Most voters view the new national health care law as bad for the country and want to repeal it.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 35% of Likely U.S. Voters now believe the trouble-plagued health care law is good for America. Fifty-five percent (55%) consider it bad for the country. Only two percent (2%) think it will have no impact.
When you ask Google to define “chuzpah,” you get this:
I think that’s the best way to describe this:
“We should have anticipated that that would create a rockier rollout than if Democrats and Republicans were both invested in success,” Obama said. “One of the problems we’ve had is one side of Capitol Hill is invested in failure, and that makes, I think, the kind of iterative process of fixing glitches as they come up and fine-tuning the law more challenging.”
The reason they didn’t see this coming is because Republicans have been so busy saying it wouldn’t work?
But then, why wouldn’t he say whatever he wanted? Who’s going to call him out on it?
In a recorded recitation uploaded to YouTube on November 9, President Obama read the address in its entirety. However, when it came to the line “that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom,” the President left out the words “under God.”
Obama’s omission occurs at the 1:35 mark.
Obama respects the feelings of those who might be offended by hearing “God” than he does the words of Abraham Lincoln or America’s history.
Turns out, back in 2006President Obama wasn’t a fan of what he’d doing today:
Americans fought a Revolution in part over the right to be free from unreasonable searches–to ensure that our Government could not come knocking in the middle of the night for no reason. We need to find a way forward to make sure we can stop terrorists while protecting the privacy and liberty of innocent Americans. We have to find a way to give the President the power he needs to protect us, while making sure he does not abuse that power. It is possible to do that. We have done it before. We could do it again.
The term most often refers to the denial of blame in (formal or informal) chains of command, where senior figures assign responsibility to the lower ranks, and records of instructions given do not exist or are inaccessible, meaning independent confirmation of responsibility for the action is nearly impossible. In the case that illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such act or any connection to the agents used to carry out such acts. The lack of evidence to the contrary ostensibly makes the denial plausible, that is, credible. The term typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions to plausibly avoid responsibility for one’s (future) actions or knowledge.
Now we’re being told that senior people in the White House knew about the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups. And by “senior officials,” I don’t mean Obama.
It amazes me how little Obama is involved in considering how much credit he takes for all the good that happens.
But then, maybe he doesn’t have time to learn about the IRS abusing its authority, what with him leading raids on compounds in Pakistan.
While I was driving back from Columbia today, I listened to El Rushbo. One thing he does, and I think Hannity copies this, is compile different sound bites from different news broadcasts that not only have the same message, but actually all use the same terminology.
We’ve got a media montage here. That press conference the other day really rattled these guys in the media. They thought that Obama’s reelection was gonna usher in an LBJ-style, Great Society avalanche of liberalism — and they’re getting worried Obama can’t deliver. He couldn’t deliver his own party on a gun control bill. Let’s listen to the montage. We got Dan Balz, Jessica Yellin, Al Hunt, F. Chuck Todd, Bob Shrum, Tom Brokaw, and Cokie Roberts.
BALZ: Analogies are made to Lyndon Johnson and he should be more like Lyndon Johnson, breaking arms and legs and twisting everybody.
YELLIN: He’s not LBJ! Everybody knows that!
HUNT: He’s not LBJ.
TODD: He’s not gonna ever be LBJ.
SHRUM: The Lyndon Johnson comparison…
ROBERTS: Why doesn’t he just knock heads like LBJ did?
BROKAW: Lyndon Johnson gave quite a few press conferences, and he shut that down.
ROBERTS: When you listen to LBJ, that is leadership.
RUSH: Where in the world did this come from?
That’s a good question, but not what I want to focus on. I want to focus on how LBJ operated.
He was a bully. Flat out.
Take a look at this photo:
That’s not LBJ going in for a little open mouth guy on guy action. That’s Whitney Young getting “The Johnson Treatment.”
Here’s Johnson pulling it on 90 year old Senator Theodore Green:
Here’s one of the most iconic photos of Johnson being a bully:
The Johnson Treatment has been described as having ‘a large St. Bernard licking your face and pawing you all over.’ LBJ was a big man, and the original “close talker.” The Johnson Treatment was a singular combination of physical intimidation and coercion, and it was one of his most effective tools as he mastered the Senate, and later, to a far lesser degree, the Presidency. The phrase “The Johnson Treatment” is sometimes also used to describe being violated by unwanted company. LBJ would paw you, lean into you, get right up in your grill and ask you for a favor. Except it wasn’t really asking.
