About Me

Name: Mike Bates
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

CNN's Borger: Obama 'Aligned with So-Called Liberal Leaders in the Democratic Congress'

 Yesterday on The Situation Room, CNN senior political analyst Gloria Borger discussed President Obama's rapidly declining approval ratings.  A question was posed by host Suzanne Malveaux:
MALVEAUX: What does it mean, Gloria, for the president to be losing out on these Independents?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: I think it's a real possible for him. Remember that President Obama won the election with 52 percent of Independent voters. That number is down considerably to 43 percent, and Independents are the margin of difference here for him.

Now, the key to keeping those people is, right now, they are worried about the deficit. They see the president as a big spender. They see him aligned with so-called liberal leaders in the Democratic Congress. So, what he's got to do when -- after Labor Day is kind of show them that he is the kind of so-called post-partisan president that many of them thought they were electing.

The good news for President Obama in this is that they are not realigning themselves with the Republicans yet, because the Republican Party still has very high disapproval ratings.

Now, Jessica, you've been watching something as well, which it looks like to be a generational gap in these numbers.

Borger's choice of words was revealing.  By using "so-called," she introduced an element of doubt as to whether Congressional Democratic leaders are, in fact, liberal.  Synonyms listed at thesaurus.com include pretended, dubious, and questionable.

I don't see there's any question as to if the Democratic leadership in Congress is liberal.  These are the folks who, spurred on by Obama, have given us unprecedented spending and deficits, expanded federal meddling in the private sector, and are now attempting to take over the one-sixth of the economy represented by health care.  It's no coincidence that last July's deficit was bigger than that for all of 2007.  Americans for Tax Reform calculated that this year's Cost of Government Day, the day on which the average American has earned enough gross income to pay off his or her share of the spending and regulatory burdens imposed by government at all levels, fell on August 12, a full 26 days later than just last year.

I can only shudder in imagining what damage would be wrought if Obama aligned himself with real liberal leaders in the Democratic Congress rather than Borger's "so-called" ones.   

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

AP: Obama Never Made Public Option 'A Deal Breaker'

In today's article titled "White House appears ready to drop 'public option,'" the Associated Press reports the Obama administration is signaling it's prepared to drop the option of government-run insurance as a component of ObamaCare.  The piece states in part:
Obama had sought the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured, but he never made it a deal breaker in a broad set of ideas that has Republicans unified in opposition.

Not a deal breaker?  It certainly seemed to be one as recently as last month.  On July 20, The Washington Post's Web site included Ezra Klein's report, "Obama Says Health-Care Reform 'Must' Include Public Option."  Cited is Obama's radio address of that week, in which the president declared:

(A)ny plan I sign must include an insurance exchange: a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans - including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest - and choose what's best for your family.

Any plan must include a public option.  The language is unambiguous.  Except in ObamaWorld apparently.  Now we're told it was never really a deal breaker.

Conservatives have been frustrated by mainstream media efforts to at times rewrite history to Barack Obama's benefit.  Here they go again.   

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Name That Party: March Madness Edition

Today's Chicago Tribune, taking a cue from its hero Barack Obama, gave bracketeering a try.  The contenders, all former Illinois and Louisiana public officials, were selected for a smackdown to determine the most disgraceful.

The rivals from Louisiana were former Governors Huey Long and Edwin Edwards, former Congressman William "Refrigerator" Jefferson, and former New Orleans City Council president Oliver Thomas (identified as Thomas Oliver by the newspaper.).  Weighing in from Illinois were former Governors George Ryan and Milorad "Call Me Rod" Blagojevich, former Congressman Dan Rostenkowski, and former Chicago alderman Arenda Troutman.

The Trib gave the nod to Edwin Edwards, although I think the competition was marred by not having an Illinois Daley in the competition.  Setting that aside, what was interesting is the Tribune didn't mention party affiliation in its bracketeering.  Seven of the eight contenders, or 87.5 percent, were Democrats.  Gee, what a surprise.

Yet the Tribune didn't see fit to note that relevant fact.  Just another day at what used to bill itself as the "World's Greatest Newspaper."   
Tags: Media bias  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »