1/20/2013: Massive disarray in DC

Obama’s approval rating continues to drop

The biggest reason for Obama's fall: a SHARP DROP IN APPROVAL AMONG DEMOCRATS AND LIBERALS, apparently unhappy with his moves toward the center since he led the party to landslide losses in November's midterm elections. At the same time, he's gained nothing among independents.

"HE'S HAVING THE WORST OF BOTH WORLDS RIGHT NOW," said Lee Miringoff, the director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion at Marist College in New York, which conducted the national survey.

"As he moves to the center, HE'S NOT PICKING UP SUPPORT AMONG INDEPENDENTS and he's having some fall-off among his base. If his strategy is to gain independents and keep the Democrats in tow, it isn't working so far."

The poll was taken from Dec. 2 through Wednesday, as the president proposed a two-year freeze on federal civilian workers' pay and cut a deal with congressional Republicans to extend expiring tax cuts — even those for the wealthy, which he'd opposed.

Overall, just 42 PERCENT OF REGISTERED VOTERS APPROVE of how he's doing his job, while 50 percent disapprove.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/10/105105/poll-obamas-losing-support-romney.html#ixzz17oMNxyuo

Democrats generally do better among registered voters than they do with likely voters. This is not good for Obama.

Milbank: Obama finally stands his ground

But rather than caving in to liberals' complaints and allowing Democrats on Capitol Hill to take the lead - as Obama did to his peril over the past two years - HE HAS PUSHED BACK WITH THE FULL FORCE OF HIS OFFICE. In private persuasion and in public talk, the White House has delivered to disgruntled liberals a message summed up by Vice President Biden in a private session with lawmakers on Wednesday: TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT.

THIS IS A HOPEFUL SIGN that Obama has learned the lessons of the health-care debate, when he acceded too easily to the wishes of Hill Democrats, allowing them to slow the legislation and engage in a protracted debate on the public option. Months of delay gave Republicans time to make their case against "socialism" and prevented action on more pressing issues, such as job creation. Democrats paid for that with 63 seats.

Things began the same way this time. The White House left matters up to congressional Democrats, who postponed a vote on taxes until after the election. BUT WHEN LAWMAKERS CONTINUED THEIR FOOT-DRAGGING, OBAMA CUT THEM OUT OF THE NEGOTIATIONS.

The rift isn't about ideology; Obama knows as well as DeFazio does that cutting the estate tax is a dumb way to stimulate the economy. IT'S ABOUT STRATEGY: The alternative to a deal, administration officials say, was to waste the next few months fighting over taxes - putting Democrats on the hook for voter anger and economic damage that would have come from an increase in rates on Jan. 1 - only to wind up with a deal that likely would be worse with Republicans controlling the House.

Inevitably, Democrats on the Hill now complain that Obama's deal is "grossly unfair." In a measure

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121002298.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Milbank appears to be whistling by the graveyard. The schism that has opened up on the hard left is a major blow to the Democrats. Their only real hope now is that the Republicans screw up as badly as the Democrats did the past two years.

Warning for the left: “Leave him alone!”

Since the Democratic Party's "shellacking" in last month's midterm elections, SPECULATION HAS BEEN GROWING ABOUT A POSSIBLE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY CHALLENGE TO PRESIDENT OBAMA launched by his party's disgruntled left. Talk of a primary challenge has only ratcheted up following Obama's announcement of the tax deal he cut this week with congressional Republicans.

Warning: If the Democratic left does to Obama in 2012 what it did to incumbent President Carter in 1980 via Ted Kennedy's damaging Democratic presidential primary challenge - or what the Republican right did to incumbent President George H.W. Bush in 1992 with Pat Buchanan's entry into the GOP primary - THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AS A WHOLE WILL FIND ITSELF PAYING A STEEP PRICE FOR YEARS TO COME.

That's a promise, not a threat……

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121005182.html

The author goes on to detail what will happen if Obama is challenged in the primaries and how it will hurt the Democrat Party. From what I see, although logical, it is not likely to sway those who want to challenge Obama. Logic is not their strongpoint.

If you won’t waste the money, we know others who will

This left the Obama administration with a dilemma. In the rush to put together the $814 billion stimulus package, the administration had packed it with funding for projects—like electric cars and high-speed rail—that had long been favorites of the we-know-better crowd in Washington. Voters of two Midwestern states, judging from the elections and polling on the issue, had looked at the administration’s $1.2 billion stimulus gift and said, with characteristic Midwestern politeness, “NO, THANK YOU.”

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WASN’T HAVING IT, these voters not understanding what’s good for them. So they insisted: YOU’LL TAKE THE DAMN TRAINS—OR ELSE! Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood told both Kasich and Walker within days of their election that IF THEIR STATES DIDN’T WANT THE MONEY, OTHER STATES WERE EAGER TO GET THEIR HANDS ON IT. In other words, if you don’t want to waste our money, we’ll find someone who will.

Walker proposed that the money be repurposed to fund Wisconsin’s real transportation needs: improving the state’s bridges and highways. ……..

Kasich, a noted deficit hawk, PROPOSED THAT OHIO RETURN THE $400 MILLION TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO BE USED EXCLUSIVELY FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION. Three Wisconsin congressmen, including Representative Paul Ryan, introduced legislation that would do the same thing with Wisconsin’s money. Together, THAT WOULD MEAN A SAVINGS OF $1.2 BILLION—not a huge amount in the context of the federal budget, but not insignificant for an administration suddenly concerned (at least rhetorically) about deficits.

