Barack Obama, the Divider in Chief: Obama Blames Racism Rather than Poor Job Performance For His Lower Approval Ratings
Once again Barack Obama cries racism instead of taking responsibility for his poor job performance … Obama plays the race card yet again.
In an interview with The New Yorker, Barack Obama blamed racism for his falling job approval and popularity numbers. Racial tensions is the reason why his popularity among white voters has waned within the past two years, are you kidding me? Sorry, but this man is a despicable human being and a poor excuse for a president who would continually try to divide a country between races and blame racism for his poor job as president. Disgusting!!! Obama thrives off of using the race card. This is why you never elect a community agitator as president.
Of course Obama could not look at the obvious to determine why his popularity among white voters has fallen in the past couple of years. Certainly it has nothing to do with the on going disastrous economy and Obama’s failure to create jobs. Also, it has nothing to do with Obama’s lies to the American people regarding Obamacare and that you could keep your insurance plan, if you liked it. It has nothing to do with other scandals like IRS-gate, Benghazi-gate and NSA-gate, where Americans no longer consider Obama trustworthy. And of course his failure in foreign policy has nothing to do with it either.
A note Barack Obama, when one is given the benefit of the doubt and then fails miserably on all aspects of their job, including their signature piece of legislation, you are deemed a failure and lose the support of the people.
President Barack Obama said that racial tensions may have softened his popularity among white voters within the last two years, according to a story posted on the New Yorker magazine’s website today.
“There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black president,” Obama said in the article by David Remnick, appearing in the magazine’s Jan. 27 edition.
“Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt precisely because I’m a black president,” Obama said in his most direct comments on how race has affected his political standing since he’s been in office.
By the way, it is not just white voters where Obama has fallen badly in the polls. Barack Obama is down 23 points with Hispanics as well. Is that racism too? So are all of the following from the chart below racist too … they all have lower Obama approval numbers than 2012, including Blacks, Hispanics, Non-whites, women, men, Independents, moderate Democrats … pretty much everyone.
Chart from Gallup.com
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Says that Conservatives Who are Right to Life & for 1st and 2nd Amendmends ‘Have No Place in the State of New York’
More liberal tolerance … What has taken over the Democrat party … So much of a government in NY state of, by and for the people, all people.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said during a WCNY radio interview with Susan Arbetter that that if “extreme conservatives” are “right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay,” then “they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” Seriously? Isn’t the governor of a state supposed to represent all the people? Could you imagine if a governor from a “red” state said that no one who was pro-choice, pro-gay or pro-gun control has no place in their state? The MSM would be in a complete and total uproar. Cuomo went on to say that “moderate Republicans have a place in this state” and noted that he can work with moderate Republicans, as they’ve consistently passed his agenda. So only those that agree with Cuomo have a place in New York state. UNREAL! Imagine if Chris Christie made such a comment? Once again we are witness to another double standard. Let’s hope this socialist clown never runs for president.
“Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”
This intolerance is coming from a state governor, this is why the framers and Founding Fathers wrote a Bill of Rights to the US Constitution to protect the people from a tyrannical government.
So let’s get this correct, an individual who expresses their First and Second Amendment rights of the US Constitution have no place in New York state? I thought it was the Democrats who claim to have a big tent and are oh so tolerant. The sad reality of Andrew Cuomo’s comments is that he is being seriously and this is what the liberal, socialists who have taken over the Democrat party believe. So for all you folks outside of New York City and who live in upstate New York, you best not be for the rights of new born babies, you best not support the right to bear Arms and you best not be for religious freedom and the right to follow your religious beliefs.
Gallup Poll: 72% Say Big Goverment is Greatest Threat to America Than Big Business or Big Labor … Total Rejection of Obama, Nanny State Liberalism
Looks like America might just know tyranny when they see it …
According to the latest Gallup poll, an astonishing 72% of Americans now say that “BIG” government is the greatest threat to America as compared with big business and big labor. WOW!!!
