Friday, December 2, 2011

Should the Democrats panic?

What’s new today

Story #1 talks of a desperation in Obama’s fund raising pitch.  #2 talks about the decrease in the unemployment rate.  #3 is the case for Newt Gingrich and what he brings to the presidency.  #4 tells the story the Democrats don’t want told about Fannie, Freddie and Chris and Barney.  #5 takes us to the Occupy movement and the false story about Lech Walesa supposedly endorsing the movement.  #6 gives us the six signs that the Occupy Movement is now politically dead. 




1.  Obama Sounds Desperate

Suddenly, President OBAMA IS INSERTING A STARK NEW TONE OF DRAMA AND URGENCY INTO HIS CAMPAIGN SPEECHES TO LOYALISTS AT POLITICAL FUNDRAISERS.

After talking up his payroll tax cut in Pennsylvania Wednesday afternoon, Obama flew Air Force One to New York City for not one, not two, but three money gatherings from Gotham liberals….

…."EVERY SINGLE THING THAT WE CARE ABOUT IS AT STAKE IN THE NEXT ELECTION," he told one donor group. "The very core of what this country stands for is on the line."

So, the future of the entire country is now inextricably tied to Obama's own reelection?

SUCH HYPERBOLIC, HUBRISTIC CLAIMS ARE USUALLY RESERVED FOR A CAMPAIGN'S CLOSING HOURS TO PROMPT A LAST-MINUTE SPURT OF POLITICAL ADRENALIN AMONG SUPPORTERS. Not 341 days out. Not 10 months before even early voting opens. This couldn't possibly be desperation! Already?

Here are several other points made by Obama to a possibly puzzled crowd assembled at the Gotham Bar and Grille:

"I've got to win in 2012."

"In order to finish the job, I'm going to have to have a second term."

"I need a couple more years to finish the job."

"I'm going to need another term to finish the job."…


He is right when he said the core of what this country stands for is at stake. However, that reminder probably works more against his election than for it. 




     2. Jobs: Mixed Results for Obama

U.S. employers, continuing a pattern of modest hiring, ADDED 120,000 NEW JOBS IN NOVEMBER, the Labor Department said Friday.

The nation's UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, HOWEVER, FELL SHARPLY TO 8.6% FROM 9% IN OCTOBER. There was an unusually big drop in the number of people who reported being out of work. Many jobless people may have quit looking for jobs, and thus wouldn't have been counted as officially unemployed. Analysts expect the jobless figure to climb back up next month.

Strong HOLIDAY HIRING BOOSTED THE NEW JOB TALLY LAST MONTH. RETAILERS ADDED ALMOST 50,000 JOBS, the second strongest November hiring by stores in a decade. TWO OTHER LOWER-PAYING SECTORS, TEMPORARY-HELP AND LEISURE BUSINESSES, ACCOUNTED FOR MUCH OF THE REST OF THE JOB GAINS. Manufacturing payrolls were flat, and government continued to slash workers….


Kind of reminds me of the old joke, “I have good news and bad news for you, which do you want first.”  “Give me the bad news.”  “Okay, we’re out of food and the only thing we have to eat is grass.”  “What’s the good news?” “There isn’t enough of that to go around.”  I’ll give you the good news first.  We gained 120,000 jobs last month.  Now the bad most of them were temporary or low paying. 



3.   The Case for Gingrich

…Nevertheless, THERE IS A COMPELLING CASE FOR GINGRICH AS THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE. He is both glib and brilliant. In this respect Gingrich resembles much more the parliamentary pugilist Winston Churchill, who also had very heavy baggage, than Ronald Reagan, who gave "The Speech" ten thousand times. Like Churchill, who mastered much more than just politics, Gingrich is an historian, a fiction writer, and a dozen other things.

HE WILL NOT BE STUMPED BY THE MEDIA. IN FACT, GINGRICH WILL HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE TO ACTUALLY EMBARRASS THE AUTOMATONS WHO READ TELEPROMPTER QUESTIONS. More pointedly, Gingrich has the best chance of any Republican to display Obama before America in a "deer in the headlights" moment. OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT IS A PROFOUNDLY IGNORANT MAN WHOSE IGNORANCE IS MASKED BY EQUALLY IGNORANT AND WHOLLY PROGRAMMED MEDIA.

Yet what Obama doesn't know can hurt us, and a single slip in the debates could cost him -- and perhaps his party -- five percentage points in the general election. That could not only seal the presidential election, but also swing dozens of House and Senate races and turn a presidential victory into a presidential landslide. People are scared now, and a man who obviously grasps the present crisis can be a valuable electoral asset.

