his relationship with Pelosi as “cordial.” He stood by his earlier remarks that the House could flip to the Republicans but again expressed confidence that Democrats would retain control. Another Democratic official, familiar with White House strategy, said that there is a “misperception” among House Democrats that Obama, a former senator, favors his old chamber over the House. The official placed the blame largely on polling data that continue to show the president and Congress in poor shape.

    Though politically provocative, Gibbs’s comments — first on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday and again at his regular briefing Monday — were largely seen as accurate in Washington. Analysts estimate that about 60 Democratic House seats are in jeopardy; Republicans need a net gain of 39 to claim the majority. But the press secretary’s public airing of the dire situation reinforced the feeling among House Democrats that Obama’s priority is building a firewall around the Senate majority.

    (Photos: How Bill Clinton has evolved into Obama’s Mr. Fix-it)

    “What they wanted to do is separate themselves from us,” Pascrell said Wednesday. He accused the White House of wanting to preemptively pin the blame on lawmakers running poor campaigns should Democrats lose the majority and not on Obama’s own sagging approval ratings.

    At the Tuesday night meeting with Pelosi, lawmakers groused that the White House was taking them for granted. Pascrell was especially vocal and punctuated his complaints by reading Gibbs’s comments word for word in front of the caucus. After he spoke, Pelosi interjected. “I disagree on one point — I think you were too kind to Mr. Gibbs,” she said, according to Democrats familiar with her comments. Publicly, the speaker and other members of the leadership have distanced themselves from Pascrell’s view that Gibbs’s remarks were part of a White House plan.

    Pascrell and Pelosi were the most vocal in their direct, blunt criticism of the White House. But interviews with more than 10 lawmakers and senior aides, from liberal and conservative districts, made it clear that scores of House Democrats at the gathering shared Pascrell’s and Pelosi’s dissatisfaction. Most of those interviewed did not want to be quoted by name criticizing the president.

    House members complain that the White House routinely shows them disrespect. Until recently, some said, administration aides would wait until the last minute to inform them when a Cabinet official would be traveling to their districts to give a speech or announce a government grant. Lawmakers love these events, which let them take advantage of local press coverage.

    House Democrats are far more upset that they have repeatedly voted to support Obama’s agenda and then felt they were left to fend for themselves when the legislation was watered down in the Senate. First with the nearly $800 billion stimulus plan and then again with the landmark health-care bill, House members approved far-reaching, controversial early versions that reflected the White House’s desires. But the bills stalled in the Senate under Republican filibuster threats and were scaled back. Now these lawmakers are left to defend their earlier votes on the campaign trail.

    Some representatives from industrial states are especially angry over their efforts to enact climate change legislation. At the urging of the president and Pelosi, the House narrowly approved a controversial bill in June 2009. But more than a year later, the Senate has yet to take up the issue, leaving lawmakers feeling as if the White House pushed them to take a huge political risk — and one they now have to explain to the voters — for nothing.

    “My experience is, we always feel neglected. The experience the Republicans had with Bush — they felt neglected. That’s the nature of the relationship between the House and the White House,” House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) said before Wednesday night’s White House huddle. “Tonight’s all about coordination, focus, going forward, how we maximize our message.”

    House leaders have begun to keep close track of Obama’s campaign trips. By congressional and White House estimates, Obama has done four events benefiting nine House Democratic candidates, and one event solely for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the political organization that raises money for House candidates. He’s headlined a pair of joint fundraisers for the DCCC and other party committees. (Vice President Biden has been the go-to figure for House Democrats, playing the emcee at 29 events benefiting 36 candidates.)

    By contrast, Obama has attended headline events for Senate Democratic candidates in 10 states. The broader complaint, from both liberals and moderates, is that a White House led by former members of Congress now seems out of touch with their needs.

    “The Democrats have overreached, and that’s one reason why there are so many races in play,” said Rep. Chet Edwards (Tex.), a centrist facing his toughest election in years. “Rahm Emanuel knows as well as anyone the challenges moderate and conservative Democrats face in their districts. I think there are some, in the administration and in Congress, who don’t fully understand the political dynamics.”

    Obama’s recent promotion of comprehensive immigration reform and a South Korea trade deal exacerbated those tensions, pushing issues that do not play well in conservative districts. It also angered liberals who see little hope of passing those issues through the Senate and are tired of watching endangered House colleagues forced into tough votes.

    One House Democrat compared their relationship with the White House to the 1970s Life commercials starring “Mikey,” the kid whose brothers trick him into eating the cereal. “There’s a sense that’s the White House’s attitude toward us,” the lawmaker said. “And now, Mikey ate it and he’s choking on it, and there’s no appreciation.”

  85. Quayle’s son is running for congress in Arizona….he just got married…does that go together?? You get married then run for office? He’s a newly wed. Geez, is this news??

    I wonder if he knows how to spell potato?

  86. Quayle’s son is running for congress in Arizona….

    Heh, only Rethugs would think this is news………zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz snore, cough, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  87. What kind of freaks me out is that a film like 2012 plays a black president stepping up an doing the right thing. When they movie he had not won. They also attic religious institutions bet never “mecca”. The vatican, the sao paula statue. American institutions like the Wahington Monument no problem but the creator said if the same theing he’d be placing his name in jeopardy’

    By the way the movie sucks and pays no attention to the hispanic communitie

  88. …zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz snore, cough, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    ————————
    and barf. Let us hope he is no dan quayle.