The PJ Tatler makes an astute observation that has a lot of merit, see the chart below and notice when the noticeable upward trend began in 2009. Hmm, what happened then? Of course this boost in Americans fear of big government has everything to do with the so-called “Hope & Change” that they voted for in electing Barack Obama. It would appear that the folks at Hot Air noticed the remarkable trajectory as well. He promised transparency and delivered something quite different. What’s the matter America, you have a problem with the IRS enforcing Obamacare? Personally, I think they need to start including the MSM in these polls as well.
America, wake the hell up and make a stand against “BIG GOVERNMENT” liberalism or it will be here to stay. Elections matter, get out and vote against it if you feel strongly against it!!!
Seventy-two percent of Americans say big government is a greater threat to the U.S. in the future than is big business or big labor, a record high in the nearly 50-year history of this question. The prior high for big government was 65% in 1999 and 2000. Big government has always topped big business and big labor, including in the initial asking in 1965, but just 35% named it at that time.
The latest update comes from a Dec. 5-8 poll. Gallup has documented a steady increase in concern about big government since 2009, rising from 55% in March 2009 to 64% in November 2011 and 72% today. This suggests that government policies specific to the period, such as the Affordable Care Act — perhaps coupled with recent revelations of government spying tactics by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden — may be factors.
I would also add this upswing has in part to do with a bunch of gutless, establishment RINO’s who think that it is more important to sell ouch their Republican principles and protecting “We the People” as opposed to retain their power.
Obama Administration: It’s Ok for “Green Energy” Wind Turbines to Kill or Injure Bald or Golden Eagles without Penalty Because We’re Trying to Save the Environment
THE HYPOCRISY AND DOUBLE STANDARD OF THE LIBERAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS … DEATH PANELS FOR EAGLES.
So not only does Obama pick winners and losers with regard to energy companies, he also picks who can kill and who can’t. The shameful new rule enacted by Obama’s Interior Department makes it possible for green energy companies to slaughter Bald and Golden eagles without penalty for 30 years. UNREAL. Big Oil harms some water fowl and these people lose their minds and talk about the evils of oil. However, Big Green Wind kills eagles and other birds and that is perfectly acceptable. What a fraud these liberal groups are that claim to protect the Earth and the Eco-system. As long as so-called “green” energy kills the symbol of the United States, that bis perfectly ok, but of coal, oil, gas injures a worm … then that is a national tragedy. This president will do anything to pander to his liberal base and make it all political. I would ask Mr. President, how is this fair to the Eagles?
The Obama administration said Friday it will allow some companies to kill or injure bald and golden eagles for up to 30 years without penalty, an effort to spur development and investment in green energy.
The change, requested by the wind energy industry, will provide legal protection for the lifespan of wind farms and other projects for which companies obtain a permit and make efforts to avoid killing the birds.
An investigation by The Associated Press earlier this year documented the illegal killing of eagles around wind farms, the Obama administration’s reluctance to prosecute such cases and its willingness to help keep the scope of the eagle deaths secret. The White House has championed wind power, a pollution-free energy intended to ease global warming, as a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s energy plan.
According to the Washington Times, wind energy facilities have killed at least 67 golden and bald eagles in the last five years, but the figure could be much higher, according to a new scientific study by government biologists. Hmm, so why doesn’t Obama and his liberal environmentalists put the same type of restrictions of “killer” wind turbines that they do to the coal, gas and oil industry? How come wind farm companies do not have to build protective cages around the turbines like a common fan has to protect birds from flying into the blades? This administration certainly has no issue with costly expenses when it comes to regulating other forms of energy.
Just curious, why aren’t wind farm companies regulated to put protective covers over their blades like a common fan?
More from Breitbart.com, It’s okay to kill Eagles because Obama said so.
Wildlife conservationists are livid at the Obama administration’s approval of a new rule that extends wind farms leases up to 30 years. On Friday, wildlife protection groups decried the new regulation as a “stunningly bad move” that gives wind power companies the ability to kill eagles and other birds for the next 30 years.
