Archive for the ‘Obama’ Category

New York Times Accidentally Tells the Truth, Quickly Rectifies Problem

In Media, Obama on April 13, 2011 at 1:11 pm

Via Gateway Pundit

The New York Times Economix Blog published a post analyzing the first quarter G.D.P. estimates. The opening paragraph of the post declared Obama’s economic policies a failure:

At a time when the economy should be rebounding the latest GDP number for the first quarter of 2010 shows that the Obama economic policies have failed. Read the rest of this entry »

I Know You Are But What Am I?

In Obama on September 13, 2010 at 9:23 pm

Do not drink and email peevish world leaders.

I don’t even know where to start with this one, it’s just so monumentally stupid.

A British Teenager got drunk while watching a television program about 9/11 this past weekend. Something about that program (and his state of intoxication) inspired him to dash off an email to President Obama. At some point in that email, the boy called Obama an unkind name. As a result, the kid has been banned from entering the United States.

For life.

The name he called the president? Michelle Malkin writes it as “p***k.” I’m guessing that’s “prick.” I have no problem printing that.

Check Michelle’s post to find out who the administration doesn’t have a problem allowing into the U.S.

Obama’s Dereliction of Duty

In Afghanistan, Obama on September 3, 2010 at 1:36 pm

In 2009, the first year of Obama’s presidency, over three hundred U.S. Military Personnel gave their lives in the course of their service to our country in Afghanistan. During that same year, then Commanding General Stanley McChrystal tried for three months to gain an audience with his Commander-in-Chief.

McChrystal sought to address the necessities for successfully carrying out the mission tasked to our troops. It wasn’t until his avoidance of McChrystal was more widely reported in the media that President Obama found time to meet with his top general in Afghanistan. Even then the meeting was little more than an aside. McChrystal was granted a few minutes, not in the White House, but aboard Air Force One… On a Copenhagen air strip… While the President was on his way to make his case to IOC for hosting the Olympic Games in Chicago.

General McChrystal has since been replaced as commander in Afghanistan following his criticism of the Obama Administration in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine. Obama said McChrystal’s remarks showed “poor judgment.” On the contrary, General McChrystal’s observations seem spot-on, especially in light of recent statements from within the Obama Administration:

[Obama’s] Afghan policy was focused as much as anything on domestic politics. He would not risk losing the moderate to centrist Democrats in the middle of health insurance reform and he viewed that legislation as the make-or-break legislation for his administration.

Let that sink in for just a minute. Obama’s Afghan policy was focused on domestic politics. He would not risk losing health care votes. In other words, decisions that affect the lives of American Servicemen were made not with regard to the mission that they’ve put their lives on the line for, but for how those decisions affect Obama’s legacy.

Obama Policy Shift on Offshore Drilling

In Economy, Environment, Obama on March 31, 2010 at 9:31 am

Drill, baby, Drill!

The New York Times reports:

The Obama administration is proposing to open vast expanses of water along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time, officials said Tuesday.

The proposal — a compromise that will please oil companies and domestic drilling advocates but anger some residents of affected states and many environmental organizations — would end a longstanding moratorium on oil exploration along the East Coast from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, covering 167 million acres of ocean.

Hold the celebration for a bit, though. Opening more coastline to oil exploration is something that Obama promised during his campaign and brought up again during his state of the union address. However, as with anything the Obama administration does, this will surely come with a catch. Further on in the NYT article, the catch may have appeared:

The Senate is expected to take up a climate bill in the next few weeks — the last chance to enact such legislation before midterm election concerns take over. Mr. Obama and his allies in the Senate have already made significant concessions on coal and nuclear power to try to win votes from Republicans and moderate Democrats. The new plan now grants one of the biggest items on the oil industry’s wish list — access to vast areas of the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling.

