Friday’s Fribbles and Kibbles

  Witch’s Will For A March Morning

  My Pick Of The Litter Today

Not-So-Smooth Operator

Obama increasingly comes across as devious and dishonest.

by Peggy Noonan

Something’s happening to President Obama’s relationship with those who are inclined not to like his policies. They are now inclined not to like him. His supporters would say, “Nothing new there,” but actually I think there is. I’m referring to the broad, stable, nonradical, non-birther right. Among them the level of dislike for the president has ratcheted up sharply the past few months.

It’s not due to the election, and it’s not because the Republican candidates are so compelling and making such brilliant cases against him. That, actually, isn’t happening.

What is happening is that the president is coming across more and more as a trimmer, as an operator who’s not operating in good faith. This is hardening positions and leading to increased political bitterness. And it’s his fault, too. As an increase in polarization is a bad thing, it’s a big fault.

The shift started on Jan. 20, with the mandate that agencies of the Catholic Church would have to provide services the church finds morally repugnant. The public reaction? “You’re kidding me. That’s not just bad judgment and a lack of civic tact, it’s not even constitutional!” Faced with the blowback, the president offered a so-called accommodation that even its supporters recognized as devious. Not ill-advised, devious. Then his operatives flooded the airwaves with dishonest—not wrongheaded, dishonest—charges that those who defend the church’s religious liberties are trying to take away your contraceptives.

What a sour taste this all left. How shocking it was, including for those in the church who’d been in touch with the administration and were murmuring about having been misled.

Events of just the past 10 days have contributed to the shift. There was the open-mic conversation with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in which Mr. Obama pleaded for “space” and said he will have “more flexibility” in his negotiations once the election is over and those pesky voters have done their thing. On tape it looked so bush-league, so faux-sophisticated. When he knew he’d been caught, the president tried to laugh it off by comically covering a mic in a following meeting. It was all so . . . creepy.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303816504577312043447691520.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

    Stories/Articles You Might Find Interesting – or not

Another Legislative Defeat For Obama

Another (not totally unexpected) defeat for one of President Obama’s legislative proposals today. This time, the Senate rejected a measure to repeal oil company tax breaks, which the president urged them to pass in a stern speech this morning. The vote wasn’t completely split along party lines, with two Republicans supporting the measure and four Democrats opposing it.

Obama will continue to frame this as the GOP protecting the interests of Big Oil, but the fact that it failed in the Democrat-controlled Senate takes the edge off that slightly:

Obama has sought to deflect blame for high gas prices, in part by casting Republicans as allies of big oil companies. He used a Rose Garden speech to urge lawmakers to back the plan.

“Today, members of Congress have a simple choice to make,” Obama said. “They can stand with big oil companies, or they can stand with the American people.”

I know this fits nicely with Obama’s class warfare strategy, but it sounds completely counterintuitive. Even if there’s no hard evidence that repealing these tax breaks would raise the price of gas at the pump, it still sounds like a reasonable outcome to the average voter. And that’s the argument the GOP has been making:

Republicans alleged the Democratic proposal would hit struggling consumers.

“That was their brilliant plan on how to deal with gas prices: raise taxes on energy companies; when gas is already hovering around $4 a gallon, then block consideration of anything else, just to make sure gas prices don’t go anywhere but up,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on the floor.

Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) said the bill “is not a policy that will do anything but increase the price at the pump and decrease supply.”

“That is the opposite of what we need,” Vitter said on the floor ahead of the vote.

So there is honest disagreement about whether repealing tax breaks for oil companies would raise gas prices. But everyone can at least agree it certainly won’t lower the price at the pump. Which is why this is a puzzling and politically stupid move for the Democrats. Their plan to deal with high gas prices isn’t even designed to lower high gas prices.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/03/29/senate-kills-repeal-oil-company-tax-breaks/

 

 

The “flexibility” doctrine

by Charles Krauthammer

You don’t often hear an American president secretly (he thinks) assuring foreign leaders that concessions are coming their way, but they must wait because he’s seeking reelection and he dares not tell his own people.

Not at all, spun a White House aide in major gaffe-control mode. The president was merely explaining that arms control is too complicated to be dealt with in a year in which both Russia and the United States hold presidential elections.

Rubbish. First of all, to speak of Russian elections in the same breath as ours is a travesty. Theirs was a rigged, predetermined farce. Putin ruled before. Putin rules after.

Obama spoke of the difficulties of the Russian presidential “transition.” What transition? It’s a joke. It had no effect on Putin’s ability to negotiate anything.

