Tag Archives: Obama

Democrat Chuck Todd: Obama “on precipice of doing Jimmy Carter-like damage” to Democrats

10 Sep

You know it’s bad when fellow Democrats are saying this about Obama.

 

 

 

Liberal columnist: ‘Obama administration mistakes journalism for espionage’

21 May

 

Liberal columnist Eugene Robinson has a piece from yesterday that is critical of the Obama administration:

The Obama administration has no business rummaging through journalists’ phone records, perusing their e-mails and tracking their movements in an attempt to keep them from gathering news. This heavy-handed business isn’t chilling, it’s just plain cold.

It also may well be unconstitutional. In my reading, the First Amendment prohibition against “abridging the freedom . . . of the press” should rule out secretly obtaining two months’ worth of the personal and professional phone records of Associated Press reporters and editors, including calls to and from the main AP phone number at the House press gallery in the Capitol. Yet this is what the Justice Department did.

The unwarranted snooping, which was revealed last week, would be troubling enough if it were an isolated incident. But it is part of a pattern that threatens to redefine investigative reporting as criminal behavior.

 

Labor unions turning on Obamacare

21 May

 

A piece from The Hill today says labor unions are not too happy with Obamacare.  No word yet on whether these unions are racist…stay tuned.

Months after the president’s reelection, a variety of unions are publicly balking at how the administration plans to implement the landmark law. They warn that unless there are changes, the results could be catastrophic.

The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) — a 1.3 million-member labor group that twice endorsed Obama for president – is very worried about how the reform law will affect its members’ healthcare plans.

Last month, the president of the United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers released a statement calling “for repeal or complete reform of the Affordable Care Act”…

…In a new op-ed published in The Hill, UFCW President Joe Hansen homed in on the president’s speech at the 2009 AFL-CIO convention. Obama at the time said union members could keep their insurance under the law, but Hansen writes “that the president’s statement to labor in 2009 is simply not true for millions of workers.”

 

Chris Matthews: interest in Obama’s multiple scandals due to racism and white supremacy

15 May

 

Well, I have not heard this excuse in at least ten minutes.  Racism…that has to be it…why else would anyone care that the President, his administration and the IRS are involved in multiple scandals, involving intimidation, harassment, cover-ups, and deaths?  Has to be because of racism.

 

The problem is there are people in this country, maybe ten percent, I don’t know what the number, maybe twenty percent on a bad day, who want this president to have an asterisk next to his name in the history books, that he really wasn’t president. … They want to be able to say, well, he didn’t really have that batting average; he really wasn’t the first African American president; he really didn’t do health care; he really didn’t kill bin Laden. There’s an asterisk, and they have been fighting for that, the people like Donald Trump, since day one. They can’t stand the idea that he’s president, and a piece of it is racism. Not that somebody in one racial group doesn’t like somebody in another racial group, so what? It’s the sense that the white race must rule, that’s what racism is, and they can’t stand the idea that a man who’s not white is president. That is real, that sense of racial superiority and rule is in the hearts of some people in this country. Not all conservatives, not even all right-wingers, but it always comes through with this birther crap and these other references and somehow trying to erase ObamaCare, erase his record in history, and a big part of it is bought into by people like John Boehner, who’s not a bad guy, but he knows the only way he can talk to the hard right is talk their language.

I really wonder sometimes if people like Chris Matthews actually believe this nonsense or does he just know his role and what is expected of him if he wants to have a show on MSNBC?

 

 

Killing eagles is bad…sometimes

14 May

 

Unbelievable piece from Hot Air :

When it comes to enforcing the environmental laws concerning certain species of federally-protected birds, the Obama administration and their environmentalist allies have been impressively diligent in charging oil companies, coal plants, and power stations when said birds get tangled up in their power lines or drown in their waste pits; in the past five years, prosecutors have managed to wrack up tens of millions of dollars in fines and settlements from various businesses, including oil and gas companies, for these egregious offenses.

When it comes to winds farms, however, the federal government has been oddly negligent in enforcing these same laws — which is weird, seeing as how the American wind industry kills hundred of thousands of birds every single year. The Associated Press reports that the Obama administration has yet to levy any fines or file any suits against wind companies, and that Congress is picking up on the rather glaring enforcement discrepancy:

It’s a double standard that some Republicans in Congress said Tuesday they would examine after an Associated Press investigation revealed that the Obama administration has shielded the wind power industry from liability and helped keep the scope of the deaths secret…

More than 573,000 birds are killed by the country’s wind farms each year, including 83,000 hunting birds such as hawks, falcons and eagles, according to an estimate published in March in the peer-reviewed Wildlife Society Bulletin.

IRS targeting Tea Party groups “has more legs politically in 2014 than Benghazi” says NBC’s Chuck Todd

13 May

 

From Jim Geraghty at National Review:  “Scarborough, Todd Wonder Why Democrats Are Shrugging at IRS Scandal”

TODD: Why aren’t there more Democrats jumping on this? This is outrageous no matter what political party you are, that an arm of the government, maybe it’s a set of people just in one office but, mind you, that one office was put in charge of dealing with these 501c4s and things like that.

SCARBOROUGH:  Why didn’t the president say something on Friday afternoon?

TODD:  I don’t know. Maybe they were distracted by Benghazi. Maybe they made the decision they didn’t want it to be about healthcare. I raised this question – where is the sense of outrage? And the only pushback was, Jay Carney spoke about this at the press briefing and he was pretty strong. I have to say it didn’t sound very strong to me. I don’t know if the White House realizes. I think this story has more legs politically in 2014 than Benghazi.

More here.

 

 

White House has meeting with media allies on Benghazi fiasco – off the record

10 May

 

Politico reports that the Obama White House held an off the record meeting with their political strategists the media this afternoon to discuss the Benghazi  investigation.

The White House held a “deep background” briefing with reporters on Friday afternoon to discuss recent revelations about the Benghazi investigation, sources familiar with the meeting tell POLITICO.

The meeting was conducted on “deep background,” according to White House spokesman Josh Earnest, but sources told POLITICO that the existence of the meeting was “off the record.” The meeting began around 12:45 p.m. and postponed the daily, on-the-record White House press briefing until mid-afternoon.

The session was announced to reporters in the wake of an ABC News report showing that White House and State Dept. officials were involved in revising the now-discredited CIA talking points about the attack on Benghazi.

Emails obtained by ABC News show that State Dept. spokesperson Victoria Nuland requested that the CIA scrub references to an Al Qaeda-linked group, which, Nuland told White House officials, “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings.”

Correction: An earlier version of this post incorrectly referred to the meeting as “off the record.” Though the existence of the meeting was off the record, it was conducted on “deep background.” 

UPDATE (3:05 p.m.): I asked Earnest to explain the meaning of “deep background,” as defined by the White House, for my readers. He emails:

Deep background means that the info presented by the briefers can be used in reporting but the briefers can’t be quoted.

Hmmm.  Someone must be on to something if the Obama White House is calling a special meeting with their comrades in the media.  Look for the media to all be singing the same tune by the time the Sunday shows roll around.