GINGRICH ALSO UNDERSTANDS CONGRESS. He was House minority whip and then speaker of the House, the most important office in Congress. Gingrich would understand how to move legislation through Congress, and so A CONSERVATIVE AGENDA SUPPORTED BY HIM WOULD HAVE A MUCH GREATER LIKELIHOOD OF ACTUALLY BECOMING LAW than it would with some more ardent, but less experienced, conservatives.

An analogy might be made between LBJ and Gingrich. President Johnson was not nearly as liberal as most Democrat nominees in the last fifty years, yet he transformed America (for the worse, but still dramatically) with his "Great Society" agenda. Johnson, who had been Senate majority leader before he was vice president, knew just how Congress worked. Since Johnson, America has moved progressively to the left, because Johnson was able to get enacted what seemed like a modestly leftist agenda.

Moreover, GINGRICH AS A NOVICE SPEAKER LEARNED THE HARD WAY WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN'T IN HIGH-PROFILE NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE DEBATES. It is easy to underestimate what he accomplished with a modest House majority and a Senate in which Republicans could not even end debate on a bill, much less, in either house, override a presidential veto.

His personal scandals of the past would actually come as a strength in the general election. Gingrich as speaker was smeared and attacked so relentlessly that ALL THE "BAD NEWS" HAS BEEN HEARD LONG BEFORE. Rather like with Clinton, who had even more scandals, no one much cares about an older man whose life has been scrutinized and used by his enemies…


This is a very good summary of the case for Newt. 




4.  Frank, Fannie and Freddie



…IN THE MYTHMAKING OF THE REACTIONARY LEFT, PRIVATE BANKS CREATED RISKY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS PREDICATED ON THE U.S. MORTGAGE INDUSTRY THAT WERE SO INTRINSICALLY CORRUPT THAT IT LED TO AN INEVITABLE COLLAPSE IN THE HOUSING MARKET IN 2008. Private banks that were bailed out in TARP were collectively engaged in negligence and fraud that led to our present economic demise. The staggering loss of $6 trillion in housing values damaged the entire global economy.

NOTICEABLY ABSENT FROM THIS COMMENTARY AND STORYTELLING IS A SENSE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S KEY ROLE IN CREATING THE CRISIS. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the largest financiers of mortgages in the United States. Preceding the crisis, congressional regulator FRANKLIN RAINES MADE PUBLIC STATEMENTS THAT THERE "WAS NO RISK" TO INVESTING IN AMERICAN MORTGAGES. The deregulated view of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac combined with the regulator's statements that there was no risk in this area of financial investment was the equivalent of telling chronic gamblers that the casino will cover all bets. Not only did congressional regulators such as Barney Frank fail to constrain the federal agencies inflating the housing bubble, but THEY ACTIVELY CRITICIZED IN PUBLIC THOSE TRYING TO PREVENT A CRISIS THROUGH INCREASED REGULATION, and they worked to inculcate the view that there were no undue risks in the American housing market.

Congressman Frank provides his own convoluted review of this crisis on his congressional homepage. IN HIS ACCOUNT, THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION TOOK THE INEXPLICABLE VIEW OF OPPOSING REGULATION FROM 2001 TO 2007 AND THEN ENDORSED REGULATION IN 2007, WHEN FRANK TOOK LEADERSHIP OF THE IMPORTANT HOUSING ISSUES RELATING TO FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC. According to Frank, the regulations passed in 2007 by himself and President Bush were "too late." Outside the reactionary left's mythmaking offered by Congressman Frank, the BUSH ADMINISTRATION REPEATEDLY CALLED FOR HEIGHTENED CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC THROUGHOUT BOTH TERMS OF THE BUSH PRESIDENCIES. In reality, the Bush proposals to treat GSEs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the same as private banks in the regulatory world, were termed "inane" in 2005 by Congressman Frank. The reforms passed by Frank came in 2008 -- after the industry had collapsed -- despite Frank's 2005 assurance that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were "fundamentally sound." The GSEs purchased considerable political sway in fall of 2006 to prevent the regulatory leveling sought by the Bush administration. Democratic senators such as Chris Dodd and Barack Obama received considerable financial support from the GSEs in a landslide sweep for Democrats in Congress that functionally guaranteed that the GSEs would fend off future regulatory reforms pushed by the president….


This is the Achilles’ heel of the left in the financial crisis.  They pooh pooh the idea that Fannie and Freddie were the root cause of the crisis, because it doesn’t fit their narrative.



