Thursday, December 8, 2011

Democratic losses and lies

What’s new today

Story #1 tells of the people who are leaving the Democratic Party rolls in 8 key battleground states.  #2 identifies 5 lies in Obama’s fairness speech.  #3 points out the inconsistency of what Obama is demanding in his fairness speech.  #4 reiterates Obama’s threat to veto a continuation of the payroll tax decrease if the Republicans try to put approval of the Keystone pipeline in the bill.  #5 tells about how Chris Christie handled OWS hecklers.  #6 lays out the beginning of a story you’ll read more about.  It appears the Republican insiders don’t like Newt.  In our final story we look at Winston Churchill and see if Newt is our American Churchill. 

1.   Voters Flee Democratic Party

President Obama’s uphill battle to re-election is getting steeper.

A report released today by the centrist think-tank Third Way showed that MORE THAN 825,000 VOTERS IN EIGHT KEY BATTLEGROUND STATES HAVE FLED THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SINCE OBAMA WON ELECTION IN 2008.

“The numbers show that Democrats’ path to victory just got harder,” said Lanae Erickson, the report’s co-author. “WE ARE SEEING BOTH AN INCREASE IN INDEPENDENTS AND A DECREASE IN DEMOCRATS and that means the coalition they have to assemble is going to rely even more on independents in 2012 than it did in 2008.”

Amid frustrating partisan gridlock and unprecedentedly low party-approval ratings, the number of voters registering under a major party is falling fast, but it is also falling disproportionately.

In eight states that will be must wins in 2012  – Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina and Pennsylvania – DEMOCRATS LOST 5.4 PERCENT OF THEIR REGISTERED VOTERS WHILE REPUBLICANS LOST 3.1 PERCENT. The number of independent voters in those states jumped 3.4 percent.

“People are frustrated and the way you tune out in American politics is that is you drop the label of the two parties,” said Steven Jarding, a Harvard public policy professor and Democratic campaign strategist. “The danger for Obama in this is he is not only going to have to capture them but capture more of them because there are less Democratic voters.”…

Less democratic voters sounds like music to your ears. 

2.   Five Big Lies In Obama’s Economic Fairness Speech

Election '12: One thing is certainly true about President Obama — NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES PEOPLE POINT OUT THE FALSEHOODS IN HIS SPEECHES, HE JUST KEEPS MAKING THEM. Case in point: his latest "economic fairness" address.

In that speech Tuesday, Obama once again tried to build a case for his liberal, big-spending, tax-hiking, regulatory agenda. But as with so many of his past appeals, Obama's argument rests on a pile of untruths. Among the most glaring:

TAX CUTS AND DEREGULATION HAVE "NEVER WORKED" TO GROW THE ECONOMY. There's so much evidence to disprove this claim, it's hard to know where to start. But let's begin with the fact that countries with greater economic freedom — lower taxes, less government, sound money, free trade — consistently produce greater overall prosperity….

BUSH'S TAX CUTS ON THE RICH ONLY MANAGED TO PRODUCED "MASSIVE DEFICITS" AND THE "SLOWEST JOB GROWTH IN HALF A CENTURY." Budget data make clear that Obama's spending hikes, not Bush's tax cuts, produced today's massive deficits.

And Obama only gets his "slowest job growth" number by including huge job losses during his own term in office. Also, monthly pre-recession job growth under Bush was about 40% higher than post-recession growth has been under Obama.

DURING THE BUSH YEARS, "WE HAD WEAK REGULATION, WE HAD LITTLE OVERSIGHT." This is patently false. REGULATORY STAFFING CLIMBED 42% UNDER BUSH, AND REGULATORY SPENDING SHOT UP 50%, according to a Washington University in St. Louis/George Washington University study….

Obama and his supporters keep saying these things and like Dr. Goebbels said 70 years ago, if you tell a lie often enough pretty soon you’ll start believing it yourself. 

3.  Obama’s Fairness Speech

President Obama spoke in Osawatomie, Kansas today, speaking in the vein of the “New Nationalism” speech Teddy Roosevelt gave there a century ago. There was a lot of the usual Obama stump content, including pleas for infrastructure spending, DEMANDS FOR THE RICH TO “PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE,” AND THE TRADITIONAL SHOUT-OUT TO WARREN BUFFETT’S  SECRETARY – a perennial class-warfare martyr who pays a higher tax rate (but a miniscule fraction of the tax dollars) coughed up by her boss. She belongs on Mount Rushmore at this point.

Buried beneath the tired Obama 2012 campaign claptrap – and I wonder if even some of the President’s dwindling base of fervent supporters aren’t growing weary of hearing the exact same focus-grouped phrases tediously repeated, over and over again – were two central ideas, tied back to the “New Nationalism” theme. FIRST: IT’S CRUCIAL FOR AMERICA TO COLLECTIVELY RECOVER ITS ECONOMIC GREATNESS BY PITCHING IN, PAYING FAIR SHARES, and working together under the direction of a benevolent government that will coach Team America to Win The Future. SECOND: EVERYONE SHOULD PLAY BY THE SAME SET OF RULES.

THESE TWO IDEAS ARE ENTIRELY CONTRADICTORY. The Obama presidency comes off as deranged because it’s impossible to reconcile them without going mad.

For example, IF EVERYONE IS SUPPOSED TO PLAY BY THE SAME SET OF RULES, WHY DO WE NEED 30+ “CZARS” TO EXERCISE HEAVILY FUNDED, LARGELY UNACCOUNTABLE POWERS OVER AMERICANS WHO HAVE COMMITTED NO CRIMES? If we’re all going to play by the same rules now, does that mean the President’s buddies are going to return their ObamaCare waivers?

