The Media Launches An Assault And Then Orders A Retreat

Each morning I log in to Yahoo, check my email and scan the headlines, maybe check some sports scores. This morning one headline jumped out at me. Here's a screen shot of the Yahoo headlines page of local stories. I've scrolled down so that the headline in question is at the top:

House GOP launches assault on health care

Yike. "Assault on health care"? Casual readers might assume that Republicans want to close hospitals and pharmacies and put their family doctors out of business. Adding the word "law" on the end is the very least they could have done to make the headline less invidious. Of course, they also could have refrained from using the word "assault" -- which sounds so . . . uncivil of those mean Republicans.

Clicking into the article, I notice that it is a CNN piece by Tom Cohen. So it wasn't something the local tv station came up with, it was a distributed article by CNN. I went and googled at the time and noted dozens of websites with the same headline. I didn't take a screen shot at the time, however.

Just now I went back to that article, and you know what? The headline has been changed to something a little less inflammatory:

House GOP to vote again on health care repeal

Well, that's a little more neutral. Note this below the headlline:

UPDATED 11:48 AM EDT Jul 11, 2012

So it was just recently updated. The original url, however, still contains the "launches assault on health care" phrase, in case there is any doubt:

http://www.wxii12.com/news/politics/House-GOP-launches-assault-on-health-care/-/9677658/15472656/-/pffry5z/-/index.html?absolute=true

I also just now went back and took a screen shot of the google results for "House GOP launches assault on health care" which now returns 1,700 results.

So Google continues to roam the internet and pick up on the original headline, even as sites are being changed to reflect a more neutral phrasing than was originally used when the article was distributed.

Someone, and we have no idea who, apparently launched an assault, so to speak, in an attempt to convey Republican activity in voting to repeal Obamacare in terms that were derogatory, invidious and inflammatory. Someone, and we have no idea who, apparently realized that was a mistake and ordered a retreat. But on the internet, there really are no second chances.

You might want to sit down for this: The media is not unbiased. I know, shocking.

Do Or Not Do -- There Is No Try

Obama on 60 Minutes with Steve Kroft, 2008:

KROFT: Why do you think you’d be a good president?

OBAMA: You know, I’m a, I’m a practical person. One of the things I’m good at is getting people in a room with a bunch of different ideas who sometimes violently disagree with each other and finding common ground and a sense of common direction.

Obama on WLWT-TV in Cincinnati, Ohio, 2012:

I suspect that most people … would acknowledge that I’ve tried real hard, and we just haven’t gotten the kind of willingness on the part of Republicans to engage on a whole range of issues that I wish had happened.

If getting people to work together was the reason Obama claimed that he would make a good president when asked directly -- and he admits he has not been able to accomplish that -- then by his own definition Obama has not been a good president. Not good presidents do not deserve reelection.

We'll give Obama a B+ for effort. And a participation ribbon for trying. He deserves that much.

(click image to enlarge)

56% Of America Agrees With Obama

From The Hill:

Two-thirds of likely voters say President Obama has kept his 2008 campaign promise to change America — but it’s changed for the worse, according to a sizable majority.

A new poll for The Hill found 56 percent of likely voters believe Obama’s first term has transformed the nation in a negative way, compared to 35 percent who believe the country has changed for the better under his leadership.

56% of America: "Obama has changed America for the worse"

Obama 2008: "It is time to change America!"
Obama 2011: "...and for some of our friends and neighbors, that change has been painful."

And with that, Obama's big campaign slogan is . . . Forward!

Obama's Not Being Direct With Us When He Says We're Heading In The Right Direction

Bad economic news this week on the jobs front. Only 80,000 jobs added last month. It is estimated that the economy needs 125,000 jobs each month just to keep up with population growth.

As expected, Obama and the White House tries to spin the news favorably -- an economy sucking wind being the biggest threat to his reelection. At the Tatler, Bryan Preston catches some of that spin - the White House saying you shouldn't read too much into a monthly report. What he actually catches is that this is the 30th time they've told us not to read too much into a monthly report.

Over on Campaign Spot, Jim Geraghty quotes some more spin from Obama:

Pointing to the fact that 80,000 jobs were created, [Obama] declares the news is “a step in the right direction,” but he’s not done yet, much work remains to be done, and so on.

Obama thinks adding fewer jobs in a month than new people come into the workforce is the "right direction"?

Yike.

