Well, at least he stimulated something!

MSNBC voters?

Your stimulus dollars hard at work:

The Labor Department paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal stimulus funds to a public relations firm to run more than 100 commercials touting the Obama administration’s “green training” job efforts on two MSNBC cable shows, records show.

The commercials ran on MSNBC on shows hosted by Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann in 2009, but the contract didn’t report any jobs created, according to records reviewed recently by The Washington Times.

Spending reports under the federal Recovery Act show $495,000 paid to McNeely Pigott & Fox Public Relations LLC, which the Labor Department hired to raise awareness “among employers and influencers about the [Job Corps] program’s existing and new training initiatives in high growth and environmentally friendly career areas” as well as spreading the word to prospective Job Corps enrollees.

You’d think the money would’ve been better spent on a spot in which voters not already in the tank for Obama would be watching. But that’s government efficiency for ya: spend money needlessly shoring up voters who’d already vote for ya! No word yet on why taxpayer money is funding Obama’s relection campaign. But the damn signs all over the roadway are another story (again, free adverts).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Husband was incredulous over this last night. But I reminded him of Obama’s Chicago pol heritage. As long-time visitors to the Windy City, you get used to this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daley’s name was plastered over every trashcan and on every airport kiosk. Free advertising on the taxpayer dime. Obama learned well!

 

Meet the CENGAs

That’s how pollster John Zogby refers to the “college-educated, not going anywhere” youth. You know, the ones who voted for Hopenchange the last time? Via the Washington Examiner, some have wizened up:

For the first time since he began running for president, Republican Mitt Romney has the support of over 40 percent of America’s youth vote, a troubling sign for President Obama who built his 2008 victory with the overwhelming support of younger, idealistic voters.

Pollster John Zogby of JZ Analytics told Secrets Tuesday that Romney received 41 percent in his weekend poll of 1,117 likely voters, for the first time crossing the 40 percent mark. What’s more, he said that Romney is the only Republican of those who competed in the primaries to score so high among 18-29 year olds.

“This is the first time I am seeing Romney’s numbers this high among 18-29 year olds,” said Zogby. “This could be trouble for Obama who needs every young voter he can get.”

Oh noes! How to explain it?

Zogby speculates that Romney’s selection of 42-year-old Rep. Paul Ryan helped turn more younger voters to him. “It could be his youthfulness,” said Zogby of Ryan. Plus, he said, more younger voters are becoming libertarian, distrustful of current elected officials and worried that they are going to get stuck with the nation’s looming fiscal bill.

“They want change,” said Zogby.

They want jobs and to live independently. To build their own families. They can’t under the current economic climate. Thank goodness some are smart enough to realize it’s from the disastrous policies of this disingenuous president and his merry band of lackeys.

H/t: memeorandum

Laundry

I’ve followed the news of late, but not much has compelled me to post. I’d rather change diapers than comment on Obama et al these days. And the news from my home state of Colorado this weekend saddened me beyond words. So did this heartbreak.

This, however, caught my eye this morning.

Via Bryan Preston, witness change:

It found that 66 percent believe paltry job growth and slow economic recovery is the result of bad policy. Thirty-four percent say Obama is the most to blame, followed by 23 percent who say Congress is the culprit. Twenty percent point the finger at Wall Street, and 18 percent cite former President George W. Bush.

The results highlight the reelection challenge Obama faces amid dissatisfaction with his first-term performance on the economy.

The poll, conducted for The Hill by Pulse Opinion Research, found 53 percent of voters say Obama has taken the wrong actions and has slowed the economy down. Forty-two percent said he has taken the right actions to revive the economy, while six percent said they were not sure.

Indeed.

Moving along, also from Mr. Preston who has kept me entertained in late-night nursing sessions, this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heh. Obama owns this economy.

 

 

“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequence of their political choices.”

So argues Chief Justice John Roberts in his majority opinion. So, the joke’s on us, is that it? I’m having a hard time deciding if Roberts intended this to be the equivalent of Obama’s snide “above my paygrade” retort.

Other bits and pieces as my due date flies by and the thermometer climbs above 100. (Note to self: future pjBabies must be born in winter. Lots of snow preferable. Will deal with the loss of ski season.)

Via Hot Air:

What say you? Will Obama survive the largest tax increase in history during the middle of a recession?

I’m leaning toward not.

Pyrric victory and all. Oremus.

A little Mark Levin for your listening enjoyment here.

I’m intrigued more than anything about the possibility that Roberts changed his mind. The dissents written by Scalia and Thomas lefthints.

“Are We in Revolutionary Times?”