  89. Ouch
    If I may, can I rewrite.
    I just watched 2012 by mistake but I was blown away by the fact that hero president who happened to black and who held so much of the time. The film came out in 08 and it takes years to put together such a production . The film destroys the vatican and I beg your forgiveness but i cannot remember the name of the statue in sao Paulo.

  90. While Glib Gibbs told the truth about November, he was instigating the “FEAR” campaign for The Won that OMG the Republicans in charge would be worse [and they might issue investigations on the DIMS en masse] in order to rally what base there is left. Meanwhile Pitiful Pelosi MUST pull in money for the Nov Dims. Following Pitiful Pelsoi’s email I have a suggestion. She even addressed me by my first name; sorry Pitiful Pelosi, you have not earned that right. Here is the email I got from Pitiful Pelsoi:

    Here is what will happen in November. Democrats will keep control of the House. Period.

    While some Washington pundits are claiming that Republicans have the momentum, I remain more confident in our chances for victory as long as we have our secret weapon — you.

    Next Sunday, July 25th, marks 100 days from the fall elections. I have set a goal of raising $1 Million in grassroots contributions to send a powerful message to the media and to the world that we will keep control of the House and we will continue America’s New Direction!

    Please stand with me to send an overwhelming message of grassroots strength. If you contribute $5, $10 or more today, you will receive a special invitation to join me on our National Campaign Kickoff Conference Call.

    Your grassroots support has provided our margin of victory in House races since 2006 and continuing through our triumphant special election victories this year.

    Ninety percent of your grassroots dollars are sent right back out the door to help our Democratic campaigns (only 10 percent is used for administrative costs). Your dollars help our great Democrats fight back against Republican attacks, place strategic early media buys to get their messages out, and most of all, work to turn out every Democratic voter on Election Day.

    Let us take this opportunity to come together for progress.

    Thank you,
    Image Blocked
    Nancy Pelosi
    Speaker of the House

    P.S. Help us meet our goal before the final 100 days of this election season. Contribute today and receive a special invitation to join me on our National Campaign Kickoff Conference Call.
    ___________________________________________________________________________

    Suggestion:EVERY disenfranchised democrat or former democrat should mail to her an IOU for ‘if and when’ the now Radical Revolutionary Dimocratic party returns to the control of real democrats like Hill and Bill

  91. MEANCHELLE SPURS ON THE NAACP TO DO OBAMA’S DIRTY WORK

    thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-07-14/the-tea-party-isnt-racist/?cid=bs:archive19

    The Tea Party Isn’t Racist
    ========================

    by Tunku Varadarajan

    NAACP: Can we all agree that it stands for the National Association for the Advancement of Cynical Politics?

    The proper expansion of “NAACP” has a profoundly archaic ring to it. I know, I know: The retention of that primordial name—the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People—has to do with safeguarding history; and an irrefutably impressive history it is, too. But can anyone deny that the “colored” part of the organization’s name is no longer preservative of anything that is at all meaningful?

    Colored: Who the heck says that in the America of today, unless you’re a very, very old friend of the late highwayman (as in dedicated asphalt, not armed robbery) Robert C. Byrd? Which is why no member of this once-courageous black organization will spell out its full name. Everyone says, instead, “N-double A-CP”: To elongate the abbreviation is to expose oneself to derisive—or, worse, baffled—inquisition. (“Dad, Mom, what’s with the ‘colored’ thing?”).

    The NAACP, this vestigial bone on the American body politic, has thrust itself into the headlines by voting, at its annual meeting Tuesday, to censure as “racist” the Tea Party movement. This controversial public rebuke—delivered a day after the first lady, Michelle Obama, addressed the NAACP’s conference—has opened up a raw, new racial front in the run-up to the November elections. In effect, the self-congratulatory, post-racial Obama camp is reaching for the crudest weapon in the Democratic arsenal: the racial blunderbuss.

    Of course, desperate times call for desperate measures, and the NAACP is going back to an old playbook. The NAACP is resorting to the Jacksonian (Jesse, not Andrew) ploy to use the race card (a) to rally blacks to the mid-terms; and (b) to intimidate the mainstream media, so that it doesn’t report critically on a liberal administration, urging it instead to focus on the perceived sins of the Tea Party movement.

    If black Americans are suffering due to our current economic woes, Obama’s own policies are hardly helping them. The NAACP can’t bitch about “the Man” anymore because the Man is Obama. And so instead it turns its racially monolithic vituperation on the Tea Party, which has never been in power, and has had no impact on the economic condition of black Americans—except to advocate policies (smaller government, lower taxes, radically reduced deficits, etc.) that would likely improve the standard of living of all Americans (blacks included). In fact, the Tea Party is a greater friend of black Americans, one might say, than the administration, and is much more representative of America than the NAACP. (There are many more black members of the Tea Party—however you define that movement—than there are, by definition, non-black members of the NAACP.)