And that phrase, "right direction", I know that phrase. Here's a post from two years ago in which I noted that no matter the economic news, Obama would declare that we are heading in the "right direction". It included this chart:

I stopped keeping track of his penchant for telling our lying eyes that the economy is heading in the right direction, but let's do some catch up. Searching Google for "right direction" and "remarks by the president" on whitehouse.gov we get this:

That's 137 entries on whitehouse.gov in which Obama has used the phrase "right direction" - and that's after google eliminated entries it deemed as repetitive - it actually returned 308 results in total. Obama uses the phrase in several varieties - for example he used the phrase a number of times in the stumping he did for the 2010 elections in his car in the ditch metaphor.

Obama apparently believes the idea that if you repeat something enough, people might start to believe it. That theory failed pretty spectacularly in the shellacking the Democrats suffered in the 2010 elections, but you'd be silly to think Obama would learn from it. He's lying about the economy heading in the right direction, and let's face it, he's not that smart.

Fun With Rasmussen

Rasmussen Reports is the site of pollster Scott Rasmussen. Rasmussen has created a Presidential Approval Index that measures the difference between Strongly Approve and Strongly Disapprove poll results.

Let's have some fun with the numbers.

Obama has seen three straight days of being minus 22 on the Rasmussen index. In fact, all three days were exactly the same on all measures (Srongly Approve 23%, Strongly Disappove 45%, Total Approve 44%, Total Disapprove 54%).

Today marks the ninth time that Obama has been at minus 22 or lower on three or more consecutive days, and the first time in 2012. The rest occurred in 2011. The record is 8 days, which took place once each in August, September and October of last year.

11/29-12/3 - 4 days
11/2-11/4 - 3 days
10/21-10/23 - 3 days
10/16-10/19 - 4 days
10/2-10/9 - 8 days
9/4-9/11 - 8 days
8/30-9/2 - 4 days
8/21-8/25 - 5 days
8/11-8/18 - 8 days

Today also marks the third consecutive day in which Obama's Strongly Disapprove is higher than his Total Approve - the eighth time that has happened, the first time in 2012, and only the second time since 2010. Obama has exceeded three days with his Strongly Disapprove commanding a higher number than his Total Approve only once, almost exactly two years ago when it was five days in June of 2010.

10/5-10/7/2011 - 3 days
9/9-9/11/2010 - 3 days
10/14-10/16/2010 - 3 days
9/9-9/11/2010 - 3 days
9/4-9/6/2010 - 3 days
7/23-7/25/2010 - 3 days
6/16-6/20/2010 - 5 days

Today is Obama's 1,251st day in office.

Obama has spent 10.2% of his presidency at minus 20 or lower

Obama has spent 73.3% of his presidency at minus 10 or lower.

Obama has spent 84.2% of his presidency underwater on the Rasmussen index.

Obama Owns Hollywood

And Hollywood owns Obama.

So Obama enjoyed the Devil who wears Prada/Carrie Bradshaw fundraiser last week. That's Anna Wintour, editor of Vogue and Sarah Jessica Parker of Sex in the City, just to be clear.

There sure does seem to be a lot of attention being paid to that fundraiser. I have been doing an On This Date In 2008 series here. Fun stuff. But here's a date I didn't include: On June 17, 2008 - Michelle Obama attended a fundraiser and $10K per plate dinner co-hosted by Calvin Klein and . . . Anna Wintour to support Barack's campaign.

It was the first of two fundraisers co-hosted by Wintour in the 2008 election - the second coupled the fundraiser with a fashion show on September 9 in New York City. That affair was co-hosted with . . . Sarah Jessica Parker.

I remember distinctly the Obama as celebrity meme in 2008. And yet, I have seen very little attention paid to the fact that the Wintour/Parker gala is not new.

Oh well.

Now some are worrying that Obama's obsessive Hollywoood fixation just might be going overboard.

Some of the president's most ardent entertainment industry supporters quietly tell The Hollywood Reporter that while they realize he needs to deploy all of his weapons to compete with deep-pocketed Republican super PACs, they fear the increasing reliance on stars and celebrity contests could backfire with swing voters and mobilize the right.

Forget it. Obama can no more disown Hollywood than he can his own typically white grandmother or his spiritual mentor and racist ex-pastor. Obama owns Hollywood. And Hollywood owns Obama.

Try Not To Think Of A Fishing Expedition

In Jay Carney's press briefing yesterday, he claimed that Republican attempts to get Attorney General Eric Holder to turn over all documents related to Fast and Furious was a "fishing expedition".