5.   Lech Walesa and the OWS

It was about six weeks ago that the press was abuzz with news that legendary labor activist Lech Walesa, the man who, more than anyone else, was responsible for bringing down communism in Poland, was planning a visit to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. The left-wing blogosphere erupted in paroxysms of joy; BRENT BUDOWSKY AT THE HILL SUMMED IT UP BEST: "ONE OF HISTORY'S GREAT LEADERS FOR JOBS, WORKERS AND FREEDOM IS NOW SUPPORTING THE OCCUPY WALL STREET PROTEST. Lech Walesa has now weighed in, big time, for the good guys."

I forgot all about this until just yesterday, when I learned that WALESA NEVER DID MAKE THAT VISIT--a fact apparently overlooked by the mainstream press, although it was big news in the conservative blogosphere. WALESA EXPRESSED HIS VIEWS MORE OPENLY IN MID-NOVEMBER IN AN EDITORIAL CRITICAL OF THE OWS MOVEMENT IN THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE:

I have lived under the heavy hand of communism, where the state controls virtually everything, and I've lived under freedom. While today's protesters have many legitimate concerns, let me assure them that instead of either cronyism or greater government control, IT IS DIALOGUE AND SOLIDARITY LEADING TO FREEDOM THAT WE SHOULD ALL STRIVE FOR…






With the anti-capitalist tone of the OWS movement, it was naïve for the proponents and the occupiers to think an anti-Communist leader would embrace their movement.  It appears Walesa realizes that freedom is one of the first things leftists are willing to sacrifice.



6.  Six Signs the Occupy Movement is Politically Dead



…..here are six undeniable signs that the same media and leftist elites who promised you air cover in the revolution that would finally fulfill your frustrated dreams have just left you swinging in the wind, fully exposed and more than a little humiliated with nowhere to go:

1. MSM IS NO LONGER INFATUATED WITH OCCUPY: Other than the big stories surrounding Occupy evictions, the mainstream media’s all but stopped covering the Occupy movement. 12 to 14 hours a day the cable nets are on in my office, and even leftist CNN and far-left MSNBC have ceased trying to use the Occupiers as a way to jump-start Obama-friendly narratives about taxing the rich and how Wall Street is to blame for Obama’s failed economy….

….2. JON STEWART GUTS OCCUPY: On November 17, “The Daily Show” took the “cool” out of Occupy with a devastating report (see above) that exposed the movement for the Orwellian Animal Farm these kinds of movements always become (which of course was Orwell’s point). No one in media understood better how useful this movement could’ve been to Barack Obama than Jon Stewart, but HE’S ALSO SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW WHEN IT’S TIME TO FIRE OFF A FLARE WARNING OBAMA TO STAY AWAY — AND THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT THIS SEGMENT WAS MEANT TO DO, AND DID.

3. AP PRETENDS DEMOCRATS NEVER SUPPORTED OCCUPY: On November 18, the Associated Press laughably and transparently attempted to memory-hole the Democrats’ very public and energetic embrace of all things Occupy.

Gee, I wonder why?

4. SLATE FREAKS OVER AD CONNECTING HIGH-PROFILE DEMOCRAT TO OCCUPY: Slate’s Libby Copeland was so panicked over a political ad that truthfully and effectively laid out Elizabeth Warren’s once-proud connection to the Occupy movement that she made a public fool of herself labeling the ad as “sexist.”

That’s desperate. And more than a little funny.

5. NEW YORKER BARES OCCUPY’S ASTRO-TURF FOR THE WORLD TO SEE: Even though Big Government exposed all this over a month ago, the fact that the New Yorker would, IN A MAJOR FEATURE PIECE,  FINALLY PUT TO BED THE LIE THAT OCCUPY WAS JUST SOME SORT OF ORGANIC, GRASSROOTS ORGANIZATION LIKE THE TEA PARTY, is the final nail in the movement’s coffin.

After all, someone has to take the blame for this.

6. LIBERAL CITIES EVICT OCCUPY: Mayors of some of the most liberal cities in America (Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia) ARE PLAYING BULL CONNOR TO ALL THOSE WONDERFUL LITTLE HIPPIES WHO ONLY WANT “SOCIAL JUSTICE.” Furthermore, in their latest reports, the MSM has even stopped trying to make the cops look bad during these evictions. The coverage can best be described as obligatory.

Democratic mayors of big, urban liberal cities don’t evict popular movements, do they? They wouldn’t even evict a movement popular with the Obama’s base….

http://bigjournalism.com/jjmnolte/2011/12/01/dead-movement-walking-top-six-signs-the-left-and-the-msm-have-hung-occupy-out-to-dry/

A very nice summation of why the OWS movement is now the living dead.  Another sign is the fact that many are saying the Occupy movement has already won as it has put the spotlight on greed.  That isn’t winning.  That’s declaring victory and retreating.

No comments:

Post a Comment