Indeed, the central concept underlying liberal and socialist thought, THE IMMENSE PROGRESSIVE TAX SYSTEM, IS FOUNDED ON THE CONCEPT OF TREATING PEOPLE “UNFAIRLY.” Obama complained in his Osawatomie speech about sinister millionaires taking advantage of too many “loopholes” to avoid high taxes (hi, Warren Buffett’s secretary!) However, he didn’t have much to say about the huge constellation of manifestly “unfair” rules designed to penalize activities the government disapproves of, or subsidize objectives it finds worthy. ..

Contradictions don’t seem to bother liberals.  They fight racism with racism.  The country needs jobs and Obama does whatever he can to strangle these jobs in their cribs (See Keystone).  They are against waterboarding because they deem it torture and yet are using drones to kill American citizens. 

4.  Obama threatens veto if pipeline decision is added to payroll tax cut

The battle between the White House and Republicans over the Keystone XL pipeline escalated Wednesday with a veto threat delivered personally by President Obama.


So Obama will take a win/win proposition (extension of a tax break for the American public and a pipeline that will provide 20,000 jobs immediately and 200,000 jobs in the future) and veto it???  Actually it isn’t that surprising. 

5.   Chris Christie Interrupted by OWS hecklers:  deals with them

….“You know what, WE’RE USED TO DEALING WITH JOKERS LIKE THIS IN NEW JERSEY ALL THE TIME,” Christie said, as the protesters filed out. “So you guys go all out and chant and do what it is that you want to do.”

Once the room quieted and the protesters were locked outside, Christie resumed speaking and offered his thoughts on the Occupy Wall Street movement.

“Here’s the way I feel about it: THEY REPRESENT AN ANGER IN OUR COUNTRY THAT BARACK OBAMA HAS CAUSED,” he said, drawing cheers from the crowd. “He’s a typical cynical Chicago... politician who runs for office and PROMISES EVERYTHING AND THEN COMES TO OFFICE AND DISAPPOINTS, and so their anger is rooted not in me or Mitt Romney, THEIR ANGER IS ROOTED IN THE FACT THAT THEY BELIEVED IN THIS HOPE AND CHANGE GARBAGE.”

Christie called them disillusioned and said he “feels bad” for them.

“Now they are angry but they’re not mature enough to know they should be angry with themselves,” he said.

I do like Chris Christie.  He’s right, they did believe all this “hope and change garbage.”  It appears Obama has gone from Hope and Change to Fear the Republicans, Envy the Rich, and Resent everyone else and OWS has bought the “new garbage” hook, line and sinker.

6.  Newt and the Ruling Class

I just returned from the belly of the beast, Washington, D.C. There is not a more parochial or insular city in the country. While there, I had a conversation with two members of what can be described only as the Republican establishment, one in the print media and the other a K Street lobbyist. In short order, the conversation turned to Newt Gingrich and his surge to the top of the ladder.

THERE IS NO ONE MORE REVILED IN WASHINGTON THAN NEWT. IF ANYONE BELIEVES HE IS PART OF THE ESTABLISHMENT, HE OR SHE IS MISTAKEN. In fact, it would not be a terribly great stretch to say some in the Republican wing of the governing class would prefer to see Obama re-elected than Newt in the Oval Office. However, the vast majority of this class are now in a panic as the preordained choice, Mitt Romney, is truly threatened by the rabble in flyover country constantly looking for anyone but Romney. These people have settled, so it seems, on Gingrich. The increasing volume of commentary of the Beltway insiders and attendant vitriol toward Newt has become a near-hysterical tidal wave rehashing and embellishing Newt's supposed failings and personal "baggage."

Much of this stems from his days as House minority leader and later speaker, when HE RUFFLED MANY FEATHERS AS HIS, AT TIMES, ABRASIVE AND ASSERTIVE PERSONALITY WAS ON FULL DISPLAY. Newt was relentless, with a near-imperious and dictatorial demeanor, in getting many of his and other conservative ideas into law, and he never failed to expound on whatever came to the forefront of his mind. One must realize that THERE ARE NO MORE TENDER EGOS THAN THOSE IN CONGRESS, IN THE WASHINGTON MEDIA, OR IN THE UPPER REACHES OF THE ENTRENCHED BUREAUCRACY. They are all always the smartest in any room (regardless of party affiliation) and do not take kindly to being told otherwise or denigrated by someone who refused to become absorbed by and subservient to the dominant Washington culture.

Thus, many cannot fathom why Newt, of all people, would be in first place in the polls….

Newt is looking better and better to me. 

7.   Is Newt an American Churchill?

As one of the most polarizing figures in modern American politics, Newt Gingrich has racked up a huge inventory of pungent criticism of both his ideas and his character — much of it from his fellow conservatives. National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru, for example, notes Newt’s “erratic behavior, lack of discipline and self-absorption” and “need to justify his every petty move by reference to some grand theory.”

But before becoming prime minister, Winston Churchill was often dismissed in similar terms by members of his own party, who complained that “his planning is all wishing and guessing,” that he was “a genius without judgment,” and that he had been “on every side of every question.” His many non-fiction books were even characterized as “autobiographies disguised as history of the universe.” This is not to suggest that Newt is the next Churchill, which would indeed feed Newt’s grandiosity. Rather, it is to prompt us to recognize one important fact and to ask two questions that have heretofore not been asked….

An interesting article that looks at Winston Churchill and how he ended up being the perfect man for his time in history and wonders if Newt might be the same. 

No comments:

Post a Comment