    The NAACP senses—knows—that the electoral momentum is building inexorably against President Obama. And they hope to slow it by playing the race card. Let there be no doubt that nothing would have been tabled at this NAACP meeting without President Obama’s imprimatur—especially with the first lady as the keynote speaker. Our first black president—with his lowest approval ratings ever—is using his race politically, through a surrogate. But shameless as all this is, it may have some effect. As Shelby Steele, a political scientist at the Hoover Institution, told me, “racist stigma in America is so powerful that truth and reason look meager next to it. Any populist movement—such as the Tea Party—that is predominantly white, has this vulnerability of seeming to be a throwback to the nation’s racist past.”

    Michelle Obama’s participation as keynote speaker could prove toxic to the Democrats in the run-up to the November elections—even though she confined her remarks to obesity and the like, and steered clear of references to the Tea Party. Many in America already believe that she is a black militant in mufti, and her headlining of a gathering which cast the Tea Party as racist will have been noted by a good many ordinary, non-radical, middle-of-the-road Americans—not to mention Tea Party activists, who will be sure (and who can blame them?) to put together little YouTube packages from the NAACP shindig, cutting from Michelle O to Ben Jealous, the NAACP president who was the resolution’s prime mover.

    So here we have the Tea Party, one of the nation’s most organic, Athenian, democratic movements, being attacked by a political organization—the NAACP—that is among the most sclerotic, dinosaurian, and cadaverous of America’s political groupings. When race is in play, there is vulnerability all around. The NAACP, and President Obama, will learn that in the months ahead.

  92. Okay so were does Naacp get their money. Can it be stopped.
    I cannot keep up with with whom I am disgusted.
    I have no idea who to say no to, but I guess big govt already has its hands there cause they match. Just for kicks I am going to find the most not acceptable group and gonna donate.

  93. I am not an economist so anything I would say in that area should be discounted accordingly. But I have tried as many of you probably have to make some sense out of what is happening to our economy. My tentative conclusion is that there are a number of ways to look at the problem, and I think some of them are smoke and mirrors.

    The political way to look at our current economic malaise is as an imbalance between spending and revenues. When Bill Clinton left office, we had a balanced budget, thanks in part to his leadership and in part to the rise of the computer which drove up productivity. By the time Bush left office, two wars and simultaneous tax cuts gave us the highest deficits since World War II. Mr. Obama has driven those deficits and the national debt even higher and has set time bombs in the legislation he has passed since taking office. If that were all there was to the problem, then the solution would be to repeal his policies, establish fiscal austerity and deal with the social consequences–which could turn out to be severe and potentially destabilizing. The justification will be everyone has to tighten their belts, but the impact will be felt by those on low wages as opposed to the millionaires. Amnesty is tantamount to suicide in those circumstances.

    The business way to look at our current economic malaise is as a re-balancing of the global economy. As Kenneth Phillips points out during the second term of the Reagan Administration, a policy decision was made to abandon manufacturing in this country, to straddle the fence on high tech, and to tilt the economy toward finance. The mantra for that was we must move from the Industrial Age into the Information Age, etc. Well, in many respects we have done that, and the result has been lower paying jobs, high unemployment etc. Meanwhile, as the McKinsey article notes the center of gravity for world economic activity has shifted from the old mature economies of the west to the emerging markets around the world. Within a few years, the 40% of the world population will be middle class. Two of my friends have recently taken jobs in the Caribbean where the economies are booming compared to here. One of them had built three airports there in the last five years. But where does that leave the United States? Our politicians say green jobs. But why should those not be off shored as well?

    The economist way to look at this that our current malaise is the inevitable result of the collapse of the real economy within trans-Atlantic markets, and the expansion of fictitous, nominal finacial assets, such as financial derivative markets. Mr. Obama and his cronies in congress beat down efforts to enact real reform, and passed a financial reform bill which as the Wall Street Journal reported the day before yesterday settled for weaker than anticipated regulation. What we have now is a vast domain of quadrillions of worthless financial assets backed by US dollars. The resulting risk is a total breakdown in the global financial system. Soros wants China to lead the world out of this mess, but where does that leave the United States. Currently they are holding a trillion of our debt. The solution is an Obama-free United States and a working alliance between the US, China, India and Russia. The problem with Obama in this context is that he is a wholly owned asset of the monetarists. The other problem is he is neither trusted or respected.

    What this means to me at least is that efforts by Bill to sell Obama policies in this environment to an electorate who has had more than enough Obama are likely to be an exercise in futility. The other thing it should show democrats is that if there is to be a future for the party and the country then we must have Hillary in 2012. Smoke and mirrors, teleprompters and mindless chants of yes we can echoed and re echoed by big media won’t do it any more. This situation is too serious.

  94. I am sure I often post here and am more than a bit silly-
    But hot damn the World tRADE cENTER mosque the staten island. we hear growing population, well why the hell is America getting a growing population? Can yopu move to saudi Arabia? I cannot. Can I move to Ireland maybe as along shot. But why does no one ask why their is such a growing community. How do you get in? You have family? You have a unique skill or? I am just troubled that, that many would be able to say we need a mosque near we live.
    Why the fuck would these people want to live there. How many thousands of millions of dollars are at stake at that property.

  95. Want to re ask a question–
    What is going on with immigration that cities all ovwer the country are worried about persons from the middle east?
    If anyone has the brewer defense number I’ll do a pal pal now.

  96. The Selective Modesty of Barack Obama
    Obama’s modesty about America would be more understandable if he treated himself with the same reserve.

