Will Obama Give Credit Where Credit is Due? Doubtful.

The nice thing about being on vacation, or in this case, a mini vacation, I saw the following exchange between Gretchen Carlson and Robert Gibbs as it happened. In my rush to get things done before I return to work tomorrow, I forgot about until I came across this video at Common Cents:



Until Obama gives his big speech tonight we will not know if he gives credit where credit is do and admits that back in 2007 he, Obama, was wrong about the war in Iraq and President Bush was absolutely right. My guess-not a chance in Hell.


Obama is a complete narcissist. He blames everyone else for anything that goes wrong and takes credit for everything that goes right, whether he had a hand in it or not. Problem is, videos like the one above, and so many more, document Obama's previous positions for all time. Obama should show Bush a kindness but it really doesn't matter if he doesn't. In the end, history will judge the two men and their presidencies. I suspect, Bush will come out way ahead in the long run.

Obama's Extreme Makeover

The Oval Office design makeover is top secret but the Obama administration lets WikiLeaks go ahead.

The Ground Zero Mosque is just a simple matter of freedom of religion, no questions asked.

Last night we had an arrest of alleged terrorists on a flight originating from our President Barack Obama's home airport at O'Hare.

If they blow a hole there will this be the next site of a supremacist Sharia mosque?

America doesn't need a makeover.

Congress and the Oval Office need a real one--in November.

HT Memeorandum. RealClearPolitics.

More. The president gives a speech on Iraq today. Will he be gracious? Will he even mention the word terror? Will he speak for America?

And Jim Geraghty, NRO's Morning Jolt: TSA: Trouble Searching Anybody

Most recent posts here.

This is no time to increase spending

Are you one of those unpatriotic ninnies who erroneously believes that you can't spend your way out of a hole? Shame on you! You are the reason that Barry's "Summer of Recovery" has (unexpectedly) turned into a "Summer of Bust". Robert J. Samuelson explains:

Why is the recovery faltering? There are many explanations: a depressed housing market; weaker-than-expected exports; cautious corporations. But consumers, representing 70 percent of the economy's $14.5 trillion of spending, are the crux of the matter.

It isn't that Americans aren't behaving as anticipated. They may actually be outperforming. "Consumers are deleveraging (reducing debt) . . . and rebuilding saving faster than expected," writes economist Richard Berner of Morgan Stanley. In 2007, the personal savings rate (the share of after-tax income devoted to saving) was 2 percent. Now it's about 6 percent. Temporarily, this hurts buying. Declines in consumer spending in 2008 and 2009 were the first back-to-back annual drops since the 1930s. Since World War II, annual consumption spending had fallen only twice (1974 and 1980).

No job or worried about losing your job? Buck up! Don't put money in the bank for a rainy day. Spend it.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't our national spending spree the reason we are in this mess now? People bought the government line that everyone deserved to own a home, whether they could afford it or not and whether or not their credit history indicated that they would pay for the home even if they could afford it. As more and more people bought houses the prices went up and riskier loan schemes became necessary to put people in to homes. Once the ball started rolling it didn't stop until it went right off the cliff and it was straight down from there.

When will people feel secure enough to start spending? My parent, children of the Great Depression, were never spenders though they could easily afford to be. It wouldn't surprise me if the young people of today, having watched their parents lose their jobs, then their homes and cars, end up being much more fiscally conservative than the people of my generation. In any case, it is unrealistic to expect people to spend on random goods and services when they are not sure where the next meal is coming from.

Any talk of increased consumer spending is premature when unemployment is sitting at ten percent. First, get the government out of the marketplace and off the backs of employers and the jobs will come. Spending will follow, though hopefully never at the levels that spurred this crisis to begin with.

Cross posted at Carol's Closet

Good morning

Most recent posts here.

Friday p.m. various & sundry

Maybe it's because I've been busy and away from the news, but even sine Steyn (how long, Mark, how long?) NRO has outdone itself today. A sample:

John Derbyshire on how to fix our schools: Race to Nowhere

Here is my prescription for a reform of the nation’s education system. First, destroy all the schools. Cart away the rubble for landfill and sow the ground with salt. Abolish the federal Department of Education and all state equivalents. End all education funding from public sources.

If the inhabitants of any district then wish their kids to be educated in schools, let them raise the necessary funds themselves.

An anti-government-school radical after my own heart.


Krauthammer on the bankruptcy and malignancy of the Left: The Last Refuge of the Liberal

Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the “bitter” people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging “to guns or religion or” — this part is less remembered — “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”

That’s a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking. [. . .]

Now we know why the country has become “ungovernable,” last year’s excuse for the Democrats’ failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?

RTR. Dr. K nails it as usual. The Left has no honor.


Jonah Goldberg on Obama's sea of troubles: Dorsal Fins Surround White House

Convinced that his popularity was eternal, Obama responded by saying, yes, but there’s a “big difference” between 1994 and 2010, and that big difference is, “you’ve got me.”

The funny thing is, Obama might have been right. Because things might be much worse for Democrats in 2010 than they were in 1994 — and the big difference might well be Barack Obama. [. . .]

Moreover, Obama has lost his connection with the American people. He’s aloof without inspiring confidence. On issue after issue — terrorism, immigration, the oil spill, the environment, and the Ground Zero mosque — he seems determined to craft his responses in a way that will annoy the most people possible.

RTR.


On the Corner, Andy McCarthy keeps his eye on the ball:

It’s a sleepy Friday in late August, the president is on another vacation, Congress is out of town, no one is paying much attention. What better time for the Obama administration to pull the plug, once again, on military commissions? This time, it has halted the case of top al-Qaeda operative Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who was to be prosecuted by a military court for the Cole bombing. The Washington Post report is here, and Jen Rubin has thoughts at Contentions.

Also from J-Ru, how hubris precludes self-correction:

I was wrong – I underestimated how badly Obama would harm his own party and how quickly the American people would turn on him. But in answer to your query, I am not holding my breath; the clique that scoffed at the notion that Ronald Reagan (or Margaret Thatcher or John Paul II) could win the Cold War and that has bowed before the false idol of Keynesianism should not be expected to reflect on its misjudgments. Unlike the Bourbons (who managed to remember everything), the left learns nothing and remembers nothing. It is why it is so drearily predictable and so often surprised.

Just think where we might be now if Obama, Pelosi, and Reid hadn't so utterly lost their heads, and instead of trying to force their entire statist agenda down our throats, they had plotted out a more subtle, slower paced power grab? The electorate would be dozing instead of reaching for their pitchforks.


