► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Bill Clinton’

Does Bill Clinton want Obama defeated?

by Phantom Ace ( 9 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Headlines, Progressives at September 21st, 2011 - 11:07 am

It’s no secret Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are not exactly bosom buddies. President Hussein prevented the Clinton restoration at the White House. Since then, he’s destroyed the Democratic Party. Billy Boy isn’t happy about this and acts in a way that one could call a frenemy.

“Bill Clinton says that partisanship in Washington is hampering any ability to reach economic solutions for the country,” ABC News reports:

We live in a time where there’s this huge disconnect between the way the political system works and the way the economic system works,” President Clinton told “This Week” anchor Christiane Amanpour. “If you want to put people to work, we’ve got to focus on what works, and what works is not all this back and forth fighting in Washington.”

“Conflict has proved to be remarkably good politics,” Clinton added. “It’s very hard for the people in Washington, who got there based on pure conflict, pure attack, pure ideology, to take it seriously when their same constituents are saying please do something positive. That’s not how they got elected.”Too much gridlock in Washington–wow, there’s an original observation. And yet it is of some interest that Bill Clinton is saying this, for one reason there is gridlock in Washington is that the current president followed the former president’s advice.

I bet Billy Boy wishes he can challenge Mr. Hussein for the Democratic nomination in 2012. He can’t and Hilly will not as well. It’s clear, Clinton doesn’t like Obama.

Reagan Navy Sec. Lehman: The swagger of Navy pilots has given way to being PC, integrating women and gays

by Bob in Breckenridge ( 2 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Headlines, History, Military, Political Correctness, Politics, Progressives at September 18th, 2011 - 5:28 pm

Couldn’t agree with him more. But this always happens when libturds run the military.

Not only do they always cut funding, they also turn it from a force trained to kill any potential enemy into a social experiment with their politically correct bullshit- quotas, racial and gender make-up, etc.

I detest libs.

Not only are they always wrong, but when it comes to our national security, they’re also dangerous.

Lehman rocks Navy with complaints about political correctness

The Navy’s former top civilian has rocked the service in a military journal article by accusing officials of sinking the storied naval air branch into a sea of political correctness.

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman, himself an ex-carrier-based aviator, wrote that the swagger and daring of yesterday’s culture has given way to a focus on integrating women and, this year, gays.

Pilots constantly worry about anonymous complaints about salty language, while squadron commanders are awash in bureaucratic requirements for reports and statistics, he added.

“Those attributes of naval aviators — willingness to take intelligent calculated risk, self-confidence, even a certain swagger — that are invaluable in wartime are the very ones that make them particularly vulnerable in today’s zero-tolerance Navy,” said Mr. Lehman, who led the Navy in the Reagan administration.

“The political correctness thought police, like Inspector Javert in Les Miserables, are out to get them and are relentless.”

Navy pilots privately have complained for years that a post-Tailhook-convention push to clean up conduct by aviators went too far.

The 1991 Las Vegas convention has stood as a black mark for the Navy because some naval aviators engaged in lewd escapades and excessive drinking.

An ensuing Pentagon investigation ballooned into one of the government’s most extensive probes as scores of officers were targeted and had their careers shortened. Feminists used the scandal to demand a change in Navy culture.

Now, Mr. Lehman, a New York investor who served as a bombardier navigator in A-6 Intruders, has aired in public in what active duty pilots dare not say.

His lengthy article adorns the home page of the magazine Proceedings, a forum for active-duty and retired personnel on naval issues. Proceedings is published by the U.S. Naval Institute, an independent association located at the Naval Academy in Annapolis.

“Once standards of common sense were ignored in favor of political correctness, there were no limits to the spread of its domination,” Mr. Lehman wrote.

“Not only have alcohol infractions anonymously reported on the hot-line become career-enders, but suspicions of sexual harassment, homophobia, telling of risque jokes, and speech likely to offend favored groups all find their way into fitness reports.

“And if actual hot-line investigations are then launched, that is usually the end of a career, regardless of the outcome. There is now zero-tolerance for any missteps in these areas.”

The Lehman broadside coincides with the celebrations this year at military bases across the country of the 100th anniversary of naval aviation.

That celebration, too, got caught up earlier this year in charges of political correctness. The foundation in charge of anniversary events posted a history online that emphasized women and minority advancement in naval air. Click here to read the rest.

Libs blame big losses in NY and NV on 9-11, small voter turnout, despite $1.3 million spent

by Bob in Breckenridge ( 6 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Breaking News, Democratic Party, Economy, Elections 2012, government, Headlines, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Political Correctness, Politics, Progressives, Republican Party, unemployment at September 14th, 2011 - 4:35 am

Hmmm, they both got trounced. In New York city, the libs spent $500,000, and sent in former President and current pervert Bill Clinton to help attempt to elect a guy who did not even live in the district, and had no intention of moving there even if he had won.