So asks Victor Davis Hanson of Obama’s unprecedented (and shameful) disregard of the Constitution yesterday in announcing he will  blatently ignore the law of the land (and the separation of powers) and not deport 800,000 illegal aliens. How quick can you get ‘em on the voter rolls illegally, eh? Hanson writes:

Legally, President Obama has reiterated the principle that he can pick and choose which U.S. laws he wishes to enforce (see his decision to reverse the order of the Chrysler creditors, his decision not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, and his administration’s contempt for national-security confidentiality and Senate and House subpoenas to the attorney general). If one individual can decide to exempt nearly a million residents from the law — when he most certainly could not get the law amended or repealed through proper legislative or judicial action — then what can he not do? Obama is turning out to be the most subversive chief executive in terms of eroding U.S. law since Richard Nixon.

Politically, Obama calculates that some polls showing the current likely Hispanic support for him in the high 50s or low 60s would not provide enough of a margin in critical states such as Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado, or perhaps also in Florida and Virginia, to counteract the growing slippage of the independent vote and the energy of the clinger/tea-party activists. Thus, what was not legal or advisable in 2009, 2010, or 2011, suddenly has become critical in mid-2012. No doubt free green cards will quickly lead to citizenship and a million new voters. Will it work politically? Obama must assume lots of things: that all Hispanics vote as a block in favoring exempting more illegal aliens from the law, and are without worry that the high unemployment rate hits their community among the hardest; that black voters, stung by his gay-marriage stance, will not resent what may be seen as de facto amnesty, possibly endangering his tiny (and slipping) lead in places like Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. And because polls show overwhelming resistance to non-enforcement of immigrationlaw, Obama also figures that the minority who supports his recent action does so far more vehemently than the majority who opposes it. Time will tell; but my gut feeling is that his brazen act will enrage far more than it will delight — and for a variety of different reasons. As with all his special-interest efforts — the Keystone cancellation, war-on-women ploy, gay-marriage turnabout, and now de facto amnesty — Obama believes dividing Americans along class, ethnic, gender, and cultural lines will result in a cobbled together majority, far more preferable than a 1996 Clinton-like effort to win over the independents by forging  a bipartisan consensus.

There is no bipartisan consensus in Obama’s head. Yes, we can steamroll the Constitution! He is desperate, because in doing so, he’s going to make the employment situation bleaker for many. Read the rest.

Rush called this the “Catch, Release, Vote” plan. Fitting. His predictions of what comes next frighten me more.

UPDATE: Pundette has much more.

The multiple coersions of Rev. Wright

The story grows deeper daily. Byron York writes:

At another point in the interview with Klein, Wright discussed the book he hoped to create. “What I was going to write on the Barack Obama thing was what it was like being the pastor of the one who ended up being the first African-descended president,” Wright told Klein.  “Before the media mess, what was it like?  And Martin said if you’re keeping notes about what happened, don’t publish that until after 2012, regardless of how the election goes.  So I really put it aside.  And every time I look at that box, with all those things in it — “

When Klein asked more about the box, Wright revealed that in 2008 Eric Whitaker, a close friend of President Obama’s, offered him a substantial sum of money to stay quiet about his relationship with Obama until after the ’08 election.

“What’s in the box?” asked Klein.

“An email offering me money not to preach at all between the explosion of the media the first week in March [2008] and the November election,” answered Wright.

“An email from whom?” Klein asked.

“One of his friends.”

“Whitaker?” asked Klein.

“Yeah.”

“Eric?”

“Yeah.”

According to Klein, Whitaker’s offer, which was made through an intermediary at Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ, was $150,000.  Wright declined. Wright also said that some time after he received Whitaker’s email, he spoke one-on-one with Obama, who did not offer him any money.

Um, isn’t someone else on trial for this?

 “Was [Obama] aware that Eric Whitaker had offered you money?” asked Klein.

“I don’t know,” said Wright.  “I didn’t mention that.”

“But he asked you not to appear at the NAACP or the — “

“National Press Club,” added Wright.

“Those two things?”

“No — and don’t do any more public speaking.”

“What did you say to him?”

“I said, how am I supposed to support my family?” Wright said.  “I have a daughter and a granddaughter in college whose tuitions I pay.  I’ve got to earn money.  He said, ‘Well, I really wish you wouldn’t.  The press is gonna eat you alive.'”

“And that’s all he said?  Just that?”

Oh, the compassion.

Whitaker declined to comment. Who wants to place bets he’ll conveniently disappear for a while?

Laundry

What a mess!

Jeremiah Wright might still bring Obama down.

He’s back. And this time, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright threatens to engulf President Obama in a major scandal – one that could doom his re-election. Edward Klein in his recent biography of Mr. Obama, “The Amateur,” interviewed Mr. Wright about the president’s past. On tape and on the record, Mr. Wright claims that in 2008, the Obama campaign offered $150,000 to buy his silence. If this is true – and I stress if – Mr. Obama may have committed a crime, and if so, he should be prosecuted and sent to prison. Wrightgate could bring down the Obama presidency.

What a fitting end, no?

And what a shameless liar our Dear Leader is. “Born in Kenya” held value way back when. Before running for the presidency. How many lies did it take to elect Obama? And how many more to cover it all up for the second go-round?

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 342 other followers