Apr 23 2009
Conservatives Continue To Drive GOP Into Oblivion
The Democrats are being given a free ride because the ‘true conservative’ opposition is so inept and repulsive there is no respectable or credible check on the Democrats. The far right has destroyed conservatism as defined by Reagan and executed through both Bush presidencies. But it takes real ineptitude of historic proportions to destroy all that good, hard work in only a few short years of mindless madness.
The data is just too strong to dismiss anymore:
As he approaches the 100-day mark of his presidency, Barack Obama’s job approval ratings are higher than those of his most recent predecessors. However, the 44th president is even more distinguished by his strong personal popularity. Fully 73% of Americans – including as many as 46% of Republicans – hold a favorable view of Obama as a person. Fewer people held favorable impressions of George W. Bush (61%) and Bill Clinton (60%) early in their first years.
Obama’s job approval stands at 63%, while 26% disapprove of the way he is handling his job as president.
Through 100 days of a radical shift to the left the conservatives have been so hot headed and out of whack that America has turned to Obama as the preferred option. The conservative right is out of control, and now openly attacking America and Americans as they sink deeper and deeper into historical oblivion. Remember, to these people George W Bush, John McCain, John Kyl and other GOP leaders were traitors to the cause. They were moderates who created the Gang of 14 (a huge success), the prescription drug option in medicare/medicaid (a huge free market success), the Iraqi Surge (while many on the right bailed) and a chance to reform immigration and win over the most prized segment of the electorate – the rapidly growing hispanic voters (being voters they are Americans and deserve respect and a voice at the table).
After 100 days they have made Obama more popular than when he was elected!
This is how conservatives have screwed up so horribly, repulsed so many and shriveled up into a small band of angry malcontents:
A conservative faction of the Republican National Committee is urging the GOP to take a harder line against both Democrats and wayward Republicans, drafting a resolution to rename the opposition the “Democrat Socialist Party” and moving to rebuke the three Republican senators who supported the stimulus package.
At the rate they are going they will push Obama into becoming one of the most popular presidents of modern time. It is not Obama’s gifts pulling this off, it is the massively repulsive nature of conservatives. Obama and the Dems are not succeeding – in fact he is stumbling and failing to make any progress on anything of value. It is simply the conservatives have become so radioactively angry they simply make the Dems look good in comparison.
Gone are the level heads, reasoned policies with broad centrist support, respectful tone. Gone is the shining city on the hill, destroyed and replaced by an angry mob.
The path out of this mess is obvious to everyone not drowning in the fevered swamps of the right:
But before they rush to criticize Obama, they need to put their own house in order. The GOP’s moderate wing has declined in recent decades, and the size of the Republican coalition is shrinking.
If the Republican Party is to reestablish its dominance in American politics, it must rebuild a national coalition that includes independent and moderate voters and elected officials. In the 1950s and 1960s, Republicans had a robust centrist wing typified by President Dwight Eisenhower, New York Gov. Nelson Rockefeller and New Jersey Sen. Clifford Case. Influential think tanks like the Ripon Society proposed moderate policy ideas that proved to be both popular and effective.
E.J. Dionne argues in his seminal “Why Americans Hate Politics” that Ripon’s members “were among the first in the 1960s to … show how an all-volunteer Army could work.” They sought “to turn the Republicans’ preference for state and local government into practical programs,” endorsed civil rights, proposed tax credits for the working poor and supported an opening to communist China.
…
Moderates and independent-minded Republicans tend to be harder to find in the House than they were 10 or 20 years ago — whether they support abortion rights or are pro-Big Government. A once-proud moderate tradition has been seriously weakened.
The decline of moderate and independent Republicans, according to historian Vincent Cannato of the University of Massachusetts, Boston, “is only part of the problem” confronting Republicans today. Still, “just as Democrats needed to reach out to Blue Dogs” to build their coalition, Cannato said, “Republicans need to find out who the moderates and independents are in the country — and try to figure out how to appeal to them.”