Five times:

1: "Republicans are focused on this politically motivated, taxpayer-funded, election-year fishing expedition."

2: "its efforts to work with Congress to provide it the information that was required under legitimate oversight needs, an assertion was made -- because this has become a political fishing expedition."

3: "They do not expect Congress to waste time on politically motivated fishing expeditions, which this has clearly become."

4: "I cannot divine the motivations behind what I think I've clearly suggested is something we believe has become a fishing expedition that’s unnecessary and unworthy of Congress at this time"

5: "I would refer you to my comments about partisan fishing expeditions and political theater, and one of the causes and consequences of the Congress with the lowest recorded approval ratings in history."

A day before, after the House Oversight Committee voted Attorney General Holder to be in contempt, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer responded:

"Instead of creating jobs or strengthening the middle class, congressional Republicans are spending their time on a politically motivated, taxpayer-funded election-year fishing expedition."

Good to see Pfeiffer and Carney have coordinated the talking point down to the exact wording. And it is evident that the White House has settled in on the catchphrase they want to use to characterize the efforts of the Republicans. So, step one is decide on a catchphrase, and begin using it prolifically.

What's step two? Step two is get the media on board.

Enter Washington Post's Eugene Robinson:

The House wants to go fishing in a vast sea of documents, some of which relate to ongoing investigations. As a believer in sunshine and disclosure, I don’t much care for questionable claims of executive privilege. But I like the politically motivated sideshow the GOP is staging even less.

Eugene Robinson, an extension of the public relations function of the White House, obligingly carries the water.

On This Date In 2008

Four years ago today, Obama debuted the Great Seal of the Obama Campaign of 2008 (unofficial title), complete with its Latin slogan, "Vero Possumus", which roughly translated to "Yes We Can".

Met with widespread derision at the audacious display of arrogance, even from his own side of the aisle, the seal was hushed away three days later, never to be seen again.

On This Date In 2008

On June 19, 2008 Obama announced his decision to break the promise of accepting public funding for his campaign. The announcement also confirmed the breaking of his promise to negotiate with John McCain on the issue of campaign funding.

Senator Barack Obama's announcement Thursday that he would finance his campaign with private contributions was the final step of a slow walk away from public financing that began almost as soon as his campaign started 17 months ago.

Obama said he'd pursue public financing "aggressively." He committed to it in a written questionnaire. He even said, repeatedly, that he would meet personally with Senator John McCain to discuss a deal.

Instead, his campaign never even asked the Republican's aides for a meeting on the subject. And Obama, both campaigns said, never asked for a face-to-face meeting with McCain.

Obama made this decision -- becoming the first major party presidential candidate to do so since public funding was instituted -- because he knew he could raise more money outside of the system than in it, and that the money he could raise would dwarf that of McCain.

The Obama fundraising juggernaut led me to a post a couple months later, introudcing the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Windfall Profits Tax Reform Act of 2008.

In the 2012 campaign, the Obama campaign's fundraising has begun to lag that of Republican opponent Mitt Romney.

So we can expect to hear anew the calls about the evils of money in politics that were suspended in 2008.

The Private Sector Is Doing Fine

My take on Instapundit's "iconic photo from the early days of hope-and-change"

Baghdad Barack:

And Chip Diller Obama:

Obama Can't Jump

More from Instapundit:

A NEW CAMPAIGN SCANDAL: Obama Secretly Sucks At Basketball.

From the linked article:

One apparent weakness: his jump. "In fact, [coach Chris] McLachlin coined a phrase for the phenomenon: Barry Obama, famous for his no-jump jump shot!"

Well.

That Obama can't jump is only a secret for the billions of people who never saw my work from 2009:

Instaquoted

That's me in the ANOTHER UPDATE part this post on Instapundit.

CBC: Michelle Obama Uses Racial Language About Her Husband

Via the Washington Examiner, we find out that calling Obama "cool" is racist, according to the Congressional Black Caucus:

Angela Rye, Executive Director of the Congressional Black Caucus, argued that President Obama has struggled during his first term due to racially-motivated opposition from conservatives who dislike having a black president
...
"There's an ad, talking about [how] the president is too cool, [asking] is he too cool? And there's this music that reminds me of, you know, some of the blaxploitation films from the 70s playing in the background, him with his sunglasses," Rye said. "And to me it was just very racially-charged. They weren't asking if Bush was too cool, but, yet, people say that that's the number one person they'd love to have a beer with. So, if that's not cool I dont know what is.