Note to you libs, no charge, of course- Don’t send in one pervert to help elect the guy who will replace another pervert.

It’s kind of tacky, capice? They also sent in current Governor Andrew Cuomo. Nice job, Andy! Your influence really kicked ass!

The GOP picked up the seat previously held by the disgraced Anthony Weiner, who obviously has a problem keeping his pants on.

It was last held by a Republican in the early 1920’s, and it’s where a lot of Jewish voters live and have grown tired of and detest Obungler’s obvious hatred of Israel and PM Benjamin Netanyahu, and his love of the 7th century savages, the paleostinians.

That would be Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

In Nevada, they spent about $800,000 on a candidate from Senate Majority leader Harry Reid’s area. She got trounced, big time, and she was the “star” they expected to be the only dimocrat who would pick up a GOP senate seat while the libs lost every other contested election for the Senate in 2012.

Almost breaks my heart. But not quite.

Republican wins Democratic New York House seat
By Paul Kane

With the outcome of his own reelection effort 14 difficult months away, President Obama suffered a sharp rebuke Tuesday when voters in New York elected a conservative Republican to represent a Democratic district that has not been in GOP hands since the 1920s.

Bob Turner, the winner, cast the election as a referendum on Obama’s stewardship of the economy and, in the state’s Ninth Congressional District, which has a large population of Orthodox Jewish voters, the president’s position on Israel.

With 75 percent of the precincts reporting at press time, Turner had a commanding lead, with 53 percent of the vote, compared with 47 percent for Weprin.

Turner, 70, a retired cable TV executive who has never served in elective office, defeated Democratic State Assemblyman David Weprin, 55, who has two decades of experience in public service, to fill the seat left vacant when Anthony Weiner (D) resigned in disgrace in June after more than 12 years in the House.

The defeat came as Republicans trounced Democrats in another special House election Tuesday, in northern Nevada, where Republican Mark Amodei led Democrat Kate Marshall, 56 percent to 39 percent almost from the start.

In both contests, the GOP pulled ahead by linking the Democratic candidate to Obama and his handling of the economy. Both Republican contenders urged voters to “send a message” to the president.

In the two weeks leading up to Tuesday’s elections, Democrats conceded that they could not win in Nevada — essentially a Republican seat reverting to form after some competitive races by Democrats, including Obama in 2008.

New York was a different story. National Democrats poured more than $500,000 into a last-ditch effort to save the seat and deployed former president Bill Clinton and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) to try to mobilize voters.

Late Tuesday, Turner was slightly ahead, with 52 percent of the vote, compared with 48 percent for Weprin.

Both races were sparked by sexual political scandals. Weiner resigned after it was revealed that he had sent lewd photos of himself to women via his Twitter account. The Nevada seat came open in May when Rep. Dean Heller (R) was appointed to fill the term of John Ensign (R), who resigned amid allegations that he had inappropriately aided his mistress’s family.

The New York race, for a seat representing a large portion of Queens and a slice of Brooklyn, also turned on Obama’s handling of Israel and Palestine. The district’s large contingent of Orthodox Jews opposes his proposal for Palestinian statehood drawn around 1967 borders. The U.N. General Assembly is likely to vote on the Palestinian statehood issue when it convenes in New York next week.

Turner spent the final days of his campaign blasting Obama on the economy and on his perceived lack of support for Israel. Democrats worry that the apparent drag that the president had on Weprin could be repeated and amplified nationwide during the 2012 elections.

“Make no mistake about it, the albatross around Weprin’s neck is named Obama, and Democrats who value honesty will tell you privately that the president’s 37 percent approval rating in the district is making it difficult for Weprin to win a race that in almost any other time would be a slam-dunk,” Stuart Rothenberg, an independent analyst and editor of the Rothenberg Political Report, wrote Tuesday.

Obama won New York’s Ninth District in 2008 with 55 percent of the vote, less than the 67 percent Al Gore received there in 2000. But even in a down year for Democrats, Weiner coasted in 2010 to an almost 20-percentage-point victory over Turner.

Democrats rejected talk that Tuesday’s election was a referendum on Obama and noted its highly unusual circumstances, including Weiner’s resignation and the fact that the contest was held two days after the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. The 9/11 remembrances essentially brought the race to a halt on Sunday. Also, in a special election with a small turnout, the district’s large number of Orthodox Jews — who have drifted from Democrats since George W. Bush’s first term — played an outsize role in tilting the race toward Turner.