So far the rabid far right tendency to call people traitors and wimps and getting in their face for not bowing down to their huge egos has not been attracting much support. Gee, wonder why?
44 Responses to “Conservatives Continue To Drive GOP Into Oblivion”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
That Pew poll of adults sure does have some strange sampling sizes of R/D/I.
I don’t know. It’s hard to say with polls anymore. Rasmussen had a report just yesterday that Obama had dropped to his lowest level yet (54%).
I guess we can all just pick the poll we like.
Good God AJ, look at the internals of some of these polls.
I have faith in Rasmussens because there have actually been elections to verify their results. And right now Obama is at 55% approval, 45% disapproval.
This poll was a joke and had a margin of error of about 8%. I am no far right person, far from it. but I think you are pushing this whole bad conservative thing too far.
I have never seen any president confronted with hundreds of thousands of people in the streets demonstrating against his policies in the first 100 days he is in office.
Here are the demographics:
Group
Sample Size
Plus or minus…
Total sample
1,507
3.0 percentage points
Form 1
742
4.0 percentage points
Form 2
765
4.0 percentage points
Republicans
377
6.0 percentage points
Democrats
476
5.0 percentage points
Independents
568
5.0 percentage points
*******
And keep in mind that personal favorability is not the same thing as approval. Bush maintained higher personal numbers than job approval numbers in his second term. This just means that people like the guy. It does not mean they approve of his job performance.
But it will take time to see where this goes. Bush’s numbers were high for a long time.
And they did the poll in both English and Spanish, which makes you wonder just who they were talking to.
Just saw over at HotAir showing that the toughest Republican to run against Obama is Huck.
What’s up with that? If this poll is true, then this poll is contradictory to the one above.
I don’t for once believe it…not especially with 1 million attending 1000 tea parties. But let’s see how these tea parties can hold up!
Public Policy Polling just came out with a poll today that agrees with Rasmussen:
53% favorability for Obama
The interesting thing about that poll is it also asked about potential 2012 races of top GOP against Obama. Huckabee was at the top (losing to Obama at the same numbers McCain did). Palin didn’t look good in this poll.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/04/2012-president-survey.html
Come to think of it, AJ, I think I saw some recent polling that Michigan is ready to kick out their Dem Governor, and Virginia looks good for the Republican candidate for Governor. Clearly, some Republicans must be doing something right.
I suppose it depends on whose polls you read. Rasmussen shows continued trend of erosion of “Strongly Support”. The overall support number is back to 55, up one point from 54 which was the lowest yet.
And Obama’s approval rating is still lower than Bush’s was in his first term in any apples/apples poll. Polls that over sample Democrats double-digits don’t count.
Also, polls conducted in Spanish were likely not talking to voters. If you are eligible to vote, you have to demonstrate competence in English, there is no reason to use Spanish if you are contacting voters.
There is an AP poll that agrees with PEW
Americans are “High on Obama”
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/ap-americans-are-high-on-obama
… most Americans consider their new president to be a strong, ethical and empathetic leader who is working to change Washington.
The percentage of Americans saying the country is headed in the right direction rose to 48 percent
PARTY ID WITH LEANERS:
Democrats 46%
Republicans 28%
Independents 26%
Most polls show that most people couldn’t name the President if you had a reward for knowing.
Do a man on the street in NY city and 9 out of 10 can’t name the vice president. I haven’t seen one lately but I’ll bet 50% still think George Bush is president.
Probably 75% of the people in the country don’t even watch the news, they rely on what their friends say, who also doesn’t watch the news, they just heard that what’s his name is doing a good job.
Yes, people that read this blog probably know what’s going on, see if you can get Obama a 60% favorable rating from your readers. See what percentage of your readers think the country is heading in the right direction. You’re talking ‘informed’ people here. You’ve probably got 5 readers that would give him a good rating, and that includes conman and GuyF.
It goes without saying that I’m not a large believer in polls that sample selected people. First off, they probably have to call 5000 people to get 1500 to even respond. Those other 3500 that don’t respond are probably too disgusted. They feel like nobody is listening. The people that are agreeable to giving an opinion are those that are enthusiastic about the admin.