    Remember NASA? It once represented to the world the apogee of American scientific and technological achievement. Here is President Obama’s vision of NASA’s mission, as explained by Administrator Charles Bolden:
    One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science and math and engineering.

    Apart from the psychobabble — farcically turning a space-faring enterprise into a self-esteem enhancer — what’s the sentiment behind this charge? Sure, America has put a man on the moon, led the information revolution, and won far more Nobel Prizes than any other nation — but, on the other hand, a thousand years ago al-Khwarizmi gave us algebra.

    Bolden seems quite intent on driving home this message of achievement equivalence — lauding, for example, Russia’s contributions to the space station. Russia? In the 1990s, the Russian space program fell apart, leaving the United States to pick up the slack and the tab for the missing Russian contributions to get the space station built.

    For good measure, Bolden added that the U.S. cannot get to Mars without international assistance. Beside the fact that this is not true, contrast this with the elan and self-confidence of President Kennedy’s pledge that America would land on the moon within a decade.

    There was no finer expression of belief in American exceptionalism than Kennedy’s. Obama has a different take. As he said last year in Strasbourg, “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” Which of course means: If we’re all exceptional, no one is.

    Take human rights: After Obama’s meeting with the president of Kazakhstan, Mike McFaul of the National Security Council reported that Obama actually explained to the leader of that thuggish kleptocracy that we too are working on perfecting our own democracy

    Nor is this the only example of an implied moral equivalence that diminishes and devalues America. Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner reported that in discussions with China about human rights, the U.S. delegation brought up Arizona’s immigration law — “early and often.” As if there is the remotest connection between that and the persecution of dissidents, jailing of opponents, and suppression of religion routinely practiced by the Chinese dictatorship.

    Nothing new here. In his major addresses, Obama’s modesty about his own country has been repeatedly on display as he has gratuitously and continuously confessed America’s alleged failings — from disrespecting foreigners to having lost its way morally after 9/11.

    It’s fine to recognize the achievements of others and be non-chauvinistic about one’s country. But Obama’s modesty is curiously selective. When it comes to himself, modesty is in short supply.

    It began with the almost comical self-inflation of his presidential campaign, from the still inexplicable mass rally in Berlin in front of a Prussian victory column to the Greek columns framing him at the Democratic convention. And it carried into his presidency, from his posture of philosopher-king adjudicating between America’s sins and the world’s to his speeches marked by a spectacularly promiscuous use of the first-person pronoun “I.”

    Notice, too, how Obama habitually refers to cabinet members and other high-level government officials as “my” — “my secretary of homeland security,” “my national security team,” “my ambassador.” The more normal — and respectful — usage is to say “the,” as in “the secretary of state.” These are, after all, public officials sworn to serve the nation and protect the Constitution — not just the man who appointed them.

    It’s a stylistic detail, but quite revealing of Obama’s exalted view of himself. Not surprising, perhaps, in a man whose major achievement before acceding to the presidency was writing two biographies — both about himself.

    Obama is not the first president with a large streak of narcissism. But the others had equally expansive feelings about their country. Obama’s modesty about America would be more understandable if he treated himself with the same reserve. But it is odd to have a president so convinced of his own magnificence — yet not of his own country’s.

    — Charles Krauthammer is a nationally syndicated columnist. © 2010, the Washington Post Writers Group.

  97. happened to catch a clip earlier today on msnbc where I think it might have been Alex or one of those anchors that all look alike – anyway – she had on an AA tea party person to talk about the NAACP and the racism issue…

    …well, he let her have it…he went on and on about the SEIU thugs that beat up an AA conservative and the NBP that threatened voters and how he has not heard one word out of the NAACP about that…and then he went on about black on black violence, etc…he was very forceful and left the anchor speechless…she DEFINITELY did not expect him to go on the offense as aggresively and as articulately as he did…

    Bravo to whoever he was…

  98. Who knew the “Toe Sucker”, Dick Morris would become known as the “Sage” Toe Sucker in twenty ten? Please post when you can:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvc98QRKxrw&feature=player_embedded
    ——————————————————————
    If you want to know what the law is, don’t ask a judge ask a thief–Justice Holmes

    His closing line is very insightful. But playing the race card on Arizona, tea parties, NBPP etc. the democratic strategists have destroyed the Obama brand of a post racial president and are actually ghettoizing Mr Obama in the eyes of the rest of the electorate.

    This is a prime example of how to lose a war–by letting tactics (race card) undermine strategy (the post racial uniter). You cannot turn perceptions like this around. Too many antecedents, to the point that people are on the alert for signs of racism and want to move forward rather than backward with his NAACP/NBBP?SEIU/ACORN surrogates. This is not something the republicans or fox news have done to him. It is a self-inflicted wound.

  99. Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Thursday, July 15th at 4:30PM EDT
    2 Comments
    I believe that the topical response to this would be “You’re doing it wrong.”

    Major Dem donors who wrote checks to the Democratic Governors Association funded a below-the-radar campaign that attacked Pres. Obama and other Dem all-stars, all in hopes of knocking off a strong GOP challenger.

    [snip]

    Iowans for Responsible Government is a 527 group founded by Rob Tully, the former state Dem Party chairman. Reports filed with the Internal Revenue Service this morning show the group raised $782K and spent $767K in the second quarter. That money came entirely from the DGA, in 3 contributions in May and June.