Does Charlie Crist have to work at being a consummate weasel or is it just a gift? From The Hill via the Corner:

Crist told a local TV station Friday that he would have voted in favor of President Obama's healthcare proposal were he in the Senate. That was a reversal of his previous position against the healthcare law.

"I would have voted for it," Crist said in the interview. "But I think it can be done better, I really do."

But now, Crist says he "misspoke" in that interview. His campaign sent out a statement Friday afternoon clarifying Crist's position on the healthcare law.

"If I misspoke, I want to be abundantly clear: the health care bill was too big, too expensive, and expanded the role of government far too much," Crist said in a statement. "Had I been in the United States Senate at the time, I would have voted against the bill because of unacceptable provisions like the cuts to the Medicare Advantage program."

The campaigns of both Rubio and Meek are having an absolute field day with Crist's flip-flop.

And there are people who plan to vote for this man. Oy.

*Updated to add Victor Davis Hanson's piece, The Sources of American Anger:

In addition, Obama and his crew see America in isolation, without comparison to the wretchedness that exists in so much of the world outside our borders. So a logical disconnect is never quite explained. If America is so xenophobic and culpable, why would millions of Mexicans or Middle Eastern Muslims wish to immigrate here — and what exactly is America doing to attract them that their own countries are not? If Michelle Obama felt that she could not be proud of America before Barack Obama’s accession, was it the free-market system that both provoked her ire and created the capital for her to jet to Marbella?

In other words, with the race/class/gender critique of the Obamians comes very little appreciation of the bounty, freedom, and affluence that they so eagerly embrace. Surely someone in the past — perhaps even white males — must have been doing something right for America to evolve into a place that our present-day critics apparently enjoy.

Also adding Andy McCarthy's Why They Can't Condemn Hamas. Feisal Rauf is as slippery as an eel:

During a WABC radio interview, Aaron Klein three times pressed Rauf to admit that Hamas is a terrorist organization. Rauf bobbed and weaved in classic Islamist style. “I’m not a politician,” he replied, as if only politicians trouble themselves over whether terrorists are terrorists. “I try to avoid the issues. The issue of terrorism is a very complex question.” Avoid the issues? You don’t say!

But it is not a complex question, no more complex than “Does Derek Jeter play for the Yankees?” It is a straightforward question that Islamists complicate with clever casuistry, carefully designed to ring all the right chimes for our opinion elites and their media pitchmen.

RTR.


Thanks to MichelleMalkin.com for the Buzzworthy link.

Most recent posts here.

Swing states swinging away from Obama

PPP pollster Tom Jensen calls these numbers brutal:

The trend is the same in all three states: independents are very unhappy
with Obama and Republicans dislike him more than Democrats like him. And although part of the reason his numbers are so bad in these states is that they model a 2010 electorate, the polls also show him losing far more of his 2008 voters than picking up support from folks who went for John McCain.

-In Florida Obama's approval is 39% with 55% of voters disapproving of him. 88% of Republicans disapprove while just 73% of Democrats approve and independents go against him by a 52/36 margin. Only 78% of people who voted for him in 2008 like the job he's doing while 93% who voted against him disapprove.

-In Pennsylvania Obama's approval is 40% with 55% of voters disapproving of him. 85% of Republicans disapprove while just 68% of Democrats approve and independents go against him by a 63/32 margin. Only 78% of people who voted for him in 2008 like the job he's doing while 93% who voted against him disapprove, identical numbers to Florida on that count.

-In Ohio Obama's approval is 42% with 54% of voters disapproving of him. 94% of Republicans disapprove while only 79% of Democrats approve and independents go against him by a 58/33 margin. Only 76% of people who voted for him in 2008 approve while 91% who voted against him disapprove.

I read this aloud to the family last night and #4 daughter asked, "How about California?" We explained that that gigantic bucket of electoral votes normally goes to the Dems by default. I know it's a long way from 2012. But the way things are going, who knows?

Most recent posts here.

That was fast

For heaven's sake. Awful news for Strasburg and the Nats:

WASHINGTON -- Stephen Strasburg has a torn elbow ligament and will likely have Tommy John surgery, bringing the pitcher's promising rookie season to an abrupt end. Washington Nationals general manager Mike Rizzo said Friday an MRI on the right elbow revealed a "significant tear." Strasburg will travel to the West Coast for a second opinion, but Rizzo anticipates the 22-year-old right-hander will need the operation that requires 12 to 18 months of rehabilitation.

Most recent posts here.

Obama the relativist

That a significant portion of Americans suspect Barack Obama to be a secret Muslim attests to their awareness of his ideological bias against the West, a bias which doesn't, of course, extend to eschewing the liberties and material goods Western culture has made possible. (That hardly makes him unique among critics of the West.)

But his anti-Western, pro-Muslim political sympathies aside, Obama is no Muslim. Nor (to state the obvious) is he, in my view, a Christian in any real sense. Considering the message put forth by the church he joined in Chicago (for political purposes), his open contempt for those who "cling to their religion," and despite the spiritual messages he allegedly receives every day on his Blackberry, Obama-as-Christian fails to convince. I don't personally know any Christians who see Obama as a follower of Christ. Maybe they're out there somewhere,* but Obama's self-professed Christianity strikes me as just another lie no one really believes. I don't mind it a bit that he's not a Christian; it's the pretense and attempt to use religion as a tool that offends. (Of course, that doesn't make him unique, either.)

That some Muslims see our president as a fellow believer isn't surprising, given his personal history, name, and sympathies. But that's a superficial view. They don't know the man very well. For a very cogent piece of Obamanalysis, see George Neumayr's A Relativist, Wrapped in a Muslim, Inside an Agnostic. Excerpt:

So what religion is Obama? Probably the most generous description of Obama's elusive religious identity, should one take him at "his word" as it appears in his slippery memoirs and speeches, is that he's neither Muslim nor Christian; he's something else. His late mother, whom he once called a "Christian from Kansas" but actually was a non-believing anthropologist from Kansas, would have found classifying him tricky too. But perhaps he can be clinically described as a practicing agnostic, with deep roots in and sympathy for Islam, who views his now-professed, politically necessary religion with barely concealed disdain while allowing himself from time to time bursts of syncretistic sophistry and quasi-religious uplift.

At least this much is clear: his greatest fear is not radical Islam abroad but the growth of doctrinal Christianity at home. Imagine if he treated Muslims in the same arrogant manner that his administration treats pro-life Christian doctors, nurses, and pharmacists; imagine if he imposed secularism on imams the way his administration uses it to silence Christians opposed to "LGBT rights." Islamic groups like CAIR would accuse him of rank persecution.