But the administration, with a vice president who loves Amtrak even more than the sound of his own voice, is determined to spend the money on trains—somewhere, somehow. SO LAST WEEK, LAHOOD ANNOUNCED THAT THE STIMULUS MONEY WOULD BE GOING TO CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/railing-against-big-government_522142.html

If you needed a reason to vote the Democrats out of office, here’s a pretty good one. They seem intent on bankrupting the country. The "use it or lose it," philosophy seems to still be in effect in Washington.

Democrats just don’t get it

Given their overwrought reaction to President Obama's tax deal, YOU'D THINK DEMOCRATS HAD NO REASON TO COMPROMISE WITH THE OPPOSITION. HAVE THEY ALREADY FORGOTTEN LAST MONTH'S ELECTION?

Democrats have lashed out at Obama for "compromising " with the Republicans on a tax bill. But all in all, agreeing to an extension of current tax rates for an extension of jobless benefits seems like a pretty fair deal.

Yet the reaction has been brutal……

Yes, the anger is boiling over. But to call this display of outrage puerile is an understatement. EVERYONE BUT THE DEMOCRATS CAN SEE HOW OUT OF STEP THEY ARE WITH PUBLIC OPINION.

As long as they were in control of Congress and the White House, DEMOCRATS FELT NO NEED TO COMPROMISE. But after four years of Democratic failure, voters on Nov. 2 awarded the GOP a record 63 seats for control of the House and took away the Democrats' veto-proof majority in the Senate, where their edge will be a slim three seats.

Even worse, furious DEMOCRATS DON'T SEEM TO REALIZE THAT ON VIRTUALLY EVERY MAJOR ISSUE, THEY'RE ON THE WRONG SIDE — AT LEAST AS FAR AS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/556559/201012101918/The-Dems-Crackup.htm

The democrats have decided to take the path that leads to oblivion. They are acting for their most radical elements and seem to have learned nothing from last month’s election.

It appears more congressional electees will cling to their guns and religion

Now that all congressional races have been decided, here the final tallies for how the election affected Second Amendment support in Congress, according to the NRA’s top federal lobbyist Chuck Cunningham:

19 OF 25 U.S. SENATE CANDIDATES ENDORSED BY THE NRA-POLITICAL VICTORY FUND WON THEIR RACES (76%). The net gain is +7 votes (Ark., N.H., N.D., Oh., Penn., W.V., Wisc.) with no offsetting losses.

After the 2008 elections, there were 43 Senators with an A rating from NRA, 2 with a B, 9 with a C, 12 with a D, and 34 with an F. The changes in the new Senate will be +7 A, +1 C, –7 D, and –1 F……

IN THE U.S. HOUSE, 227 OF THE 283 ENDORSED BY NRA-PVF WON (80%)……….

After the 2008 elections, there were 226 Representatives with an A rating, 18 B, 14 C, 22 D-rated, 151 F, and 4 ? (had refused to answer questionaire). The new House will be +36 A, –7 B, - 1 C, –16 F, — 3 ?.

http://volokh.com/2010/12/10/final-score-on-2d-amendment-in-the-november-elections/

The Second Amendment appears to be secure.

The leftwing media owns up to “Deifying” BHO

Liberal columnist MIKE BARNICLE CONFESSED FRIDAY THAT THE MEDIA "DEIFIED" BARACK OBAMA DURING HIS 2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. Both Barnicle and former MSNBC host Donny Deutsch, on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," ADMITTED THAT OBAMA HAD NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE when he took office as president and that hurt him in his first two years in the Oval Office.

"This guy took office, he had never really run anything in his life, and IT'S VERY EASY TO BE AN IDEOLOGUE," DEUTSCH SAID OF OBAMA. "And he learned," he added. Barnicle noted that Obama "has never been executive, he's never run anything, he's never managed anything."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2010/12/10/liberal-columnist-mike-barnicle-obama-deified-08-media-largely-blame#ixzz17p9O9HC6

I remember when anyone brought up his inexperience we were told he would have good people around him. Obama in his debates with Hillary Clinton down played the management part of the presidency focusing entirely on the president’s need to inspire. Well, after two years of BHO I think we are 0-2, that is, neither good management nor inspiration.

And then WikiLeaks leaks it

Off-the-record exchanges and thousands of confidential E-MAILS DATING BACK ALMOST FOUR YEARS REVEAL THAT HIGH-PROFILE JOURNALISTS HAVE BEEN AIDING AND ADVISING PRESIDENT OBAMA SINCE HE ANNOUNCED HIS CANDIDACY IN EARLY 2007.

Provided by WikiLeaks to the Washington Times, the material was originally discovered by a cleaning lady at CNN. Surfing on Wolf Blitzer’s computer during her 4:00 a.m. break, Emalina Ortiz inadvertently opened a window to “BO-WESERVE”–A PRIVATE FORUM FOR JOURNALISTS SUPPORTING OBAMA’S CAMPAIGN AND, LATER, HIS ADMINISTRATION’S AGENDA.

Shocked by what she read, Ortiz impulsively copied the archives to a flash drive and mailed it to WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange, a man she had heard BLITZER DESCRIBE IN HIS BROADCASTS AS “A HERO, SOMEONE WHO IS NOT AFRAID TO SHINE A LIGHT INTO THE SEWER TO SEE WHAT’S FLOATING AROUND DOWN THERE.”

Spokesmen from the New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN blasted Assange for exposing communications that linked Obama’s rise and governance to support from and tutelage by some of the biggest names in journalism.

In a brief phone interview, Times Managing Editor Bill Keller railed: “The cheeky sumbitch actually asked me if I wanted to break the story. Said I could run it with a ‘Who watches the watchers?’ angle. What the hell’s the matter with Assange? HE KNOWS THE RULES: WE’RE LEAKED TO, NOT ON. Only the Times destroys reputations with impunity and immunity. He crossed a line coming after us.”