    …And that money was spent trying – and failing – to get rid of Terry Branstad in the primary by claiming that he was a liberal Obama supporter. If it had worked, it might have revived Chet Culver’s collapsing campaign; as it stands, it’s over three quarters of a million dollars of Democratic money piled on the ground and set on fire. Branstad can now point to pretty much any criticism that he’s not conservative enough and plausibly claim that it’s just more Democratic smear-mongering. He’s already started. I imagine that Reps. Bruce Bailey and Leonard Boswell aren’t too happy about this, either: both need top-ticket support this cycle if they want to survive.

    All in all, one wonders if the funds might have been better spent supporting White, Sheehan, Patrick, Brown, Quinn, Goddard, O’Malley, Strickland… actually, at this point it’d be easier to find a Democratic gubernatorial nominee who isn’t in trouble right now.

    And, given these kinds of stupid antics, I guess that there’s a reason for that.

    Moe Lane

  100. France passes a law to ban burquas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Awesome!

    Hannity say’s this may soon come to America, will be discussed in a minute.

    Then I have to ask myself, why bother when Obama will never let it pass. He loves his bros and their misogynistic customs.

  101. Fears Grow as Millions Lose Jobless Benefits
    by Nick Carey
    Common Dreams

    CINCINNATI – Deborah Coleman lost her unemployment benefits in April, and now fears for millions of others if the Senate does not extend aid for the jobless.

    “It’s too late for me now,” she said, fighting back tears at the Freestore Foodbank in the low-income Over-the-Rhine district near downtown Cincinnati. “But it will be terrible for the people who’ll lose their benefits if Congress does nothing.”

    For nearly two years, Coleman says she has filed an average of 30 job applications a day, but remains jobless.

    “People keep telling me there are jobs out there, but I haven’t been able to find them.”

    Coleman, 58, a former manager at a telecommunications firm, said the only jobs she found were over the Ohio state line in Kentucky, but she cannot reach them because her car has been repossessed and there is no bus service to those areas.

    After her $300 a week benefits ran out, Freestore Foodbank brokered emergency 90-day support in June for rent. Once that runs out, her future is uncertain.

    “I’ve lost everything and I don’t know what will happen to me,” she said.

    The recession — the worst U.S. downturn since the 1930s — has left some 8 million people like Coleman out of work.

    Unemployment has remained stubbornly high at around 9.5 percent. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in June 6.8 million people or 45.5 percent of the total are long-term unemployed, or jobless for 27 weeks or more.

    Before the recession began in late 2007, the unemployed received benefits, usually a few hundred dollars a week, for 26 weeks or around six months after losing their jobs.

    Under the federal/state programs, which are administered by state governments and partly funded by taxes on business, only full-time workers are eligible for benefits. Within federal guidelines, benefits and eligibility vary from state to state.

    As the downturn left more Americans out of work for longer periods, Congress voted to provide funding to extend benefits to as long as 99 weeks in some areas.

    Some critics say this adds to the country’s large fiscal deficit, and may even discourage job-seeking.

    FOOD BANKS FEAR STRAIN

    An attempt to pass another extension has become bogged down in partisan political bickering in the Senate. Relief agencies fear that failure to extend benefits will strain their resources and may worsen the U.S. housing crisis.

    “This will put a great deal of stress and strain on our organization, which has already been working hard,” said Vicki Escarra, chief executive of Feeding America, which has a network of more than 200 food banks. In the year ended June 30, Feeding America distributed 3 billion pounds (1.36 billion kg) of food, a 50 percent increase over the past two years.

    The benefits debate has pitted the majority of Democrats against most Republicans and some conservative Democrats.

    When the House of Representatives passed a $34 billion benefit extension on July 1, 11 fiscally conservative Democrats voted against it. The Senate may take up the issue again in mid-July, but Republicans like Senator Tom Coburn have argued any extension must be paid for with cuts elsewhere.

    “Even then he (Coburn) is not sure if that’s a good idea,” said John Hart, a spokesman for the Oklahoma senator. “The longer the unemployed have benefits, the less incentive there is to find a job.”

    Most economists argue that cutting benefits could slow recovery, describing benefits as direct economic stimulus because almost every penny of it gets spent. In a June 28 client note, Goldman Sachs said if all additional U.S. stimulus spending expires, it could slow the economy up to 1.5 percentage points from the fourth quarter 2010 to the second quarter of 2011.

    The note added that extending unemployment benefits and a $400 tax credit would “substantially mitigate” that impact.

    3 MILLION CUT OFF IN TWO MONTHS

    During the Senate impasse, from the week ended June 5 to the week ended July 10, more than 2.1 million Americans lost their benefits. Another million will join them by July 31.

    In Ohio alone, where unemployment stood at 10.7 percent in May, more than 83,000 people lost their benefits in June.

    Sister Barbara Busch, executive director of non-profit housing group Working in Neighborhoods in Cincinnati, 65 percent of the people who come seeking help with their mortgages are unemployed or underemployed.

    “I fear once the benefits run out, I suspect we’ll see a new wave of foreclosures,” she said. “I just hope I’m wrong.”

    Ohio is a bellwether U.S. state in elections. The state’s Democratic attorney general Richard Cordray said blocking extending jobless benefits was politically motivated ahead of the midterm elections in November.

    “If people lose their benefits they will blame the congressional majority and the administration,” he said. “As unappetizing as it is, that would appear to be the strategy.”