I'm itching to excerpt the last two paragraphs but it would be better for you to read them in context. The piece isn't long.

*Update: Who knew? Pardon me if I remain skeptical, list or no list. (Where are the names Pfleger and Wright?)

Most recent posts here.

Just let him order his shrimp

Our tone-deaf president is turning into a parody of himself. Tapper tweets:

Reporter shouts question on Iraq to POTUS, who's ordering at restaurant. POTUS responds: "We're buying shrimp, guys. Come on."

It's really appalling the way the presidency cuts into his personal time.


Photo from Michelle's Mirror, but no explanation there of the garment. A super-sized lobster bib?

Most recent posts here.

Follow Christie's example

Take note, spineless politicos: His approval rating is up to 51% (not that he cares). And he didn't get there by taking the easy path.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Most recent posts here.

Hear her roar

No time this morning, but Mike said it pithily:

Mama Grizzly Roars

Whatever the final outcome in Alaska, behold the power of Sarah Palin.
Beware Democrats. You're going to be drinking tea this November.
And in 2012. Get used to it.

Murkowski is not reacting with class:

“I think she’s out for her own self-interest. I don’t think she’s out for Alaska’s interest,” Murkowski said as she waited at her campaign headquarters for results to come in.

Whether she wins or loses, that is a loser statement.

Related: Chuck Todd begins to catch on.


Most recent posts here.

Cuccinelli of VA says state can regulate abortion clinics

Ken Cuccinelli, Attorney General of Virginia, plays hardball on the abortion issue:

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II has concluded that the state can impose stricter oversight over clinics that perform abortions, a move immediately decried by abortion-rights organizations and others as an attempt to circumvent the General Assembly, which has repeatedly rejected similar measures.

Cuccinelli's legal opinion empowers the Board of Health, if it chooses, to require the clinics to meet hospital-type standards. Abortion-rights advocates say that could force some clinics to close because they would be unable to afford to meet the new requirements.

Can't afford it? Really? Shedding no tears here for the truly obscene profits of the abortion industry.

Cuccinelli's opinion:

"It is my opinion that the Commonwealth has the authority to promulgate regulations for facilities in which first trimester abortions are performed as well as providers of first trimester abortions, so long as the regulations adhere to constitutional limitations," Cuccinelli (R) wrote in his opinion, released Monday.

Cuccinelli declined to be interviewed, but his spokesman said in a statement that the regulations must comply with Roe. v. Wade.

Abortion-rights advocates said they are not surprised by Cuccinelli's decision and predicted that if the Board of Health acts on his opinion, the regulations could prompt the shutdown of 17 of the state's 21 clinics performing abortions.

I hope that's true. But it sounds like the abortion industry trying to scare its very large customer base into political reaction.

That Cuccinelli must be demonized should go without saying:

"It is frightening to think of what Cuccinelli will do next," said Del. Adam P. Ebbin (D-Alexandria), House minority whip. "The public needs to understand how reckless he is. He is not working on what is important to Virginia consumers. Instead, he is focusing on his own extreme ideology."

Ah yes, that "extreme ideology" which maintains that 1) unborn children ought not be scraped or suctioned from the womb, and 2) abortion outlets out to be held to rigorous safety standards. The Post provides a shocking summary of Cuccinelli's crimes thus far:

In his seven months in office, Cuccinelli has sued the federal government over new health-care rules; waded into the national immigration debate, saying law enforcement can ask about immigration status; and launched an investigation into whether a former University of Virginia professor and climate scientist manipulated data to reach his conclusions about global warming.

Yeah, baby. That's what we're talking about. Let me be the first to say it: Ken Cuccinelli for President in 20-whatever. He's only 42 so there's plenty of time.


Back to reality. It will be up to the Board of Health to take action:

It's unlikely that any changes would occur soon. The 15-member board is appointed by the governor. Eleven board members were named by former governor Timothy M. Kaine (D), and there are four vacancies. [. . .]

In his legal opinion, Cuccinelli concluded that the Board of Health, which regulates hospitals and nursing homes, has the authority to write new regulations requiring that doctors who perform abortions at the clinics hold hospital privileges, counselors have professional training and buildings undergo structural changes. The legal opinion is not binding, and the board must decide how to proceed.

Whatever happened to "safe and legal"?

"The state has long regulated outpatient surgical facilities and personnel to ensure a certain level of protection for patients," Cuccinelli spokesman Brian Gottstein said. "There is no reason to hold facilities providing abortion services to any lesser standard for their patients. Even pharmacies, funeral homes and veterinary clinics are regulated by the state."

So there's a chance that Virginia's abortion shops will someday be forced to raise their safety standards to the level you find when you take your cat to the vet to be spayed.

Because the abortion industry really cares about the welfare of women. See Cassy Fiano for more on that.

Update: Mike links to Daily Kos article on Cuccinelli so I don't have to.

Cross-posted at Potluck and the Green Room.

Most recent posts here.

Judge says no to Obama's expansion of embryonic stem cell research

Wesley Smith:

A court has enjoined the federal government from funding embryonic stem cell research under the Obama policy, as it most likely violates the Dickey Amendment. The Dickey Amendment is a budgetary law passed each year that bars federal funding of destructive research on embryos. Bill Clinton sought to get around the law by requiring the actual destruction to be privately paid for, and then funding ESCR thereafter, knowing that the scientists would destroy the embryos in anticipation of funding. So did the Obama policy. But the court, apparently, isn’t buying.

LifeSiteNews Gilbert:

The newly-expanded research was made possible by an executive order signed by President Obama in March 2009.

The plaintiffs argue that the new guidelines clearly violate a provision in U.S. law (known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment) that prevents taxpayer monies from funding research in which embryos "are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death."

In the opinion issued Monday, Lamberth ruled that the Dickey-Wicker language was unambiguous, contrary to the arguments of lawyers with the Department of Health and Human Services, and that the NIH guidelines violated the "plain language of the statute."

"ESC [embryonic stem-cell] research is clearly research in which an embryo is destroyed," wrote Lamberth. "To conduct ESC research, ESC must be derived from an embryo. The process of deriving ESCs from an embryo results in the destruction of the embryo. Thus, ESC research necessarily depends upon the destruction of a human embryo.

"Despite defendants' attempt to separate the derivation of ESCs from research on ESCs, the two cannot be separated."