She added that "even 'cool,' the term 'cool,' could in some ways be deemed racial [in this instance]."

Got it. Cool is out. Unless you're a racist.

Via the Tatler, quoting a campaign email from the First Lady, we find out that Michelle Obama is a racist:

Friend –

From coaching basketball to knowing how many Jonas brothers there are, Barack is a pretty cool dad.

I would never in a million years have thought that Michelle Obama would traffic in racialist language in describing her husband. And yet, because I would never think the executive director of the Congressional Black Caucus didn't know what she was talking about in such matters, it must be true.

For shame Michelle. For shame.

On This Date In 2008

Four years ago today yesterday, Hillary Clinton ended her historic bid to become the Democratic nominee for president.

Hillary then:

After Obama won the 2008 election, he tapped Clinton to become his secretary of state.

Hilary now:

Or another way to look at it...

Hillary then:

Hillary now:

Yahoo Wants You To Know That Romney Is Very Threatening

On Yahoo's home page right now the top news item is a link to a story about Romney slamming Obama:

Look at that pic of Romney (you can click to enlarge). Romney's practically frothing at the mouth. Why, he might even be contemplating physically slamming Obama.

Let's zoom in on just the pic for grins (not Romney's, he's snarling):

Grrrrrr. Very threatening.

HUH: I had no idea I was putting Kim Kardashian on my blog.

Obama Gets The Message That We're Out Of Money But He Keeps Spending Anyway

Via Instapundit, here's Nick Gillespie of Reason on the message in the aftermath of Wisconsin:

The short version: Voters everywhere are finally starting to realize that municipalities, states, and (here's hoping) the federal government are out of money. That's the real message of the major contests last night.

Indeed. It's as if voters listened to this guy back in 2009, and have been voting in increasing measure as if they understood the message since:

INTERVIEWER: At what point do we run out of money?

OBAMA: Well, we're out of money now.

From the gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey in 2009, to Scott Brown's election in January of 2010, to the historic shellacking in the congressional elections in 2010, to the just concluded triumph of Walker over the recall attempt, voters seem to be getting the message: we're out of money.

Of course, President Obama -- even though he conceded three years ago that "we are out of money now" -- doesn't get the message of that message even to this day, continuing to spend like there will always be tomorrows.

Back to Gillespie:

Last night's results - and moves by other Democratic governors such as New York's Andrew Cuomo - suggest that the voting public is finally getting the message that we can't keep spending far more than we take in at every level of government and that we can't keep promising more and more expensive benefits for public workers who are already earning more in salary than their private-sector counterparts.

Sounds like voters listened to that second guy in the video above as well.

In the end, the message of the message (we can't keep spending) of the message (because we're out of money) is that the voting public is far ahead of President Obama in understanding basic math.

Wisconsin Recall Election Postmortem

After Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's resounding victory in the Democrats' failed recall attempt last night, especialy given the ramifications to both Democrats and public sector unions nationally, perhaps no reaction better summarizes the left's response than this one:

I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a look of misery and dejection on the face of my daughter as I just did a moment ago. She just couldn’t understand how the out of state special interests could have just bought an election in Wisconsin -- Wisconsin! -- when so many good and decent people live in this state. “Do we even have a Democracy anymore?” she asked pitifully.

I sat down with her on the sofa and (as calmly as I could) tried to explain to her why the our country seems to be dying. “Honey, I think the Koch Brothers sent Mr. Walker all that money in order to keep out of prison. You see, they weren't sure if he was going to be arrested today or not, and so they planned Governor Walker's phony recall victory just in case…”

I tried to keep my voice steady, but it became increasingly difficult – the rage and feelings of helplessness were just too much. I think my daughter could tell something was wrong. I found myself at such a loss for words – nothing made any sense; nothing makes sense anymore. I finally had to admit, “Honey, I just don’t know – I don’t know what’s going on in this country anymore…”

When I finished her lower lip started to tremble and her eyes began to fill with tears, “Daddy” she said, “why are the Republicans doing this to the country?” Well, that was it for me: I finally fell apart. She just fell into my arms and we both began sobbing for several minutes.

For once she had to comfort me and get me back on my feet. Sometimes I just think it’s too much, but seeing the strength in my young daughter’s voice helped me to get through.

Found here.

Maybe Both First Read And Obama Don't Know North From South Carolina?