So when these guys say Obama isn’t Johnson, they’re saying he’s not able to lean into people’s grill and intimidate them.
I don’t disagree. Does this guy intimidate you?
Yeah, me neither.
And another way he’s not like LBJ is an assumption on my part, but I’m confident he’s not dropping N-bombs during casual conversation:
[LBJ's] racial attitudes were mixed up beyond any possibility of our untangling them cleanly now: Mr. Dallek quotes him defending the Supreme Court appointment of the very well-known Thurgood Marshall, rather than a black judge less identified with the civil rights cause, by saying to a staff member, “Son, when I appoint a nigger to the court, I want everyone to know he’s a nigger.”
And, let’s not forget:
The man those leftist journalists want Obama to be like dropped N-bombs like a hipster drops “before it was cool.”
So, today’s media wants Obama to be more like a racist bully from the 60s.
And the only thing saving their play is the collective ignorance and apathy of a majority of the public schooled American public.
And, who besides the new media is going to call them on it?
For some reason, when Barack Obama promised the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials that he would push for comprehensive immigration reform, the not only believed him, they rose to their feet and applauded.
Barack Obama won a standing ovation Friday at a Latino conference inFlorida Friday in which he promised to press for wholescale immigration reform and described his temporary measure last week to help undocumented youth as simply right thing to do.
He said that his move, giving a temporary two-year visa to an estimated 800,000 young people whose parents moved to the US illegally, was aimed at “lifting the shadow of deportation and giving them a reason to hope”.
He added: “That was the right thing to do.”
The president also used the speech to make repeated digs at his Republican rival, Mitt Romney, who spoke the previous day to the same audience, the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (Naleo), near Orlando. He reminded the audience of things Romney has said over the last year about immigration.
By contrast with Obama, Romney received only intermittent and tepid applause.
In his attempt to solidify Hispanic voters’ support for his re-election, President Barack Obama granted about 800,000 illegal immigrants amnesty. When this announcement was made, Daily Caller reporter Neil Munro asked him ”Why are you putting foreign workers over American?”
The water carrying media, aghast that someone would question this president, changed the narrative from the fact that Neil asked a good question that needs a good answer to the outrageousness of how Neil went about asking the question.
The question stands, and Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies is still asking it:
The most significant and contentious aspect of the new policy is that it automatically grants hundreds of thousands of people in their teens and 20s — most of them from Mexico and Central America — the right to work in the United States. Many may have already been working, but as undocumented laborers they often had to accept low wages and poor conditions.
“For hundreds of thousands of young people, the immediate effect will be that they can exhale and go out and look for a job,” said Gustavo Andrade, an official of the pro-immigrant group CASA of Maryland.
But Steven Camarota, a researcher with the nonprofit Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, said that the Obama administration was not taking into account the new measure’s probable impact on competition for jobs at the low end of the economic scale, where chronic unemployment is highest. Among Americans with less than a high school education, he said, the jobless rate is 13 percent.
“It doesn’t seem the administration is considering the cascading consequences,” Camarota said. “What does this mean for unemployed Americans who will be competing for jobs with a million-plus people who can now apply for work authorization? Is this really a good idea?”
No. It isn’t. Not unless you are more focused on winning re-election than anything else.
And black voters I have a question for you. How do you feel about voting for Obama when you consider this:
Unfortunately, the unemployment rate for African Americans rose in May to 13.6 percent from 13.0 percent in April, the Labor Department said on Friday. The numbers mirrored the national unemployment rate, which also increased to 8.2 percent from 8.1 percent, the first rise in 11 months. Further, employers created only 69,000 jobs in May, the smallest amount in a year. The startling numbers mean that federal, state, and local governments will have to invest in job-training programs for African-American workers who are increasingly losing jobs like those in the public sector, Rep. Danny K. Davis (Ill-D) told NewsOne.
When you look at the numbers and consider Obama’s actions, it kind of makes you think that…