Critics have pointed out that, aside from destroying tiny human lives, ESC research has resulted in virtually no therapeutic benefit and has been outstripped by breakthroughs in adult stem-cell research, which has yielded dozens of cures and benefits for previously untreatable illnesses. [emphasis added]

Considering the great progress being made with adult stem cells, you've got to wonder at the persistence of ESC research promoters. Defining human life down seems to be the goal.

Back to Wesley Smith:

No doubt, there will be an appeal. But if Obama decides not to yield, this could go to the Supremes. In any event, this ruling could set up a big fight in Congress next year over whether to continue the Dickey limitations. Buckle your seatbelts, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Most recent posts here.

Shocker: Auntie Z's asylum claim had no merit

I hope you're sitting down -- Obama's Aunt Zeituni was given preferential treatment! John Derbyshire:

Judge Shapiro’s reasoning is, not to put too fine a point on it, a blazing disgrace to the American legal profession.

It is now perfectly plain that Aunt Zeituni received preferential treatment because of her connection to Obama. Her asylum claim is utterly without merit, and Judge Shapiro’s adjudication of it demonstrates beyond doubt that we live in a nation not of laws, but of men — and men’s aunts.

Shades of Wodehouse, but I digress. Read the rest. Outrageous, but what does that mean when outrage is par?

Most recent posts here.

Dick Cavett has never been less proud of his country

Yes, Dick Cavett is still among us, but get ready to hang your head because he's "genuinely ashamed of us." (Do you care?) Peter Wehner calls his GZM op-ed the "worst piece published by anyone. Anywhere. Ever." I dunno. The competition for that has been pretty stiff of late.

Mr. Cavett, try as he might, can't understand why anyone would object to the location of the proposed mosque, unless they hate Muslims:

A woman tells the news guy on the street, “I have absolutely no prejudice against the Muslim people. My cousin is married to one. I just don’t see why they have to be here.” A man complains that his opposition to the mosque is “painting me like I hate the whole Arab world.” (Perhaps he dislikes them all as individuals?)

But it's not that hard to understand. Charles Krauthammer explained it quite clearly a while back. (You've probably read this but I'm still catching up.) Dr. K:

Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history -- perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.

Of course that strain represents only a minority of Muslims. Islam is no more intrinsically Islamist than present-day Germany is Nazi -- yet despite contemporary Germany's innocence, no German of goodwill would even think of proposing a German cultural center at, say, Treblinka.

Which makes you wonder about the goodwill behind Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's proposal. This is a man who has called U.S. policy "an accessory to the crime" of 9/11 and, when recently asked whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, replied, "I'm not a politician. . . . The issue of terrorism is a very complex question."

America is a free country where you can build whatever you want -- but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all.

These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz -- and no mosque at Ground Zero.

Build it anywhere but there.

In short:

Ground Zero is the site of the most lethal attack of that worldwide movement, which consists entirely of Muslims, acts in the name of Islam and is deeply embedded within the Islamic world. These are regrettable facts, but facts they are. And that is why putting up a monument to Islam in this place is not just insensitive but provocative.

Related:
Ground Zero Mosque Rally
Protests, Rhetoric Feed Jihadists' Fire
Thousands Protest Ground Zero Mosque
Poll: 77% of “Mainstream Voters” Oppose Ground Zero Mosque, 68% of the “Political Class” Support it…
Mosque Planner Says Opposition Goes 'Beyond Islamophobia'
America — Compared to What?
Is America Islamophobic?

Most recent posts here.

In LA, schools may fail kids but they'll do it in style

I guess they've got money to burn in L.A. Oh, wait -- they're broke. Mark Hemingway* reports:

There’s been an ongoing budget crisis in Los Angeles this year. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was at one point threatening to shut city services down two days a week to make ends meet. Despite this, it does not appear that the city has been cutting back:

Next month’s opening of the Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools will be auspicious for a reason other than its both storied and infamous history as the former Ambassador Hotel, where the Democratic presidential contender was assassinated in 1968. With an eye-popping price tag of $578 million, it will mark the inauguration of the nation’s most expensive public school ever.

The K-12 complex to house 4,200 students has raised eyebrows across the country as the creme de la creme of “Taj Mahal” schools, $100 million-plus campuses boasting both architectural panache and deluxe amenities.

“There’s no more of the old, windowless cinderblock schools of the ’70s where kids felt, ‘Oh, back to jail,’” said Joe Agron, editor-in-chief of American School & University, a school construction journal. “Districts want a showpiece for the community, a really impressive environment for learning.”

Just for purposes of comparison, the new Major League Baseball stadium in Washington, D.C., cost $611 million to build. [. . .]

Oh, and one parting detail, since we’re discussing Los Angeles blowing money on public facilities. The city just spent $74 million completing a state-of-the-art prison, but because the city can’t afford to hire any jailers, it’s been sitting empty.

Read the rest. The LAUSD is a mess. Freddoso cites its high school drop out rate of one in three. Will ultra-luxurious trappings entice kids to hang around through graduation? Do gold-plated lockers instill curiosity? What is the rationale behind this crazy spending? And what have over-the-top amenities to do with learning?

As a homeschooler, I've found that the kitchen table is superior to our school district's "impressive environment," in spite of the $12,000 it spends per pupil. Most children can be taught to read with one text, a library card, and 15 minutes a day of focused attention. Give me $12K per year per student and we could do some seriously edifying field trips. I've always wanted to tour the Tower of London or float down the Nile in a dahabiya.


Photo credit

*I noticed that I attributed the Washington Examiner report to the wrong writer. That has been corrected. Apologies.

Most recent posts here.

Cure for blogger burnout?

The NR post-election cruise!

It would be fabulous. But I don't have the time or the money. And someone is notably absent. I guess he's the guy who has to hunker down in an undisclosed location in case the ship and its cargo of conservative punditry gets sucked into a vortex or something. Steyn would be the one left to carry on. If he ever returns from hiatus, that is. :-/

Cross-posted at Potluck.

Most recent posts here.

Dems advised to tell smaller lies about Obamacare

Many thanks to my readers and to the awesome guest bloggers who filled in for me so ably while I was away. Their blogs:

Backyard Conservative
Carol's Closet
Politicaljunkie Mom
Ruby Slippers
And So it Goes in Shreveport
Posts by all of the above, and more, can also be found at Potluck.

As I catch up on the news, I see that nothing much seems to have changed in the past couple of weeks. Obama is again relaxing and recharging among the elites -- dismantling America takes a lot out of a guy. His administration continues to explore innovative ways to work around the will of the people, and the law, without owning up to it. Grab that power while you can.