    Senator Coburn’s spokesman Hart said suggestions the Republicans were playing partisan politics were “ludicrous.”

    “The Democrats say that because they want to avoid making the hard decisions,” he said.

    Alonzo Allen, 55, a former aid agency worker in Cincinnati whose benefits will run out in September, spends two days a week volunteering at the food bank in Over-the-Rhine and the other three looking for work. He said he worries about the one-bedroom apartment he rents and how he will feed his dog Ginger, who is the “only family I have.”

    “If the benefits stop, I’ll be out on the street and I’ll lose all my furniture,” he said. “That’s going to be tough.”

  102. Kill the Ground Zero Mosque TV Ad

    http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/07/15/ground-zero-mosque-ad-rejected-cbs-nbc/#more-83534

    CBS and NBC have rejected an ad by the National Republican Trust PAC that seeks to rally viewers against a proposed mosque that would be built two blocks from the site of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack in New York City. The one-minute spot (embedded below) begins with the words “the audacity of JIHAD” flashing on the screen followed shortly thereafter by the image of a plane flying into the World Trade Center; an accompanying voiceover declares that “to celebrate that murder of 3,000 Americans, they want to build a monstrous 13-story mosque at Ground Zero.”

    The national spot “didn’t meet our broadcast standards,” said a spokesperson for CBS, confirming the network’s decision not to run it. An NBC spokesperson also confirmed the decision to reject the spot, but did not offer an explanation why. Nonetheless, EW obtained a letter from NBC Universal advertising standards manager Jennifer Riley to the NRT PAC explaining that: “An ad questioning the wisdom of building a mosque at ground zero would meet our issues of public controversy advertising criteria. However, this ad which ambiguously defines ‘they’ as referenced in the spot, makes it unclear as to whether the reference is to terrorists or to the Islamic religious organization that is sponsoring the building of the mosque. Consequently the ad is not acceptable under our guidelines for broadcast.”

  103. Obama’s next act

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, July 16, 2010

    In the political marketplace, there’s now a run on Obama shares. The left is disappointed with the president. Independents are abandoning him in droves. And the right is already dancing on his political grave, salivating about November when, his own press secretary admitted Sunday, Democrats might lose the House.

    I have a warning for Republicans: Don’t underestimate Barack Obama.

    Consider what he has already achieved. Obamacare alone makes his presidency historic. It has irrevocably changed one-sixth of the economy, put the country inexorably on the road to national health care and, as acknowledged by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus but few others, begun one of the most massive wealth redistributions in U.S. history.

    Second, there is major financial reform, which passed Congress on Thursday. Economists argue whether it will prevent meltdowns and bailouts as promised. But there is no argument that it will give the government unprecedented power in the financial marketplace. Its 2,300 pages will create at least 243 new regulations that will affect not only, as many assume, the big banks but just about everyone, including, as noted in one summary (the Wall Street Journal), “storefront check cashiers, city governments, small manufacturers, home buyers and credit bureaus.”

    Third is the near $1 trillion stimulus, the largest spending bill in U.S. history. And that’s not even counting nationalizing the student loan program, regulating carbon emissions by Environmental Protection Agency fiat, and still-fitful attempts to pass cap-and-trade through Congress.

    But Obama’s most far-reaching accomplishment is his structural alteration of the U.S. budget. The stimulus, the vast expansion of domestic spending, the creation of ruinous deficits as far as the eye can see are not easily reversed.

    These are not mere temporary countercyclical measures. They are structural deficits because, as everyone from Obama on down admits, the real money is in entitlements, most specifically Medicare and Medicaid. But Obamacare freezes these out as a source of debt reduction. Obamacare’s $500 billion in Medicare cuts and $600 billion in tax increases are siphoned away for a new entitlement — and no longer available for deficit reduction.

    The result? There just isn’t enough to cut elsewhere to prevent national insolvency. That will require massive tax increases — most likely a European-style value-added tax. Just as President Ronald Reagan cut taxes to starve the federal government and prevent massive growth in spending, Obama’s wild spending — and quarantining health-care costs from providing possible relief — will necessitate huge tax increases.

    The net effect of 18 months of Obamaism will be to undo much of Reaganism. Both presidencies were highly ideological, grandly ambitious and often underappreciated by their own side. In his early years, Reagan was bitterly attacked from his right. (Typical Washington Post headline: “For Reagan and the New Right, the Honeymoon Is Over” — and that was six months into his presidency!) Obama is attacked from his left for insufficient zeal on gay rights, immigration reform, closing Guantanamo — the list is long. The critics don’t understand the big picture. Obama’s transformational agenda is a play in two acts.

    Act One is over. The stimulus, Obamacare, financial reform have exhausted his first-term mandate. It will bear no more heavy lifting. And the Democrats will pay the price for ideological overreaching by losing one or both houses, whether de facto or de jure. The rest of the first term will be spent consolidating these gains (writing the regulations, for example) and preparing for Act Two.

    The next burst of ideological energy — massive regulation of the energy economy, federalizing higher education and “comprehensive” immigration reform (i.e., amnesty) — will require a second mandate, meaning reelection in 2012.

    That’s why there’s so much tension between Obama and congressional Democrats. For Obama, 2010 matters little. If Democrats lose control of one or both houses, Obama will probably have an easier time in 2012, just as Bill Clinton used Newt Gingrich and the Republicans as the foil for his 1996 reelection campaign.