The Wildlife Society Bulletin approximates that 573,000 birds and 888,000 bats are killed by flying into wind turbines every year. National Audubon Society President David Yarnold expressed his anger over the Obama administration’s new rule: “It’s outrageous that the government is sanctioning the killing of America’s symbol, the bald eagle.”
UPDATE I: The only one who has stepped to the plate is the Audubon Society. Interior Dept. Rule Greenlights Eagle Slaughter at Wind Farms, Says Audubon CEO … New Rule Will Authorize 30-Year Permits for Killing America’s National Bird.
Instead of balancing the need for conservation and renewable energy, Interior wrote the wind industry a blank check. It’s outrageous that the government is sanctioning the killing of America’s symbol, the Bald Eagle. Audubon will continue to look for reasonable, thoughtful partners to wean America off fossil fuels because that should be everyone’s highest priority. We have no choice but to challenge this decision, and all options are on the table.” (Statement from Audubon President and CEO David Yarnold)
UPDATE II: From Right Wing News … All this carnage just to provide a pittance, a miniscule amount of energy. But because it is deemed “green” it is okay to make Eagles blood red.
All to provide miniscule power while putting a blight on the landscape. Average delivered power is roughly 30-40% with very low power density (megawatts per square mile), since you need huge tracks of land/sea for the farm. Compare that to natural gas, which has an average delivered power in the upper 80?s, with an extremely high power density.
From page 193 of The Mad, Mad, Mad World Of Climatism via Right Wing News
What a Coincidence … Cancer Patient Bill Elliot Who Spoke Out Against ObamaCare Now Being Audited by IRS
THIS IS REALLY DISTURBING, DO WE REALLY HAVE A GOVERNMENT TARGETING AMERICANS WHO DARE BE CRITICAL OF OMAMA?
Bill Elliot, a cancer patient who lost his insurance due to Obamacare and couldn’t pay the expensive new premiums, went on FOX News, ‘The Kelly Files’ to tell his story. Now, suddenly Bill Elliot is being audited by the IRS, scheduled in April 2014. That is if he actually lives that long. There seems to be an extremely disturbing pattern of the IRS being used as the Obama administrations storm troopers for anyone critical of Obama’s policies or who would dare use their 1st Amendment rights of free speech. The cancer victim had an insurance policy he liked and could afford. Now, thanks to Obamacare, he does not and can’t afford the ridiculous premiums. So what is the remedy for this cancer patient for a president who cares, why have him audited of course.
What a vindictive government! This is still the United States, right?
He went on FOX News where his story was picked up by C. Steven Tucker, a health insurance broker who helped him keep his insurance.
Now suddenly Bill Elliot is being audited for 2009 with an interview only scheduled in April 2014. Assuming he lives that long. That might be a coincidence, but Tucker is being audited back to 2003.
That’s a rather strange coincidence.
Would the IRS actually go after a cancer patient, who had voted for Obama initially, just for appearing on FOX and now being sharply critical of Obama and suggesting that he resign for his health plan lie?
Under the current insane state of affairs, where the IRS was used to silence the opposition, it’s unfortunately entirely possible. The fact that we are even having this discussion shows how badly Obama has undermined confidence in government institutions and the rule of law.
No You Can’t Keep Your Insurance or Your Doctor If You Like Them … Another Obamacare Loser, Stage-4 Gallbladder Cancer Victim Edie Littlefield Sunby (WH Turns to Twitter Smear Campaign)
Add Edie Littlefield Sunby to the list of losers of Obamacare … Barack Obama knowingly lied and people will die.
Over and over and over, Barack Obama made the following promise to the American people to get Obamacare passed: “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, period! If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan. period! No one will take it away, no matter what.”