So according to my assumption, 3500 don’t know or care, 60% of 1500, or 900, are enthusiastic and think he’s great, that’s breaks down to about 18% true enthusiastic rating.
Now I’m sure some won’t agree, but I think my poll and assumptions are about as valid as some of those I read.
Oh, and I meant to say: two titles of posts out of the last three:
Conservatives Continue To Drive GOP Into Oblivion
Democrats Had Their Chance – Muffed It!
So the Dems have blown it and the Repubs have blown it, who’s left?
I would agree that some people on the right simply hate too many people, but then again hating certainly did not hurt the Democrats did it? Treating Bush like Hitler did not make them too extreme. It is not the right that is making Obama popular, it is too early to even know if Obama will be popular. In the long run it may have more to do with events, things he does not even have any control over.
If there had not been a 9/11 attack on this country and if there had not been a Katrina, imagine how different things might have been for the last president.
Frogg:
AP? Maybe. According to RCP the right track wrong track numbers have the people who think the country is going in the right track at 36.6%.
Even if it is 48% it is not a strong endorsement of Democratic leadership. I honestly do not know what it would take to get a majority of people in this country agreeing on the right direction.
And Democrats do not outnumber Republicans that much. The difference is not 18%. It is more like 7%.
Miranda rights for “terrorists”; but, not for citizens? But, not to worry. PEW says we have “nothing but love” for “Dear Leader”, right?
—————–
Obama legal team wants defendants’ rights limited
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gsdBeBfQ1PJTCFWgQGQw0vp6U30QD97OGFSO0
By MARK SHERMAN – 3 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to overrule long-standing law that stops police from initiating questions unless a defendant’s lawyer is present, another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather than expand rights.
I think the polling companies (san Rasmussen) are going out of their way to make sure their samples keep giving us the 69%/73% result. Heck – If they called me and asked how I felt about Obama as a person, I would be one of those people in the 73% – but I am one of his worst detractors! I think he is a disaster, but would I be in Michelle’s book club? Maybe.
You guys have done a good job in this thread of discussing what is going on in these polls. My daughter voted for Obama – she is 22 – she called this week to tell me next time, no matter who is running – she won’t vote for O. She was influenced by her ’sugar high’ buddies at the time, but even the little real news that trickles through to her has made her change her mind.
I think that most people want to give Obama a chance. I also think they feel that he inherited a bad economy and so they are hesitant to blame him for problems, but that will only last so long.
BTW, I saw at Fox that the government is going to release photos of alleged abuse of prisoners.
Somehow I doubt that this is coincidental. The Obama administration fresh from its apology tour of the world now wants to move on to trashing the US military and trying Bush administration lawyers for torture.
The only insight these popularity polls provide is how stubbornly people will stick with their choices even when proven bad. Many people apparently voted for chavez of the north and of course they are smart people so how could they have picked the wrong guy. As dear leader just said americans are arrogant. Classic defensive behavior. Look at the polls of congress—they have a single digit approval rating yet when everyone talks about “their guy”, the ratings shoot up. I wonder what the results would be to the survey question “What percentage of your fellow countrymen are complete jackasses?”
If you want a better measure of how people feel about ol’bama look at the performance of the stock market and the trend in gun sales. Both are better forecasters of how people see the future.
A third party would be a good start though, the conservative faction AJ rails against would have to side with the new moderate party to get anything done and begin to isolate the true loons on the left who have completed the same coup over the democrat party.
KauaiBoy makes a very important point: look at what people do rather than what they say. Unfortunately, what we have is a substantial minority, expressed through the stock market and gun sales, who believe (rightly in my opinion) that Obama and his myrmidons are trying to destroy the United States as the constitutional republic it has been for over 200 years and turn it into some sort of social democratic people’s republic which will ultimately be a tyranny. And, a majority — most of whom do not pay substantial taxes — who are supporting the Obama enterprise because they’re (short term) beneficiaries of the looting of the productive.