    Obama is down, but it’s very early in the play. Like Reagan, he came here to do things. And he’s done much in his first 500 days. What he has left to do he knows must await his next 500 days — those that come after reelection.

    The real prize is 2012. Obama sees far, farther than even his own partisans. Republicans underestimate him at their peril.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/15/AR2010071504593.html

  104. HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT
    The secretary of state could mount a formidable challenge to Obama.
    Wall Street Journal

    By PETE DU PONT

    America’s economy is failing to produce jobs, increase growth or raise confidence, and it will likely get even worse next year. Our federal government’s spending has increased to $3.7 trillion this year from $2.98 trillion in 2008. Publicly held national debt is up by $2.4 trillion in less than two years, to about 63% percent of GDP from 40%, and is expected to reach 70% by 2012. Add in the unemployment rate, which has remained above 9.4% for over a year, and America is clearly failing economically.

    Next January the economy will be further depressed by increasing tax rates. The top income tax rate will rise to 39.6% from 35%, and the phase-out of itemized deductions and personal exemptions will effectively lift the top bracket to about 40.8%. On New Year’s Day the tax on dividends is scheduled to go up to 39.6% from 15%, and come 2013, ObamaCare will add another 3.8%.

    Other bad public policies will further drag down the economy. ObamaCare will increase individual costs and expand the deficit. Failing energy policies, from Washington’s inept response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to its effort to limit tapping America’s oil supplies, will drive up our use of imported foreign oil beyond the current 67% of our country’s oil consumption.

    ***
    Add together all these increases in government regulation, spending and taxes and a dim employment outlook, and the result is a dramatic national decline in support of the White House, Congress and their administration of our national policies.

    So what can be done to change America’s policies and make our economy stronger? For one thing, we could elect a president with different thinking. Almost any Republican candidate would have that, and, as we will see in a moment, there is one obvious Democrat who would change our course too.

    And why would the Democratic Party want to do that? Because the re-election of President Obama is becoming more problematic. The latest Rasmussen Reports polls show the dramatic decline of the presidential approval index, the difference between those who “strongly approve” of Mr. Obama’s performance and those who “strongly disapprove.” It began at plus 25% when the new president was sworn in, and has steadily declined to minus 13%.

    It isn’t just the president whose poll numbers are falling fast. According to recent Harris polling, Vice President Biden viewed favorably by 26% of the public and unfavorably by 45%. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does even worse, 20% positive to 49% negative. A June Nevada poll gave Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader, 33% approval and 52% disapproval.

    But the greatest contrast and most interesting statistic is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ratings: 45% favorable and only 35% unfavorable.

    That is not surprising, and there are some obvious factors that suggest she might have a chance of defeating President Obama if she were to challenge him for the 2012 Democratic nomination.

    First, as Peggy Noonan wrote earlier this month, the conclusion one hears from most “normal” American people is that the president “is in over his head, and out of his depth.” Even most progressives agree that “the Obama presidency has been a big disappointment,” according to Eric Alterman of The Nation. That means there’s a big opportunity for Mrs. Clinton.

    Second, she is physically and intellectually strong enough to take on a difficult campaign. She showed that running against Obama two years ago.

    Third, she is one of the most experienced prospective candidates the Democratic Party has had in a long while: wife of a governor, U.S. first lady, senator and now secretary of state. This is a good record to run on as someone who knows how the government works.

    Fourth, she is an experienced foreign-policy adviser who understands the threats to our national security: unresolved conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, rising threats of nuclear capability in Iran and North Korea, and uncertainties in Pakistan.

    Fifth, experience will be even more important to voters in the 2012 presidential election, whose 2008 gamble on someone with little experience is proving costly.

    Finally, Washington’s deadly left-liberal policies that have propelled the American economy in a very bad direction can be turned around. If Mrs. Clinton made the case that America must get rid of the huge debt the current administration has created, must create much better economic growth with lower tax rates, and must strongly assist employer job creation, she would appeal to a broad voter coalition.

    ***
    All this must be obvious to the inner circle of the current president’s administration. So what is he to do? That’s pretty simple–just add his secretary of state to the 2012 ticket as his new running mate.

    We don’t know whether Mr. Obama is already thinking about making this kind of change next year, but we do know he needs some very good policy outcomes to be re-elected. And if none of these Obama changes come to pass, Mrs. Clinton could put together a very effective campaign to get the nomination for herself.

    Considering how badly things are going in America just now, that could turn out to be a slam dunk for her and the disgruntled Democratic Party.

  105. Jan-I read the Krauthammer article and he is right to caution his side not to underestimate the Messiah. But the view that has crystalized about him is that he is anti business, and you can only ride that horse so far and the donors will shut their wallets. He will still have the Soros cabal behind him, but most others will abandon ship. And things are likely to fall apart in 2011 for the political, buiness and economic reasons above. I think the view expressed by Pete DuPont is the more accurate one.

  106. The irony of Bams having to use Bill to save his Presidency is absolutely astounding. The press had written off Bill and Hillary so many times, and like the line in the Simon and Garfunkel song “Mrs. Robinson”, “A nation turns its lonely eyes to you “.