Meanwhile, despite some rather dire predictions -- Charlie Cook to Dems: You know you’re going to get totally destroyed in November, right? -- the Democrats have come up with some nifty strategies for success in 2010: downplay their crowning achievement, Obamacare, and be as vague as possible about its content. Specifically, the Dems are advised to make their lies more credible:

The confidential presentation, available in full here and provided to POLITICO by a source on the call, suggests that Democrats are acknowledging the failure of their predictions that the health care legislation would grow more popular after its passage, as its benefits became clear and rhetoric cooled. Instead, the presentation is designed to win over a skeptical public, and to defend the legislation — and in particular the individual mandate — from a push for repeal. [. . .]

The presentation advises, instead, sales pitches that play on personal narratives and promises to change the legislation.

"People can be moved from initial skepticism and support for repeal of the law to favorable feelings and resisting repeal," it says. "Use personal stories — coupled with clear, simple descriptions of how the law benefits people at the individual level — to convey critical benefits of reform."

The presentation also counsels against the kind of grand claims of change that accompanied the legislation's passage.

"Keep claims small and credible; don’t overpromise or ‘spin’ what the law delivers," it says, suggesting supporters say, "The law is not perfect, but it does good things and helps many people. Now we’ll work [to] improve it.”

(Confused. Should they mention that poignant tale about the dead sister's teeth, or not?)

It seems the American people aren't as abysmally stupid as Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and company had hoped.

But then there's Joe Biden; don't go to Vegas with him:

“On Nov. 3, the day after the election, there will be a Democratic majority in the House and a Democratic majority in the Senate,” Mr. Biden said. “If it weren’t illegal, I’d make book on it.”

Companion piece by the apparently delusional Eugene Robinson: Obama's Winning Streak. Read Jennifer Rubin on that.

In other news:

Still no Steyn. Be sad with me.


Blago keeps busy:

By the way, if you’re in Chicago tomorrow and want to ask him about this, he’ll be signing autographs at a local comic book convention. Seriously.

He's something of a living cartoon, himself, so that makes sense.

Almost two years in, and we're still trying to answer the question, Who is Barack Obama? David P. Goldman: Obama is n0t even a Muslim:

He has a deep antipathy to the American view of things, insisting that “American exceptionalism” is no different than “Greek exceptionalism.” He belongs neither to the United States, nor to the Muslim world; he is a gifted outsider with a talent for persuasion who profiled Americans the way anthropologist profile primitive tribes, and in a variant of the old adventure-movie script, made himself our king.

Read the rest of Goldman's short piece.

And from the above-mentioned Charlie Cook, along with Peter Wehner, more perceptive Obamanalysis. Wehner:

Things have gotten so bad for the Democrats in the wake of the mosque/Ground Zero controversy that respected political observers like Charlie Cook are speculating that Obama’s actions might only be explained by a strange indifference to his re-election. According to Cook:

Just over a year ago, a Democratic congressional leadership staffer who had sat in on a number of closed-door meetings between President Obama and Democratic members of Congress told me something to the effect of, “I know this isn’t true and sounds naïve, but listening to the president in these meetings, you’d think he really doesn’t care if he gets re-elected or not.”

While I acknowledge that someone who gets elected to the U.S. Senate and the presidency is by definition extremely competitive and has a healthy desire to win, the words of that staffer have frequently come back to mind. Most recently, I thought of them following the president’s decision to weigh in on the proposal to build a Muslim mosque and cultural center in lower Manhattan, not far from Ground Zero.

Cook goes on to write:

At the risk of sounding like an unlicensed psychoanalyst, it seems that President Obama is so supremely self-confident, so self-assured of the righteousness of his positions, that perhaps he believes if he does what he thinks is best and lets the chips fall where they may, everything will eventually work out. And, if it doesn’t, well, he’ll still think he did the right thing anyway.

Wehner's conclusion:

The president, therefore, seems unable to process the (massive) incoming evidence that his approach is not working. He is a great, world-historical figure — and yet our situation is fraying. This is creating a form of cognitive dissonance. And so he and his aides and supporters must blame others — his predecessor, the GOP, cable news, “structural factors,” a “communications problem,” our political culture, our political system, and even the American people. As his presidency skids, Obama has become obsessed with finding scapegoats.

Bingo. Read the rest of that, too.

Most recent posts here.

Putting the Car in R on Obamamodel

They're losing swing-vote women independents, and are worried about losing the elderly. (Gee, why is that) The public is putting the car in R on the Obama policies. Steve Huntley, Chicago Sun Times:

President Obama has been getting a lot of mileage in campaign appearances with his automobile analogy about Bush administration policies driving the country into a ditch. He talks about "D" standing for Democrats and driving the country forward and "R" representing Republicans and going backward. The problem with this analogy is that cars have a reverse gear for a reason, and sometimes it's useful for getting out of trouble.[snip]

Putting the transmission into drive on the administration's plan to increase taxes on small businesses and investors -- job creators -- has run into a chorus of criticism from economists. You don't raise taxes in a recession. Charging ahead regardless of the consequences is why Obama gets low marks from the voters for his handling of the economy.

And while I do cut the president some slack for some of the August vacations--after all it's the prime month for parents of school kids, Americans are not amused at the pontificator in chief dropping the ball once again on job creation, however misguided his prescriptions. Unemployment numbers rise again.

And demagoguing Social Security, when any sentient American knows it's going bust, does us all a disservice--why did the Tea Party start anyway? Why does it continue to build and resonate?

I don't hold any hope that the president will emulate Reagan's success. Early on he had the chance to forge the centrist path he wink, wink promised and he chose to go hard Left.

The R is for Reverse course and go Right.

--crossposted at BackyardConservative

Linked at Michelle Malkin. Buzzworthy. Thanks!

Most recent posts here.

Obamacare is an Abomination

I've noticed several devastating articles on Obamacare lately; none of which tell me anything I didn't know already for the most part, but now that we've passed "the bill so you can find out what's in it," the rotten apples are starting to float to the top.

Consider this piece from David Freddoso at The Washington Examiner.  The highlights:

"...seniors who rely on Medicare will replace Medicaid recipients at the bottom of the health care ladder as early as 2019."

"Fees Medicare pays to providers will be slashed below Medicaid rates, which are already well below market prices."

"By 2050, 40 percent of existing health care facilities will forced to close their doors."

"The wait for care will be much, much longer."Many physicians already refuse to accept new Medicare patients. More will refuse when payments from the government fall below cost."