I see all this talk about ‘moderation’ – well, horsefeathers! There is no way liberty can compromise with tyranny or the rule of law can compromise with the rule of men.
If by moderation, one means dropping most of the social agenda and concentrating on economic and political liberty, and solid defense, I’m all for it. But, if by moderation you mean compromising on things like nationalization of industries and finance, gun control, health care, political correctness and corruption, no thanks.
It’s unfortunately true that without the social conservatives, the Reagan revolution and the victory in 1994 would not have occurred. Also true that without the evangelicals, Jimmy Carter would not have been elected in 1976. They’re a two edged sword.
I don’t know if you could really put together a moderate party that essentially left all of the ’social conservative’ questions to the individual states and concentrated on an essentially classical liberal approach to political and economic liberty. I fear not.
Hello,
I would like to talk about the trees and the forest.
Your new president is so very good at getting you to look
away from the thing that should worry you the most.
I know because I watched this policy work in London, so many
times under Tony Blair. It is very simple.
What is the biggest thing that could hurt you that is happening
right now? You could read The London Times on their Page 2.
Pakistan is falling and that is means right now. In a few weeks,
no more, the Taleban and their brothers in the Al-Qaeda will
be in having the nuclear weapons of Pakistan. After that,
you know what will happen in your country and in mine.
And your president wants you to be only concerned with
some officials from your last president. You are all shouting at
each other and you are all very in the passion of this
minute, and that is what your new president wants for you
to do.
For your new president to challenge your cia, that is very
risky for him. I think your new president has a lot of secrets
and can not survive if your cia decides to reveal them and
still he does not take care.
It is the decision of the gambler, in Cuba, in Las Vegas, and
now in the DC, if his plan succeeds it will not matter
what your cia does.
Your president seeks to purchase time, for the fall of Pakistan
to finish, and the nuclear bombs to be under Al-Qaeda.
After that, he will have mostly completed what was his
mission.
And me? I have sold my flat in London. You call
a flat a condo. I will be moving to a smaller town in the
country next week. I used to be a Leftist and a Communist.
I am not so stupid that I would continue to live in London.
That is very not safe any more.
Terrye,
What killed the conservatives is they also treated Bush like Hitler. The pretty much killed the coalition. It is one thing for your opponents to trash you, it is another for your so called allies to do it.
I don’t understand all of this antipathy towards conservatives. Calling BO a socialist isn’t just for conservatives alone, Dick Morris (no right winger) is saying the same thing. http://thehill.com/dick-morris/obamas-leap-to-socialism-2009-04-21.html I agree that conservatives shouldn’t fall into the same mindset as the far left did over the last 8 years but there is a point in stating the obvious to the American people weather they want to hear it or not. Maybe its semantics in the way the message is delivered but BO is certainly no moderate and the Congress is even farther left than he is at this point. What conservatives should be doing is pointing out the differences in governance philosophy in rational terms to the American people. Honesty is truly the best policy in this case.
AJ, I don’t think people pay that much attention to conservative pundits who used satire or creative names for Bush over spending or immigration. If you look at the internal polls of Bush’s favorability…..it seems to me that his support was high among “conservatives” and it was the centrist (independents) and Democrats that jumped ship and abandoned him. I don’t even remember any conservatives calling Bush “Hitler”, anyway.
Lacegrl130, your daughter is not alone. There is another poll out there showing that Obama’s biggest drop in support since election day is in the age 35 or younger group. Young people are idealistic and want a different type of government. But, they are also not so easily fooled–they pay much more attention than the generation before them did at that age. They are also results oriented. They want real change; not chump change. They will give Obama the benefit of the doubt for awhile; but, they are not blind. He must produce.
So far the rabid far right tendency to call people traitors and wimps
An interesting statement coming from a supporter of the savage invasion of Iraq. GOPers spent much of this decade attacking anyone opposed to their MidEast holocaust as traitors and America-haters. I recall blowhard Limbaugh claiming ‘neocon’ was an anti-Semitic slur. What a bonehead! The unprovoked war against the people of Iraq (another 70 killed yesterday) helped America go bankrupt and cost the GOP the White House, Senate, and House of Reps. The conservatives supported this war. They’ve only themselves to blame for their political isolation.