Really, you might want to read the tragic and heart-breaking story of Edie Littlefield Sunby, a state-4 gallbladder cancer patient who has become a victim of Obamacare and the lies that were spewed to pass the failed law. As reported in the Wall Street Journal, thanks to Obamacare Edie Littlefield Sunby will lose her healthcare insurance and her doctors. Lies have consequences, especially when Obama and Democrats knew that millions would lose their insurance because of Obamacare. Thanks Democrats as you own this one 100% as the not-so affordable care act was passed with not one GOP vote.
Everyone now is clamoring about Affordable Care Act winners and losers. I am one of the losers.
My grievance is not political; all my energies are directed to enjoying life and staying alive, and I have no time for politics. For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31.
My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits.
Countless hours searching for non-exchange plans have uncovered nothing that compares well with my existing coverage. But the greatest source of frustration is Covered California, the state’s Affordable Care Act health-insurance exchange and, by some reports, one of the best such exchanges in the country. After four weeks of researching plans on the website, talking directly to government exchange counselors, insurance companies and medical providers, my insurance broker and I are as confused as ever. Time is running out and we still don’t have a clue how to best proceed.
What happened to the president’s promise, “You can keep your health plan”? Or to the promise that “You can keep your doctor”? Thanks to the law, I have been forced to give up a world-class health plan. The exchange would force me to give up a world-class physician.
For a cancer patient, medical coverage is a matter of life and death. Take away people’s ability to control their medical-coverage choices and they may die. I guess that’s a highly effective way to control medical costs. Perhaps that’s the point.
Yup, no death panels here, eh? WAKE UP AMERICA … Obamacare has never been about healthcare, it is about controlling your lives from birth to death.
Hmm, I guess Obama was correct when he told his peeps that he was “really good at killing people.”
This White House has no conscience. A smear campaign against a cancer patient in order to protect the diasaster that is Obamacare where Obama and Democrats knowingly lied to the American people that they could keep their healthcare insurance if they liked it, PERIOD! Sick, just frigging sick!
The Divider in Chief Continues His Nonsense … Obama Attacks Republicans In Weekly Address, Says GOP Is Rooting for Obamacare to Fail … It Already is a Failure
Does this guy ever stop with the negativity and division? I hate to inform you President Obama, the GOP is not rooting for the failure of Obamacare … IT ALREADY IS A FAILURE.
Not only do 60% of Americans think the Obamacare implementation is a joke, but the premise and model of Obamacare is a lie and failure. President Barack Obama promised that Obamacare would lower premiums. Barack Onama promised that if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor. Obama promised that with Obamacare, if you liked your health care plan, you could keep your health care plan. ALL WERE LIES. Hmm, 500,000 people lose their health insurance plans in California. Wait there is more bad news, more Americans in 3 states have had their insurance canceled under ObamaCare than have filed an exchange account in all 50 states. I believe that would be deemed a failure. But it gets even worse. The entire point of the Ponzi scheme known as Obamacare is for young, healthy, non-subsidized individuals to pay for the older, sick, poor ones. In order for the model to work at least half, if not more healthy young folks need to sign up in order to redistribute the wealth. The majority cannot be Obamacaid. However, that is not remotely occurring. As reported at Bloomberg, in almost half the states with exchanges, the overwhelming majority of enrollments are coming from Medicaid, not the new insurance markets.
That’s a problem for three reasons. First, signing up for Medicaid is a comparatively simple process, which means that we don’t really know how well things are going on the private side in many of these states. Second, insurance products need a pretty big pool of customers in order to be stable; otherwise, there’s too big a risk that you’ll have a wildly disproportionate number of sick people. Obamacare has risk-adjustment mechanisms to try to mitigate this problem, which I discussed the other day, but they only defray some of the expenses for an insurer that gets too many sick people. Besides, the mechanisms are only temporary; they go away after 2016.
The third reason to worry is our old friend adverse selection. If relatively few people are buying insurance in the private marketplace, those people are likely to be older and sicker than the population that was projected to enroll. That makes it likely that premiums will rise quite a bit next year, scaring off young, healthy people even more.