  107. wbboei
    July 15th, 2010 at 5:11 pm

    “The political way to look at our current economic malaise is as an imbalance between spending and revenues. When Bill Clinton left office, we had a balanced budget, thanks in part to his leadership and in part to the rise of the computer which drove up productivity.”
    _______________________________________

    Just to add, when BC left office we not only had a balanced budget but a surplus.

    “What this means to me at least is that efforts by Bill to sell Obama policies in this environment to an electorate who has had more than enough Obama are likely to be an exercise in futility. The other thing it should show democrats is that if there is to be a future for the party and the country then we must have Hillary in 2012. Smoke and mirrors, teleprompters and mindless chants of yes we can echoed and re echoed by big media won’t do it any more. This situation is too serious.”

    _____________________________________

    I recall watching and listening to the events online during the ‘Clinton Initiatives’ hosted by Bill Clinton. He repeated over and over again the jobs Americans need are in the GREEN sector. I believe when and if Hillary
    becomes President, her focus will be heavy government participation in growing both the economy and jobs within the environmental zones of the GREEN sector where hundreds of thousands of jobs can be created by retrofitting the unemployed to everything related to the environment. The elements of the Earth- AIR, WATER, EARTH, FIRE. The elemental sources of life on the planet.

    Obama is ignoring the environment while his millionaire political donor buddies lay the groundwork for new and innovative environmental companies. For example, in the natural gas/energy sectors to eventually defeat our dependency on oil, starving out the old Trust Fund Standard Oil families enriched for decades by the oil industry.

    Unfortunately, they have no immediate plans for making their energy less expensive for consumer consumption. Natural Gas is clean energy. The drawback is even though it’s consumption is a little gentler on our pocketbooks; the owners like Buffet and Soros will hold the cost right up there comparable to current fossil fuel pricing. Soros and Buffet are just 2 of the Obama herders I found attempting to imitate the Trust Fund template created in the past by the Rockefellers, Bushes and VanBurens. As they aspire to become the First new Energy Titans of the 21st century (hopefully bankrupting the Rockerfellers, Bushes and VanBurens) simply because they can-

  108. How I wish Pete du Pont had run for President. He would have been much better than either of the Bushes. But he is too old now.

  109. From wikipedia Wbboei:

    ===================
    Presidential aspirations
    “With his term as Governor forced by law to end in 1985, du Pont, as the dominant Delaware politician, was widely expected by many to challenge for the U.S. Senate incumbent Democratic U.S. Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr. But du Pont never found much interest in legislative politics and declined to run, preparing instead for a long shot bid for the Republican U.S. Presidential nomination in the United States presidential election, 1988. He declared his intent on September 16, 1986, before anyone else. Coincidentally, Biden was also seeking his party’s nomination.

    Running in earnest through the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, du Pont presented an unconventional, but thoughtful program. As described by Celia Cohen in her book, Only in Delaware, du Pont, “wanted to reform Social Security by offering recipients private savings options in exchange for a corresponding reduction in government benefits. He proposed phasing out government subsidies for farmers. He said he would wean welfare clients off their benefits and get them into the workforce, even if government had to provide entry level jobs to get them started. He suggested students be subjected to mandatory, random drug tests with those who flunked losing their drivers [sic] licenses.” [1] These ideas were unusual enough that they left plenty of opportunity to paint du Pont as a novice and an oddity. In one of the debates future U.S. President George H. W. Bush made gentle fun of du Pont’s first name, and called it “nutty to fool around with the Social Security system.” After finishing next to last in the New Hampshire primary, du Pont left the race….”

  110. wbboei
    July 15th, 2010 at 10:18 pm

    How I wish Pete du Pont had run for President. He would have been much better than either of the Bushes. But he is too old now.
    ___________________________

    He was a friend of my Dad’s. He called him jokingly, a cheapskate.

  111. Ex-Clinton fundraiser gets 12 years in prison
    Thu Jul 15, 11:04 am ET

    NEW YORK – A wealthy Manhattan investment banker who was once a top fundraiser for Hillary Rodham Clinton and other big-name Democrats has been sentenced to 12 years in prison for bank fraud.

    Hassan Nemazee (hah-SAHN’ nah-MAH’-zee) was sentenced Thursday in federal court in Manhattan.

    He had reached a plea deal in March. He has admitted to three counts of bank fraud and one count of wire fraud.

    Prosecutors say he forged signatures and concocted bogus account statements to conceal a scam in which he was using proceeds from new loans to pay off older ones.

    Nemazee had been the national finance chairman of Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign

  112. About time!
    ************
    July 15, 2010
    ‘Oprah Winfrey Show’ hits all-time ratings low
    “The Oprah Winfrey Show” sunk to an all-time low in the most recent ratings report, falling below the 3.0 mark for the first time in the show’s history.

    The syndicated program averaged 3.8 million viewers for the week of June 28. …

  113. Just to add, when BC left office we not only had a balanced budget but a surplus.
    **********
    Another effect of the eight Clinton years was a significant redistribution of income away from the top 1 %ers. Bush/Cheney quickly corrected this “problem” along with the balanced budget and the surplus. As Alan Simpson calls the bottom 80 %ers, “The Lesser People”; can’t allow those folks to have too much money. Obama is accelerating the flow of cash upward and has Alan Simpson in charge of cutting the “safety net” for those “lesser people”.

Comments are closed.