A party for the rest of us?
Jules, get over the invasion of Iraq. It is past. Would you rather have Saddam alive and in power still? His birthday is in a few days, why not mourn? You’re right Iraq was an unprovoked war on our part… but it wasn’t a “savage” invasion by any means. The UN wasn’t willing to enforce it’s own resolutions. Saddam was shooting at our aircraft almost daily, hoping to actually hit one. He was inciting terror against the Israelis. Heck- his regime had men on its payroll whose only job was to rape women related to his critics. That’s the only reason I supported the invasion and the war. No I believe you are wrong- any war whose objective was to remove such a ruthless tyrant is just.
The GOP DID NOT lose control of Congress because of Iraq. Don’t you remember all the talk of “culture of corruption?” If the 2006 midterms had been about Iraq, Lamont would be the junior senator from Connecticut. Especially considering all the polls for years have shown that most Americans wanted us to stay until Iraq stabilized.
A small point: When we invaded Iraq under George W. Bush, we were technically already at war with Iraq and had been since 1992. The Gulf War had never ended; it was only put on hold by a ceasefire that was conditional on Saddam Hussein cooperating with UN weapons inspectors and letting them verify that Hussein was indeed destroying whatever weapons of mass destruction he had during the Gulf War. Saddam flouted the terms of the ceasefire, but nobody did anything about it until we invaded Iraq in 2002.
We gave Saddam, all they way up to the very last minute, a peaceful way out of the situation. He could be still sitting there in power slaughtering the Shiites, his sons torturing the sports teams and raping the local chicks in their expensive cars had he simply allowed full and unfettered UN inspections.
That would have also ended the oil for food program and other sanctions if it turned out that he had no such weapons. But he, himself, decided to play a game of chicken which he lost. Apparently France and Russia were telling him we would never invade without UN approval and were assuring him they would never give such approval and so that emboldened him.
The invasion of Iraq wasn’t a sneak attack or any kind of unexpected bolt out of the blue. We were very clear in exactly how Saddam could have avoided it. HE chose invasion, not us.
It really chaps my cheeks to see people constantly failing to recognize Saddam’s responsibility in what happened. He could have avoided it, he could still be in power today, he thought we were bluffing. We weren’t, he lost, end of story.
Behold Iraq in perspective and the Democrat’s selective concern for the Iraqi people.
Back during the debate on whether to go to war or not, I had a gut feeling that the real benefit of it would be the eventual emergence of a democracy, or at least some semblance of a country controlled by the people over a dictator, and the example this would set for the rest of the Middle East/Muslim world.
This seems to be well on the way to being a reality. As Iraq grows stronger as such a country, I look for there to be more and more pressure on other dictators by their own people to attain the same thing.
If only we had been more unified in the effort. How much easier would it have been, and how many lives would have been saved?
“What killed the conservatives is they also treated Bush like Hitler. The pretty much killed the coalition. It is one thing for your opponents to trash you, it is another for your so called allies to do it.”
That sums up what happened within the blogs, talk radio and the few TV and print media that lean our way. We all disagree. Conservatives say that their ‘principles’ have to be the glue. Nope. We can’t all decide who gets to be the Decider of the Principles. Some see this as black & white. I see some gray that many can not tolerate.
I do not think it mattered that much (what we all thought) towards the end. More Hoekstra’s are what we needed and did not have. They are our only communication. They are the only ones that have the power to break through the MSM’s Silence. They failed. The Silence? We were subjected to the horrors of Joe Wilson being ignored by the White House. Yep. This one man sent the White House an opinion. We were subjected to years of horror that the White House ignored an intel memo. The Silence? Look at the 5 pictures of the intelligence men that told Obama not to release those memos and give it to the enemy. Do you hear the crickets?