Sister Toldjah‘s take:

The upcoming cap and tax battle is close at hand, and with this being an election year, Obama and Democrat mis”leaders” in the House and Senate don’t want the political headaches and nightmares that came with the drawn out process of them trying to shove the trillion dollar ObamaCare “reform” plan down the throats of the American people, so they’re throwing a bone to “moderate” Republican and Democrat Senators and House reps in hopes of avoiding a prolonged battle and winning their votes on cap and tax

While this move may anger Obama’s pro-environment, “green-er” base, it’s a move that he can afford. It’s the base after all, where else are they going to go? In the mean time, he can build capital with the moderates and allow Democrats to repair some of the damage done by the health care reform process.

Doug Powers predicts

…that new drill sites will end up being like Obama’s sudden embrace of building nuclear power plants — and that is to construct them as sweetheart deals for big labor, but never really use them.

This as-for-now merely symbolic lurch to the middle can also be taken as a sign that Obama knows Democrats are in serious trouble in the upcoming election, as well as in 2012.

The potential for emptiness in this gesture is significant. Any leases in the newly opened areas are subject to approval by the Department of the Interior after environmental and geological studies. None of these studies will be available until after 2012, allowing the administration to maintain the illusion until conveniently after the next presidential election.

I’ll let Moe Lane at Red State take it home because he sums it up nicely:

Let me put it another way: the White House is implying the promise of jam tomorrow – in reality, it’s just a study to revisit the denial of jam yesterday – in exchange for jam today. Only the jam today is actually a swarm of angry wasps.  Try again, Mr. President.  Start with rescinding your interference with the Bush drilling permits, and expect to give up more.  A lot more: your opponents are not interested in indulging the Greenies’ quaint, somewhat primitive religious sensibilities.

h/t memeorandum


The Real Reason For Partisanship

In Obama on March 22, 2010 at 5:17 pm

Republicans turned off by size of Obama's package

Steny Hoyer’s Weasel Words

In Congress, Democrat, health care, House, Obama on March 17, 2010 at 2:58 pm


The ABC headline almost had me. For a second there I thought the headline, “House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer: ‘We’re Going to Have a Clean Up or Down Vote'” meant that, in the face of the public outcry, Democrats in the House were going to abandon the parliamentarian parlor trick that’s come to be known as “Deem and Pass”. ‘Deem and Pass’, also know as the “Slaughter Rule” after House Rules Committee Chair, Louise Slaughter, is a proposed rule that would “deem” the Senate health care bill passed pending adoption of House amendments to the bill. It’s a sleight of hand maneuver that will allow Democrats to avoid an up or down vote and simply say that they voted for a rule, not the Senate bill. It’s a chicken-shit way to pass major legislation. Similar “self executing” rules have been used in the past (yes, I consider those chicken-shit too) but never for legislation that seeks to (mis)manage 1/6 of the nation’s economy. Despite what the ABC headline and Hoyer’s own words would lead you to believe, however, there will be no “up or down” vote on the Senate bill. On ABC’s Good Morning America Hoyer said:

“We’re going to have a clean up or down vote on the Senate bill, that will be on the rule… “This is not an unusual procedure. We’re going to vote on a rule.”

I suppose if Steny says it fast enough, somebody might only catch the “We’re going to have a clean up or down vote on the Senate Bill” part. There is nothing clean about it, however, and Hoyer’s aim is to intentionally mislead. Interestingly, all this comes during “Sunshine Week” during which congress proposes to pay down debts on office accounts and  “focus on the importance of open government and freedom of information… Congress is taking action to make the government more accountable, transparent and responsive to the American people…”

“Not to take anything away from these proposals, which do little but nibble around the edges, but wouldn’t having members commit to a vote on controversial legislation create more sunshine than paying down debt from office accounts?”  Observes Ed Morrissey at Hot Air. “The very nature of open government in a representative government requires that elected officials have accountability for the laws they pass.  The social contract that binds constituents to these laws depends on that accountability.  If we cannot hold our representatives individually and collectively responsible for passage of laws, then we have ceased being a free people and have entered into an autocratic form of bondage.”

The weasel words regarding ‘Deem and Pass’ aren’t the only instance of Hoyer transgression this week. According to American Spectator, Hoyer also claimed on Good Morning America that:

“Since the President addressed the nation on health care, the support has gone up 18 points and a Wall Street Journal poll that just came out shows a majority of those responding indicate they’re for the bill.”