“This is a special election that is purely reflective of who showed up to the polls and the makeup of the district,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said in an interview after the defeat.

She said that Orthodox Jews, whose approval rating of Obama stands at just 13 percent, were far outnumbered in other districts with large numbers of Jewish voters and that this result will not be replicated elsewhere. “There isn’t any comparison between districts like mine and New York Nine,” she said.

Turner, who ran as a staunch conservative embracing the tea party, will be the first House Republican representing this portion of Queens since the 1920s — a striking departure from its Democratic traditions. This is the district that sent the late Geraldine Ferraro, the Democratic Party’s 1984 vice presidential nominee, to Congress, as well as Sen. Charles E. Schumer, one of the party most consistent liberal voices.

In Nevada, national Republicans poured more than $800,000 into a campaign that linked Marshall to Obama. Amodei, a former state senator, ran one ad that moved back and forth between words uttered by Obama and similar phrases from Marshall.

By the numbers, the Obama presidency

by Mojambo ( 155 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Business, Economy, Elections 2010, Regulation, unemployment at September 9th, 2011 - 8:30 am

Sadly, this has been the worst economics president ever. Yes he did inherit a bad hand and but  as the author states, he played it badly.  Lacking the mental and ideological flexibility to shift course when confronted by failure, (such as Clinton did in 1994) Obama has predictably doubled down and proposed a second stimulus – of course changing the term to  “American Jobs Act 2011t” to try to fool the public.

by Michael J. Boskin

When it comes to the economy, presidents, like quarterbacks, often get more credit or blame than they deserve. They inherit problems and policies that affect the economy well into their presidencies and beyond. Reagan inherited Carter’s stagflation, George H.W. Bush twin financial crises (savings & loan and Third World debt), and their fixes certainly benefitted the Clinton economy.

President Obama inherited a deep recession and financial crisis resulting from problems that had been building for years. Those responsible include borrowers and lenders on Wall Street and Main Street, the Federal Reserve, regulatory agencies, ratings agencies, presidents and Congress.

Mr. Obama’s successor will inherit his deficits and debt (i.e., pressure for higher taxes), inflation and dollar decline. But fairly or not, historians document what occurred on your watch and how you dealt with your in-box. Nearly three years since his election and more than two years since the economic recovery began, Mr. Obama has enacted myriad policies at great expense to American taxpayers and amid political rancor. An interim evaluation is in order.

And there’s plenty to evaluate: an $825 billion stimulus package; the Public-Private Investment Partnership to buy toxic assets from the banks; “cash for clunkers”; the home-buyers credit; record spending and budget deficits and exploding debt; the auto bailouts; five versions of foreclosure relief; numerous lifelines to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; financial regulation and health-care reform; energy subsidies, mandates and moratoria; and constant demands for higher tax rates on “the rich” and businesses.

Consider the direct results of the Obama programs. A few have performed better than expected—e.g., the auto bailouts, although a rapid private bankruptcy was preferable and GM and Chrysler are not yet denationalized successes. But the failed stimulus bill cost an astounding $280,000 per job—over five times median pay—by the administration’s inflated estimates of jobs “created or saved,” and much more using more realistic estimates.

Cash for clunkers cost $3 billion, just to shift car sales forward a few months. The Public-Private Investment Partnership, despite cheap federal loans, generated 3% of the $1 trillion claimed, and toxic assets still hobble some financial institutions. The Dodd-Frank financial reform law institutionalized “too big to fail” amid greater concentration of banking assets and mortgages in Fannie and Freddie. The foreclosure relief program permanently modified only a small percentage of the four million mortgages the president promised. And even Mr. Obama now admits that the shovels weren’t ready in all those “shovel-ready” stimulus projects.

[…]

The employment picture doesn’t look any better. The fraction of the population working is the lowest since 1983. Long-term unemployment is by far the highest since the Great Depression. Job growth during the first two years of recovery after a severe recession is the slowest in postwar history.

Moreover, the home-ownership rate is the lowest since 1965 and foreclosures are at a post-Depression high. And perhaps most ominously, the share of Americans paying income taxes is the lowest in the modern era, while dependency on government is the highest in U.S. history.

[…]

Can Mr. Obama change course, given the evidence that the economy responded poorly to top-down direction from Washington rather than the bottom-up individual initiative that is the key to strong growth? Is he willing to rein in the entitlement state erected under radically different economic and demographic conditions? And will he reform the corporate and personal income taxes with much lower rates on a broader base? Or is he going to propose the same failed policies—more spending, social engineering, temporary tax cuts and permanent tax hikes?

On the answer to these questions, much of Mr. Obama’s, and the nation’s, future rests.

Read the rest: The Obama presidency by the numbers