President Obama is getting ready to release hundreds of photos claiming to be torture in Iraq, etc. War? What war? I hope I never read again at any blog that Obama does not really want to do these things but is being forced. Only look at his actions. This is a really bad guy. He looks like an angel. He talks out of one side and then he does the dirty. Over and over.
“President Obama is getting ready to release hundreds of photos claiming to be torture in Iraq, etc. ”
When you have done practically nothing in your own administration and times are looking pretty rough, when you have none of your own accomplishments to point to, it is better to point out the warts of the people around you in order to make yourself relatively more attractive. That is what Obama is doing. He is trying to make his administration seem better not by its accomplishments (of which there aren’t any) but by continuing to point out flaws in others.
At some point he is going to run out of these and will need to show some accomplishment of his own.
One other thing………………this angel that graces the covers of all the rags has to be the most ungracious human that ever lived. He is nothing without the MSM covering his azz. Remember how Bush let him start his administration early because we were at war? Pure class in action. Obama is exactly the opposite. If you followed what Rev Wright was preaching and then follow Obama’s ACTIONS, you will notice they are in full agreement.
We need the same thing we have needed from the start of Bush’s term. We need communication to the masses. We need Hoekstras. We need an army of them. We need to kill the MSM that is more deadly to this country than the terrorists.
IMHO, you need to embrace the word “probably” in your prose.
Predictive, definitive statements are often subject to being wrong … in the case of this post; I believe you are possibly correct, but, probably wrong.
The series of polls that makes your screed [IMHO] less than believable is that polling regarding the direction of the country has only gotten more and more positive since Nov’08 … to the point that it is now more positive than negative.
If I were polled about Obama’s “performance” as Pres today, I would be “undecided” regarding his performance. I will probably be undecided until the mid-term elections in 2010.
Changes in policy and direction regarding the largest economy in the history of the world take time … I will give him the benefit of a doubt for 20 more months [or so].
If I were polled about Obama’s “presence” as Pres today, I would be “favorable”. He exudes a measure of competency that far exceeds his predecessor.
As a centrist, I adore and support [with my vote] competency in government. Both parties are shite [IMHO] … as are radicals on all sides of the debate. I want smart, rational, pragmatic and educated people representing us in our government … Obama appears to be trying to deliver all these characteristics.
All that said, given the economic circumstances Obama inherited, and how he has tried to mediate them [which are not – IMHO - sufficient], I think he will fail [economically].
The scariest thing is that the Right is going so “wing-nut” to combat their loss of power, that elements of this “wing-nut-ism” may gain mainstream support.
If the economy collapses and the Repubs take over in 2010 or 2012 based on their current rhetoric, [IMHO] one should be VERY afraid about the current world order and this republic.
Heck, I knew you were in the middle when you gave him a favorable. Actually I agree 100% that he is extremely competent if you are looking for a full blown, UN loving socialist. Darn near perfect.
I belive it is correct to call this socialism when “nationalization of 17 percent of our economy in health care, 8 percent of the economy in energy, and the largest tax increase in history”…http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/24/deadline-dems-will-nuke-filibuster-if-health-care-reform-doesnt-pass-by-october-15/i.e. cap and trade. I am not even talking about the banks for Gods sake. The old Soviet Union would be proud for sure.
AJ,
I don’t think average people are flocking to Obama because of conservatives being, well, conservatives.
You see, in 2006, the MSM got over their learning curve, and learned just how biased they needed to be to get 51% of voting Americans to side with their team. Today, you see a continuation and progression of this collective effort.
It doesn’t matter what a Republican or Conservative says or does. It will be cast in a bad light. Doesn’t matter how conservative they are, or how “non-conservative” they are. You should know this, as you write about it all the time with respect to George.
The problem is not with how average people view conservatives, it’s how the MSM portrays them. All of them. Heck, I hear you complain about some Republicans being too conservative, and then the next day I read one of your posts, and I swear you were referring to yourself!
Owl: I agree that the UN is shite … and that Obama is moving us more socialists then we may have been before.