President Obama blasted GOP opponents of his healthcare law as hypocrites after Republicans expressed concerns about the rocky rollout of HealthCare.gov.
In his weekly address, Obama suggested that the GOP’s focus on the issue was in bad faith because Republicans have pushed for years to repeal, defund or dismantle ObamaCare.
Republicans “spent the last few years so obsessed with denying … people access to health insurance that they just shut down the government and threatened default over it,” Obama said.
“It’s well past the time for folks to stop rooting for [the law's] failure.”
Obama’s comments come after a tough week for the administration. HealthCare.gov, the online enrollment portal for ObamaCare coverage, remained mired in problems in its fourth week.
The rollout has drawn fire from Republicans and Democrats alike, including former members of the administration.
Sorry, but Obamacare and this Healthcare.gov website has nothing to do with helping people or making health care better. It is all about control. Why else do you think that one has to enroll first providing all their information as opposed to being able to search and review plans and costs anonymously as you can on most every insurance site?
From the Divider in Chief: Barack Obama Says If He Owned the Washington Redskins He Would Think About Changing the Name
PRIORITIES from the Community Agitator …
With a US economy on the skids, record number of Americans on food stamps, a government shut down, a pending debt limit default and a national debt about to go over $17 trillion … President Barack Obama returns to his divisive ways and thinks discussing the name of the NFL Washington Redskins is some national, important issue. Barack Obama told the AP that is he was the owner of the Washington Redskins, he would think about changing their name. For one sir, you are not their owner so basically your opinion means nothing. You would think that Obama would be more concerned with not barricading WWII memorials and preventing ‘Our Greatest Generation’ heroes from visiting a memorial that honors them. But no, Obama goes back to discussing racism instead.
Since Chief Shitting Bull has already been taken, maybe we can refer to Obama as Chief Who Speaks With Forked Teleprompter
President Barack Obama says he would “think about changing” the Washington Redskins’ name if he owned the football team as he waded into the controversy involving a word many consider offensive to Native Americans.
Obama, in an interview with The Associated Press, said team names such as the Redskins offend “a sizable group of people.” He said that while fans get attached to the names, nostalgia may not be a good enough reason to keep them in place.
“I don’t know whether our attachment to a particular name should override the real legitimate concerns that people have about these things,” he said in the interview, which was conducted Friday at the White House.
An avid sports fan who roots for his hometown Chicago Bears, Obama said he doesn’t think Washington football fans are purposely trying to offend American Indians. “I don’t want to detract from the wonderful Redskins fans that are here. They love their team and rightly so,” he said.
Benghazi Whistleblower Gregory Hicks, the Former Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya Says I’ve Been ‘Punished’ for Speaking Out
As reported at NRO, Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks, the former Deputy Chief of mission in Libya stated on ABC’s ‘This Week’ that he has been punished for speaking out about the Obama administrations response, or lack there of, to the night that terrorists attacked the Bengahzi consulate killing four Americans. Gregory Hicks had previously testified in front of Congress that “he was embarrassed” after Susan Rice appeared on the Sunday talk shows blaming the terror attack on a video. Hicks stated in his interview with ‘This Week’ that “I don’t know why I was shunted aside, put in a closet if you will,” but the American people needed to know what took place that night and need to remember those that were killed, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods.
Gregory Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya who testified before Congress about the 9/11 attacks on an American diplomatic facility earlier this year, believes he has been “punished” for speaking out about the Obama administration’s response the night of the attack. He said he believes at least two of the Americans lost that night could have been saved if the United States had responded in time.
“I don’t know why I was punished,” Hicks said in an interview with ABC’s This Week. “I don’t know why I was shunted aside, put in a closet if you will.”