This last item means that 15 million senior citizens will get screwed on their coverage.

Yesterday in The American Spectator, Peter Ferrera had a devastating piece on Obamacare:

The bottom line is that you will lose your health care under this legislation, if not your job, your country as they bankrupt America, and maybe ultimately your life or the life of a loved one. All that to make dreamy, emotionalized, liberals happy, even though many of them are not happy because the socialism in the bill is not overt enough.

More specifically:

The Obamacare legislation involves precisely the thorough government takeover of health care. It creates 159 new bureaucracies, agencies, boards, commissions, and programs to rule over health care in America. Government authorities are empowered to tell doctors and hospitals what is quality health care and what is not, what are best practices in medicine, how their medical practices should be structured, and what they will be paid and when. Government authorities will mandate exactly what health insurance with what benefits workers and employers must buy, and the Act imposes tax penalties on them if they do not comply. Government authorities will dictate to insurance companies exactly what health insurance they must sell, to whom they must sell it, and what they can charge.

There's much more at the link.


Obamacare is an abomination.  I hope there are more and more of these articles coming out between now and the fall elections because I believe it will weigh heavily in the minds of the voters when it's time to pull the lever in the voting booth.  Democrats are hoping we'll have forgotten by then, but many of us will absolutely never forget.  Those in Congress that voted for Obamacare sold their souls to Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama; they will pay with their jobs.

Cross posted at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

Most recent posts here.

Sign of the Times: Hot-selling t-shirt on Martha's Vineyard this year is ...

Remember last year's visit to Martha's Vineyard with the gushing coverage and giddy anticipation of the Obama arrival to an island that barely blinks an eye when mere mortal celebrities visit?  Local restaurants created the "Barack-O-Taco," the "Obamarita" and a new ice cream treat was christened "Barack My World."  T-shirts bearing the slogans "Summer White House ’09,”  “Barackin’ the Vineyard Summer ’09," and "I vacationed with Obama" filled the shops and sold like hot cakes.

My how times have changed.  Gone are the goose bumps that greeted the Obama family last year.  Sure the "Obamarita" is back as are the "I vacationed with Obama" t-shirts.  Nothing says  they're "just not that into you" anymore Mr. President like the number one selling t-shirt on the Vineyard this year:

One barometer of the plunge in excitement has been the sale of Obama-themed T-shirts, which designers had been banking on after the craze of last year. Clothing labeled with the president’s name sold by the thousands, helping to salvage a tough economic year for the island.

But this year’s T-shirt sales are much less brisk, merchants say.

“Last year, Obama gave you goose bumps, but I don’t think you’re going to see that this year,’’ said Alex McCluskey, co-owner of the Locker Room, who sold more than 4,000 “I vacationed with Obama’’ T-shirts last year. But so far this year, he said, his hot item is T-shirts of former President Bush asking, “Miss me yet?’’

Who knew a year later Troglopundit's clever creation would be "Ba-rocking the Vineyard" in Summer '10?   Certainly the Democratic strategists and consultants didn't see this one coming:

The advice from Democratic consultants and strategists is almost unanimous: Run away from the president, and fast. A prominent Democratic pollster is circulating a survey that shows George W. Bush is 6 points more popular than President Obama in "Frontline" districts -- seats held by Democrats that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sees as most vulnerable to Republican takeover. That Bush is more popular than Obama in Democratic-held seats is cause for outright fear.

It looks as though Obama will be as welcome as snow in July on the campaign trail this year which should free him up for plenty of vacations this fall.  He even has his passport handy.  At this point an unexpected vacation or two seems preferable to his staying in Washington to do more damage to the country.  Maybe he and Rahm can open a t-shirt stand together.

Linked by Michelle Malkin. Buzzworthy. Thanks!

Most recent posts here.

Dude.

Anne asked earlier if Obama had reached his point of no return yet.

Asked and answered:

One barometer of the plunge in excitement has been the sale of Obama-themed
T-shirts, which designers had been banking on after the craze of last
year. Clothing labeled with the president's name sold by the thousands,
helping to salvage a tough economic year for the island.

But this year's T-shirt sales are much less brisk, merchants say.

"Last year, Obama gave you goose bumps, but I don't think you're going to
see that this year," said Alex McCluskey, co-owner of the Locker-Room, who sold
more than 4,000 "I vacationed with Obama" T-shirts last year. But so far
this year, he said, his hot item is T-shirts of former President Bush asking,
"Miss me yet."

This might not be as shocking if it were written about any locale other than Martha's Vineyard, which prepares for the umpteenth Obama vacation with fewer welcome signs in businesses or on yards than last year.

--Cross-posted at politicaljunkieMom.

Most recent posts here.

Obama's Point of No Return

Is he there yet? Latest polling shows quite a few Americans think The One may be Muslim. Some of us have had a deep unease about the Barackstar for some time without characterizing his religion. But you only have to look at the pews he sat in for nearly 20 years--it wasn't just political expediency. (He could have attended another spiritual adviser's church in Chicago, say the Rev. James Meeks, who's an opportunist more than a hate-monger, and has actually tried to improve Chicago.)

He ran as a blank slate of moderation, but he's been shrouded in secrecy. It's bizarre.

The American Thinker:

With Obama, we have an abundance of riches: the multiple vacations, the legal harassment of the state of Arizona on behalf of illegals, the clownish response to the Gulf oil blowout. But when historians come to select the moment when Obama went over the edge of the world, I think they'll find the great Iftar mosque speech of August 13, 2010 hard to beat.

During a White House dinner celebrating Ramadan, the president found it appropriate to come out in favor of religious freedom. Not in support of Christians being attacked by janjaweed gunmen, or Bahá'ís tormented by Iranian mullahs, or Jews being stalked by assassins, or even American citizens being told that they cannot pray in public, but in favor of a shadowy foreign foundation with suspicious financing and disturbing jihadi connections that wishes to build some kind of victory monument congruent to the site of the 9/11 massacre.

They may not build the mosque, but Americans have seen this President define moderation differently than they do.

And Nancy Pelosi's gone off the deep end too.

--crossposted at BackyardConservative

Linked by Michelle Malkin. Buzzworthy. Thanks!

Most recent posts here.

Moral Cowardliness

George Zornick at Think Progress has his boxers in a wad:

Republican Allen West is the Tea Party candidate for House in Florida’s 22nd district, a seat currently held by Rep. Ron Klein (D). West is an extremely successful fundraiser — he raked in the most money of any GOP challenger in the second fundraising quarter of 2010 — and has become a favorite among conservatives, earning the endorsement of Sarah Palin and receiving over two million hits on YouTube for a speech he delivered to a Florida Tea Party gathering.