But, let’s be honest about where we where before Obama:
Medicare is socialism.
Social Security is socialism.
The Hoover dam was a socialist project.
All of our highways are [actually] a socialist project.
The levies in and around New Orleans are socialist.
The relief efforts for the people in Galveston [after the hurricane] were socialist.
WTF, the best economies in the world are a blend of capitalism and socialism.
IMHO, all this shite from the Right regarding socialism, fascism and marxism is all about regret.
Someone lost an election, to a BLACK man … and now … many people are losing their minds.
No, we’re quite sane.
The insane (or is it more accurate to say “audacious”?) are those who would attempt to use an economic decline as a mandate NOT to encourage and facilitate private free-market capitalism, but to expand the reach, power and influence of an inefficient, slow moving federal government. Not just for funding bridges, dams and dikes, which has been its accepted and traditional function, but for controlling private banks, the American auto industry, the American health care industry and most recently even carbon dioxide production. (i.e. freedom)
And the very LAST thing on ANY of our minds is someone’s skin color. That obsession is owned by the left side of the crowd, and they’re loath to let it properly fade into history.
you’re reading alone in these comments feeling gloomy, then you read this by Jules Roy. Finally something to smile about, or laugh. Jules, you’re funny.
Savage invasion of Iraq? So we’re to think there are now more dead Iraqi’s than there would have been with Saddam still in there raping, murdering, torturing? Belly roll laughter.
Limbaugh was right ‘neocon’ is a synonym for anti-semite slur.
more laughter.
helped America go bankrupt? Obama has increased the debt of the US more in his first 100 days than 43 presidents combined preceding him. Well, that’s not really funny. Obama’s debt, I mean
At least Obama’s boneheadedness, along with Pelosi and Reid will begin the handover back to the Repubs with the 2010 election. More belly roll laughter.
Jules, don’t give up your day job, stand up is not your forte’.
Don’t think I lost it but you might should look around for yours if you honestly believe that last sentence you wrote. Most of the racism I have witnessed in the last 20 years in this country was exhibited by blacks. I am not saying it does not go the other way but I can tell you what I have observed. Examples? How about the Congressional BLACK Caucaus, in your face? How about Rev Wright screaming about ‘whitey’ and his group not only did not shut him down, they cheered? Making crimes ‘hate’ crimes? The list goes on and on. There has been more discrimination against Mexicans than blacks for a long time now. NO, NO, NO. I am not saying that everyone against illegal immigration is doing this. Far from it. I do know the difference between someone against illegal immigration and a racist. Just stating facts I see on the ground.
I am not concerned over the color of someone’s skin. I can stand to lose an election (have lost a bunch). I am concerned when someone is elected by MSM (not the people) and then this person immediately enacts laws at warp speed that harm this country. I am not young and have seen many Presidents come and go. This is the most dangerous man I have seen in the office. I am looking at his actions and not the color of his skin. I’ll let you do that one.
Oops, meant to address that last to enigma.
Friday, April 24, 2009
2 Polls Today: Obama Less Popular Than GW Bush After 100 Days
Two different polls released today show that radical Barack Obama is less popular than George W. Bush was after 100 days.
A FOX News poll admits Obama is less popular than Bush.
FOX News reported:
The president’s approval is nearly identical to the job rating George W. Bush received at the same point in his first term, as 63 percent of Americans approved and 22 percent disapproved (April 18-19, 2001). One noticeable difference is that approval of Obama is much more divided along partisan lines today than Bush’s ratings were eight years ago.
But, Gallup was not so open about their results.
Judith Apter Klinghoffer discovered this today:
Gallup reports that 56% of the public believes that Obama is doing an excellent/good job. Gallup reported 62% approved of George W. Bush’s job performance after the first 100 days.
For some strange reason this point did not make it into the Gallup press release.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/04/after-100-days-obama-less-popular-than.html
[...] AJ Strata: “…Through 100 days of a radical shift to the left the conservatives have been so hot headed and out of whack that [...]