The fact is that the WSJ poll indicated no such thing. What the WSJ poll actually found, making Hoyer’s statement an outright lie, was:

…that opinions have solidified around the health-care legislation, with 48% calling it a “bad idea” and 36% viewing it as a “good idea” when presented with a choice between those two. That gap is consistent with surveys dating to the fall.

36% is clearly less than 48% but, with Obama promising a 3,000% reduction in health insurance premiums, the problem may simply be that the Democrats are really bad at math.

Keep Hoping ‘Cause You’re Certainly Not Getting Change

In Congress, health care, House, Obama, Senate on January 5, 2010 at 8:08 am

Pay attention here, it’s only 22 seconds:

From Heritage:

Politico is reporting that President Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) will meet at the White House today (joined by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) via conference call) to set the parameters for reconciling the House and Senate versions of health care legislation. However, instead of proceeding with the usual public and open conference committee process, the White House is going to take a very active role in secret behind-closed-door meetings between the House and Senate. The Sunlight Foundation explains the implications for the American people: “Both House and Senate rules require that all conference committee meetings be open to the public unless a majority of conferees votes in open session to close the meetings. Senate rules require all conference committee reports be publicly available for at least 48 hours prior to a final vote. Without conference, there is no mechanism to provide for openness in the final discussions regarding the health care bill.”

If a candidate promises “hope” and “change” and one observes no change, is it reasonable to continue to hope?

Iran to John Kerry: ACCESS DENIED

In Iran, Obama on January 3, 2010 at 6:55 pm

A little more than a week since John Kerry’s wish to make a public visit to Iran in his role as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he’s received his official answer from the Islamic regime: “No.”

When asked Sunday if Kerry had filed a travel request as claimed or if Iran had taken pre-emptive action against talk of a visit, [Kerry spokesman Frederick] Jones told The Hill, “John Kerry has no plans to travel to Iran.”

He may not have had plans, per se, but he certainly had aspirations that the White House, in an “if-by-whiskey” manner, neither approved nor disapproved.

Sen. John Kerry has suggested becoming the first high-level U.S. emissary to make a public visit to Tehran since the 1979 Islamic revolution, a move White House officials say they won’t oppose.

“This sounds like the kind of travel a chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee would — and should — undertake,” said a White House official, adding it would be at Sen. Kerry’s own behest.

Iran however, has rejected the idea entirely.

On Saturday, Iranian legislators stepped up the rhetoric against the news that Kerry was considering traveling to Tehran with the blessing of the White House.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran has no plans to negotiate with any American official, unless the country (the U.S.) changes its policies,” member of the parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Zohreh Elahian said, according to Fars News Agency.

So much for Obama’s plan, as stated during his campaign, in which Obama announced his willingness to meet with Iran without pre-condition.

“…the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them – which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this [Bush] administration – is ridiculous.”

Perhaps no more ridiculous, Mr. President, than assuming that your personality might change the outlook of the world and make Iran want to meet with a representative of your administration.

LOLBama Funnies

In Obama on January 1, 2010 at 7:44 pm

Thanks IMAO (it clicks the link for more)

White House to Critics: Stop Blaming Us While We Look For a Way To Blame Bush

In Obama, Terrorist on December 31, 2009 at 6:46 am

In the face of criticism of President Obama’s response to the Christmas Day Underpants Bomber, the White House is looking for a way, any means to blame Bush; all while complaining that others are playing the blame game instead of ‘condemning the attackers’.

Of course we condemn the attackers, Mr. President… we’re just wondering why it took you so long to do it.

The White House blog whines:

I think we all agree that there should be honest debate about these issues, but it is telling that Vice President Cheney and others seem to be more focused on criticizing the Administration than condemning the attackers…

Meanwhile, White House blame-shifting is in high gear according to the American Spectator:

White House counsel Robert Bauer… ordered staff to begin researching similar breakdowns — if any — from the Bush Administration. “The idea was that we’d show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could,” says a staffer in the counsel’s office. “We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we’d declassify it if necessary.”

The Other McCain has more, including links to the AmSpec piece.