As for the U.S. election, the problem is not that the issue is too complicated but that if people knew Obama’s intentions of flexibly caving on missile defense, they might think twice about giving him a second term.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-flexibility-doctrine/2012/03/29/gIQA9ZMtjS_story.html

 Court defeat will hurt Obama

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s hearings on the constitutionality of ObamaCare this week, speculation is now rife about the impact of a defeat for the president’s signature legislative achievement. Arguments are being marshaled that claim an overturning of the legislation will help the Republicans, while others insist it will rally the Democrats. That all of this is a bit premature is a given. No matter how the question and answer session with the justices went, we still don’t know for sure how they will vote. But even if we are to assume, as panicky liberals and triumphant conservatives are saying today, that the bill is headed to the dustbin of history, the ultimate impact of such a decision can only be guessed at.

The issue can help and hurt both the Republicans and the Democrats. Each party has something to gain and something to lose from the outcome. Nevertheless, the two main points to be derived from a defeat is that it will diminish President Obama and get Mitt Romney off the hook for his own Massachusetts health care bill. Seen in that light, if the judges vote the way so many people seem to think they will, the decision may well be a harbinger of defeat in November for the president.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/03/29/court-defeat-will-hurt-obama-obamacare/

 Media Behaving Badly:

 For Two Straight Days, CNN Harps on Romney’s Wealth as Potential Voter Turn-Off

For the second straight day on Thursday, CNN emphasized Mitt Romney’s wealth as a possible turn-off to voters. Correspondent Joe Johns aired a segment on Thursday’s The Situation Room about “Mitt Romney-isms,” or Romney’s references to his own wealth and beliefs that seem to “hit the wrong note” for a presidential candidate.”Mitt Romney the millionaire may still have some problems with the average voter, because of his tone-deaf references to his personal wealth,” Gloria Borger introduced Johns’ Thursday story. On the previous day, Johns had authored a story about Romney’s expensive car elevator at his California mansion.
 
I only needed to see two words to know that CNN was once again “reporting” with liberal bias and spin. Those two words were “Glorie” and “Borger.”  She’s is a pressitute for Obama who isn’t worth watching, seeing or hearing. She never seems to find the time to be as critical of the left as she does of the right. The fact that she’s attacking Romney is a good indicator that even if the right hasn’t quite made up it’s mind who the nominee will be, the left has. Thus their bias and attacks.

  Worth reading : 

 We Will Battle Obama With The Candidate We Have – Not The Candidate We Might Want

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/29/we-will-battle-obama-with-the-candidate-we-have-not-the-candidate-we-might-want/?singlepage=true

New York being stupid again

DOE ‘thought’ police

by Michael Goodwin

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/doe_thought_police_ABQxI8SX39dhsoXEnB7GTJ

Romney’s Labor Pains

http://nationaljournal.com/magazine/romney-s-labor-pains-20120329?mrefid=freehplead_1

White-Hispanic?

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/29/opinion/navarrette-white-hispanic/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7

Republican GOP Primary takes back seat in Wisconsin

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/29/us-usa-campaign-wisconsin-idUSBRE82R1C620120329

 

54% Expect U.S. Supreme Court To Overturn Health Care Law

Most voters continue to believe the federal government does not have the authority to force people to buy health insurance, and they expect the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn President Obama’s health care law that includes that mandate.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters would like to see the Supreme Court overturn the health care law, and 54% predict that that’s what the court will do.

Thirty-seven percent (37%) would like to see the high court uphold the legality of the law, but just 26% think that’s what the court will ultimately decide. Thirteen percent (13%) are undecided about the law, and 21% aren’t sure what the Supreme Court will do about it

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2012/54_expect_u_s_supreme_court_to_overturn_health_care_law

Four in 10 Americans Say Energy Situation Is “Very Serious”

Americans are divided as to whether U.S. will face critical energy shortage in next five years

PRINCETON, NJ — As gas prices continue to rise in the United States, 42% of Americans describe the energy situation as “very serious,” slightly above the historical average of 38%, but lower than at several other points since Gallup first asked the question in 1977.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/153392/Four-Americans-Say-Energy-Situation-Serious.aspx

  What’s Going On In The World?

 Violence Erupts In Spanish Strikes

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/violence-erupts-in-spanish-strikes/2012/03/29/gIQAchzfjS_gallery.html#photo=1

Quote For Today:

  “The history of men’s opposition to women’s emancipation is more interesting perhaps than the story of that emancipation itself.” ~  Virginia Woolf

About these ads

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s