Gee, does anyone really wonder why Hicks is being punished for daring to speak the truth about Benghazi and question the actions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton? No one can speak ill of Obama or face the consequences. As for Hillary, “what difference does it make”. Hicks also questioned the lack of judgement of the front runner for the Democrat party for the presidential nominee in 2016 … Hicks is lucky he has not been imprisoned for such heresy.
And talk about the Obama administrations appalling audacity, Susan Rice will brief Congress on the reasons to attack Syria on the Anniversary of Benghazi. What a sick, cruel joke.
LEFT’s Hypocrisy, Double Standard and Racism, Oh My … Ed Asner Explains Hollywood Silence on Barack Obama with Regards to Syria: They ‘Don’t Want to Feel Anti-Black’ … Also, Dem. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton‘s Says Only Reason She Would Vote for the Syria Resolution Would be to Not “Shame” Obama
The hypocrisy, double standard and racism from the LEFT … Are you kidding me, the Hollywood, anti-war Left has suddenly gone silent on Obama on Syria because they don’t want to be branded racist.
Good grief, this is what our country has come to under Obama? From The Hollywood Reporter states that uber-leftist Ed Asner believes that the liberals in Hollywood have been silent on President Obama’s cries for war with Syria and a military strike against Assad in response of his use of chemical weapons on his people because they are afraid of being called racists. HUH? That is correct, Asner stated that they ‘don’t want to feel Anti-Black’. Does Asner realize that his very comment is racists? So to understand the mindset of a liberal, if you are against war, you can only be against it as long as their is a white president? Unbelievable. Also, this morning on Fox & Friends Weekend, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee blasted ‘Insane’ Dem Rep. on Syria and the ‘Racist’ Hollywood for silence. The fact of the matter is that the LEFT will support Obama, not because of the content of his charter or policies, but because of the color of his skin. So they are admitting to having different standards for people of different color. That my friends is the definition of racism.
Tucker Carlson brought up Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton‘s comments that the only reason she would vote for the Syria resolution would be so that Obama wouldn’t be “shamed.” Huckabee called that an “insane rationale for launching a military strike,” since members of Congress generally need to think about the Constitution when they vote and not the president’s public relations.
Huckabee said this is clear and unqualified “racism in its rawest form,” made so much worse by the “duplicity of people who think they’re so open-minded.”
Don’t look for Iraq War-style protests, says the liberal activist, who — like “M*A*S*H” star Mike Farrell — opposes military action.
In 2003, ahead of a U.S. attack on Iraq, a robust anti-war movement in Hollywood included a TV commercial starring Martin Sheen and Sean Penn visiting Baghdad. There were online petitions signed by Ed Asner; letters to President George W. Bush pleading for peace were signed by Matt Damon, Tim Robbins, Barbra Streisand and Alec Baldwin; former M*A*S*H star Mike Farrell fronted multiple press conferences where celebrities denounced war. In interviews, Janeane Garofalo stopped identifying herself as an actor — she preferred to be called a member of the U.S. anti-war movement.
Also, said Asner, unsuccessful efforts to prevent war in Iraq led to complacency among left-wing activists.
“We had a million people in the streets, for Christ’s sake, protesting Iraq, which was about as illegal as you could find. Did it matter? Is George Bush being tried in the high courts of justice?” asks Asner. “We’ve been so God-damned stung in this country by false wars, repeatedly, that, how can you believe in any just war with the history we have had?”
Another reason some Hollywood progressives have been reticent to speak out against war in Syria, according to Asner, is fear of being called racist.
“A lot of people don’t want to feel anti-black by being opposed to Obama,” he said.
The Independent Journal Review asks, wasn’t the election of Obama, the nation’s first “post-racial president” was supposed to change all that? It seems that it only has enhanced it.
The unspoken message, of course: We must never oppose Barack Obama or his policies. Because he’s black. To oppose the actions of blacks – or fail to blindly take up their causes precisely because they’re black [see: Trayvon Martin], means we’re “racists.” In the hypocritical eyes of the left, that is.
Wasn’t the nation’s first “post-racial president” was supposed to change all that?