Last week, video surfaced of West making a series of inflammatory statements about Islam during a March 8 pubic forum. He began by criticizing the ubiquitous “Coexist” bumper stickers, which display the symbols of Christianity, Judaism, Islam and other religions. West said:

“[A]s I was driving up here today, I saw that bumper sticker that absolutely incenses me. It’s not the Obama bumper sticker. But it’s the bumper sticker that says, ‘Co-exist.’ And it has all the little religious symbols on it. And the reason why I get upset, and every time I see one of those bumper stickers, I look at the person inside that is driving. Because that person represents something that would give away our country. Would give away who we are, our rights and freedoms and liberties because they are afraid to stand up and confront that which is the antithesis, anathema of who we are. The liberties that we want to enjoy.”

I don't see a problem with West's remarks on the 'Co-exist' bumper sticker. Islam isn't compatible with the freedoms that we hold dear. Does the 'co-exist' crowd believe that Muslim taxi drivers have the right to refuse rides to disabled people with service dogs? And if so, do they equally support ER nurses who refuse to participate in abortions because of their religious convictions or do they sniff that the nurses should find another profession while insisting that the religious beliefs of the taxi drivers should be respected? What is the 'co-exist' position on gay marriage? Do they think that Christians who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman are homophobic bigots while ignoring that homosexuality is punishable by death under Islam?

Co-existance is only possible if all sides respect each other's beliefs. I don't respect a religion that calls for the mutilation of little girls, honor killing or stoning. None of those things is compatible with American ideals of liberty or justice. The co-exist crowd believes in selective capitulation. That, as far as I am concerned, is moral cowardliness.

Cross posted at Carol's Closet

Iran Expected to Go Nuclear Friday

Let's just mention that. Since it seems to be under the radar for most "news" organizations.

I guess we're supposed to just expect Israel to quietly take care of it for us.

Our President Barack Obama essentially gave the green light to reset Russia which is supplying Iran with fuel.

And at home his bravery is unsurpassed, most recently on the Ground Zero mosque.

Jennifer Rubin notes the administration's own Middle East negotiator is opposed to that at home.

Rahmbo is reduced to begging Dems not to oppose the president on the mosque.

Are all the president's allies to remain silent on the burning issues of the day?

Is Israel? Closest to burning once again.

Most recent posts here.

Why Did Charlie Crist Return Jim Greer's Money?

When Charlie Crist split from the Republican party he was quite clear that he would not return any money that had been donated to his campaign fund. His position was that the money had been donated to Charlie Crist the man, not Charlie Crist the RINO. There’s been a small change in plans, at least where it concerns $10,000 donated to Crist by the disgraced former chairman of the Republican Party of Florida and Crist best buddy, Jim Greer. Greer has asked Crist for his money back and Crist has returned it:

TALLAHASSEE -- Gov. Charlie Crist's independent U.S. Senate campaign is refunding nearly $10,000 to Jim Greer after the indicted former Republican Party chairman asked for the money to help pay for his legal defense. ``As you know circumstances have caused me to need money to defend myself and take care of my family,'' Greer wrote in an Aug. 5 letter. ``I know sending the money back is hard, but with what has happened it may be politically beneficial for you to do.''

Greer, 48, faces six felony charges, including organized fraud and money laundering, after authorities said he used a secret fundraising contract to funnel party donations to a consulting firm he owned.

So Mr. and Mrs. Average Floridian, no refund for you but a rat like Greer, no problem. A hint as to why Crist would refund Greer’s money can be found in this from Greer’s letter to Crist:

"Charlie over the last three years, I did all that I was asked to do by you and others. Your goals were my goals. When all of the others abandoned you, I remained loyal.''

Greer is still, for the time being, remaining loyal. But in some circles loyalty can be bought. Actually, $10,000 sounds cheap.

Cross posted at Carol's Closet

Most recent posts here.

Obama's first-class temperament strikes again

Today's must-read is Scott Johnson's Ten Theses on Obama's Iftar Speech, in which our president combines offensive attitudes and dishonest rhetorical devices to obnoxious effect:

1. Obama's tone was not one calculated to persuade. He both hectored and belittled those who oppose the GZM. If you respectfully beg to differ with Obama, it is hard to like the persona Obama had on display Friday night.
2. Obama supported the GZM in his usual style, in which his position is juxtaposed with a straw man of his choosing. It is an unappealing rhetorical habit that is made even more unappealing when applied to an issue on which people of good faith obviously differ with him.

That's classic Obama, always quick to impugn the motives of anyone who opposes him. More:

8. By Saturday, in the face of the response his remarks engendered, Obama was backing off from his support for the GZM. He availed himself of the option of emphasizing the straw man he had addressed. We were to believe that he was only addressing the issue in the abstract. Both Friday's statement and Saturday's backtracking were remarkably unpersuasive.

In other words, his weasel-like "clarification" was an obvious lie. I'm not sure whether he expects anyone to believe him or not. Mr. Johnson thinks not:

In the 2008 campaign Obama presented himself as a healing if not a redemptive figure. For reasons that are almost completely understandable, many voters chose to believe in Obama's self-presentation. Belief in Obama's persona conflicted with voluminous evidence to the contrary that was there for anyone with eyes to see.
These voters who bought Obama nevertheless quickly saw through Obama's persona after the election. They now believe they were sold a bill of goods, and they are of course right. Obama's Iftar remarks suggest that Obama has no hesitation at all in reminding voters how he pulled one over on them.

The question remains whether he sees through his own false persona.


Meanwhile, CNN openly acknowledges Obama's incoherence. The drain-circling has begun.


Most recent posts here.

Waiting for Blago verdict

Watch it live here. See Anne Leary and Pat Hickey for the local perspective.

*Update* from WGN:

A federal jury today convicted former Gov. Rod Blagojevich of only one count against him: lying to the FBI. Jurors said they were deadlocked on the other 23 counts against the former governor, and all four counts against his brother Robert.

Blagojevich faces up to 5 years in prison. The former governor pursed his lips and shook his head slightly.

Patti rested her head on the chair in front of her and shook her head no several times.
Blagojevich looked at her with an annoyed look on his face.

As jurors filed out, Patti collapsed into her seat and the former governor's attorney, Sam Adam Jr. moved next to Blagojevich and put his arm around him, rubbing his back.

Most recent posts here.