Via Jonah Goldberg, here is First Read's list of the top 10 tv political ad markets for the week:

*** 10 hottest TV markets: Here’s our latest installment of the 10 hottest TV markets in the presidential contest (for the week of June 4 to June 10). Some quick notes compared with last week: Norfolk, VA remains the top market; just four states (VA, OH, IA, and NC) are on this top-10 list; Columbus, OH goes from No.4 to No.2; Cedar Rapids, IA goes from No.7 to No.3; Charlotte goes from No.8 to No.5; and Colorado Springs, CO dropped out, meaning no CO markets are on this list.

Hottest Markets for this week 6/4-6/10 and in terms of advertising points:

1. Norfolk-Portsmouth, VA (Romney/1500, Obama/825, Crossroads/630, Priorities/400)

2. Columbus, OH (Romney/1500, Obama/815, Crossroads/600, Priorities/350)

3. Cedar Rapids, IA (Obama/1600, Romney/850, Crossroads/600, Priorities/350)

4. Roanoke-Lynchburg, VA (Romney/1500, Obama/815, Crossroads/750)

5. Charlotte, NC (Romney/1500, Obama/750, Crossroads/600)

6. Richmond, VA (Romney/1200, Obama/575, Crossroads/450, Priorities/350)

7. Greensboro-High Point, NC (Romney/1000, Obama/700, Crossroads/675)

8. Cincinnati, OH (Romney/1200, Obama/600, Crossroads/550)

9. Des Moines, IA (Romney/850, Obama/550, Priorities/500, Crossroads/350)

10. Greenville-Spartanburg, NC (Crossroads/1200, Obama/950)

11. Raleigh-Durham, NC (Romney/900, Crossroads/700, Obama/575)

Yay, we're number 7! Good thing I don't watch much TV.

But take another look at number 10:

10. Greenville-Spartanburg, NC (Crossroads/1200, Obama/950)

And take a look again at this phrase in their lead:

...just four states (VA, OH, IA, and NC) are on this top-10 list

Then take a look at a map. Of South Carolina.

But it does raise the question . . . South Carolina? That is certainly not on anybody's list of battleground states. I notice that Greenville-Spartanburg is easily Crossroads' hottest market in terms of advertising points at 1200; and it's Obama's second hottest market behind Cedar Rapids. And Romney fails to register there.

Well, there's a June 12 primary for state races that has had a share of controversy over candidates being thrown off the ballot over improperly filed paperwork -- so it's easy to see why Crossroads would be investing in that market.

But Obama?

Maybe he relied on First Read and thought Greenville-Spartanburg was in North Carolina?

Or maybe the Obama campaign is spending money about as wisely as we have come to expect and as frugally as the Obama administration spends federal dollars.

Jay Carney's Focus Pocus; Obama's Focus Locus

Via Bridget Johnson at the Tatler, we have Press Secretary Jay Carney saying that Obama cares less about his re-election than he does jobs.

Carney was asked at today’s press briefing about Democrats’ rumblings of concern that the economy could hurt not only Obama’s re-election chances, but the party’s chances in the House and Senate.

“The president is focused far less on his job than on the jobs of the American people,” Carney said. “That’s what he works on every day. That is what drives all of the economic proposals that he has put forward. That is what has driven him from the beginning — from the time he decided to run for the Senate and run for the presidency.”

Carney said Obama “takes a long view on all of these things.”

“Is it good or bad for any candidate’s prospects in November? That’s — that’s not why he got into this.”

It would appear Carney managed to say all that with a straight face.

But seriously, is there anyone who believes him? Even Obama provides evidence that it's not true.

Flashback: President Obama, asked about rising gas prices, immediately answers that he cares about how it affects Americans' wallets his re-election chances:

Ed Henry, FOX News: Your critics will say on Capitol Hill that you want gas prices to go higher because you have said before that will wean the American people off fossil fuels onto renewable fuels. How do you respond to that?

President Obama: Ed, just from a political perspective, do you think the President of the United States going into re-election wants gas prices to go up higher? Is that -- is there anybody here who thinks that makes a lot of sense?

On This Date in 2008

Four years ago today, Barack Obama declared victory in the Democratic primaries in a speech given in St. Paul, Minnesota. Most notably, that Jun 3rd speech included these words:

The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals.

Most people who follow politics remember those words, although in many cases in order to mock them. Four years is quite a bit less time than "generations", but I doubt anyone is looking back and telling their children that at that moment any of those things happened.

But I can't be sure of that. So I make that claim with profound humility and limitless faith.

Have I told you how awesome my humility is? How incredible is my faith? I really have a limitless faith in the profundity of my humility.