Lame those Dem Ducks

Quack back. We tried to stop 'em with Scott Brown but they fiddled with the rules to shove major policy through under budget Reconciliation. Now they don't even have the guts to pass a budget so they can't even claim that as a fig leaf this time. Gutless Dem Ducks with no fig leaf. Yuck.

Lame those Dem Ducks.

In Illinois, we can vote Kirk. As he notes, it'll be legal to vote twice for your Senator this fall. Thanks to Blago, Tricky Dick Durbin and the rest of the Illinois Dems who refused to hold a special election. Mark Thiessen, WaPo (via RCP):

But the most likely scenario -- since Congress has not yet approved any regular appropriations bills -- is that a lame-duck session would be used to pass a massive, earmark-laden omnibus spending bill.

The Dems will probably have read this one--they love those earmarks.

At least some GOP moderates running for office are in tune with independents--fiscal issues are paramount. Bailout after bailout on our backs are making us mad. Enough of the big spending!

We need big government to get out of the way so we can create jobs.

Lame those Dem Ducks.

Remember in November.

--crossposted at BackyardConservative

Most recent posts here.

Explaining My Frustration

In an email sent earlier today to Pundette I told her that I am having a hard time blogging because I am extremely frustrated. Ross Douthat, writing in the New York Times, only served to up my frustration level with this (emphasis added):

This is typical of how these debates usually play out. The first America tends to make the finer-sounding speeches, and the second America often strikes cruder, more xenophobic notes. The first America welcomed the poor, the tired, the huddled masses; the second America demanded that they change their names and drop their native languages, and often threw up hurdles to stop them coming altogether. The first America celebrated religious liberty; the second America persecuted Mormons and discriminated against Catholics.

What an amazing man this Mr. Douthat is! He and I have never met yet he knows my heart. As a member of the "second" (or is it second class?) America, I am crude and my motives are xenophobic. I assume the onus falls on me to disprove the negative.

But I can't disprove the negative and therefore my opinions are discounted. How convenient for Douthat that he never has to deal with opinions with which he disagrees. He simply slaps on the racist label and poof! Convenient for him, frustrating for me

Cross posted at Carol's Closet

Can Obama hear himself?

He can still raise celebrity money for his party but his rhetoric is downright pathetic:

Flying thousands of miles to reap millions of dollars, President Barack Obama is dashing across the country to help his party retain power, essentially offering one familiar argument: Republicans don’t solve problems.

“Don’t give in to fear,” Obama said Monday in his latest ominous vision of a country led by the opposition party. “Let’s reach for hope.”

Obama has settled on his message for the pivotal midterm elections, which means what he said Monday in Milwaukee will sound like what he says Tuesday in Seattle and Wednesday in Miami. He is covering more than 8,000 freewheeling miles in three days, the kind of personal attention that gets donors to the door.

I guess you can't blame the guy; it worked so well the first time. But perhaps he hasn't noticed that it's been a while since anyone has called for the smelling salts. And his, er, let's call it confidence, prevents him from seeing the bitter irony his recycled slogans have taken on. Hope and change indeed.

Eighty-one percent (81%) of American adults know someone who is out of work and looking for a new job. Only 14% now believe the labor market is stronger than a year ago. One-out-of six American workers (16%) consider themselves to be among the working poor.

Most voters say that President Obama is more liberal than they are. The president's numbers are virtually identical to those of the Democratic Congress. A plurality view Republicans in Congress as more conservative than they are.

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of the Political Class believes the nation is heading in the right direction. Eighty-four percent (84%) of Mainstream voters disagree and say the nation has gotten off on the wrong track.

Those are some seriously lopsided numbers. The emperor (and empress) are revealing more and more skin with each passing day. And the president either has abysmal advisors or he refuses to listen to them; his Ground Zero mosque statement, followed by his lame "clarification," was an unforced error. Jennifer Rubin quotes Larry Sabato:

A lot of endangered congressional Democrats must be wondering why President Obama waded into this hot controversy when it was both politically foolish and unnecessary. … The political damage is done and now all Democrats will have to take a stand on this “local issue” that Obama has nationalized.

The consolation for Democrats is that voters have resisted a long list of other distractions (the BP oil spill, immigration, gay marriage) to focus heavily on the rotten economy. Come to think of it, that isn’t much of a consolation.

J-Ru adds:

No, it’s not. But there is a whole lot of political karma for a president and party who have spent a year and a half ignoring and ridiculing voters.

Pete Wehner:

Approval ratings in the 30s may now be within Obama’s grasp before the midterm elections.

To quote his eloquent mentor, Obama's chickens are coming home to roost.

This just in: Total destruction: GOP out to biggest generic ballot leads in history in both Gallup and Rasmussen:

The most amazing thing about this? When Democrats tell people that voters hate the GOP as much as they hate them, they’re not blowing smoke. That’s basically true. In fact, in many polls, the Republican Party’s favorables are still lower than the Democrats’. And even so: Biggest generic ballot lead … in history. That’s how popular Hopenchange is. [. . .]

Meanwhile, because he’s clearly a political genius, Obama’s still whining about Republican opposition to an agenda that’s so unpopular that it’s carrying them to unprecedented leads in major polls

Read the rest. America is waking up.


(PS to readers: I won't really be back for another week or so. Family emergency. Many thanks to my awesome guest bloggers. -Jill)

Most recent posts here.

Uniformity for Deaf Painters!!!

Taxwise. Stop discrimination now!!! Caroline Baum, Bloomberg:

Unless Congress gets serious about entitlement, tax and spending reform, there will be no alternative except to delegate that authority. If they won’t do it, We, the People, will have to show them the way or show them the door.

The public is sick and tired of politicians preaching tax increases and practicing tax evasion. We’re fed up with the 67,000-page loophole-ridden tax code with its egregious exemptions and deductions.

Did you know that there’s a standard tax deduction for the blind but not the deaf? Or what about the deduction for work uniforms, except if you’re a painter wearing white overalls? Imagine how deaf painters must feel.

I can already see the next crop of bumper stickers.

Boomers are going to be voting in large numbers this fall--for some it will be in the wake of a rude awakening. We need a new Roadmap for this country.

The president is off fundraising again on the Left Coast after his stunning, ill-judged remarks on the Ground Zero Mosque.

When he says let me be clear it's a dead giveaway--he's politically tone deaf once again.

--crossposted at BackyardConservative

P.S. Hamas endorses the mosque. HT Memeorandum.

More. Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah: We Muslims know the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation. Ottawa Citizen

Most recent posts here.