Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Barack Obama Tag

Posted by Amy Miller on February 18, 2015 24 Comments
By all accounts, this Administration seems to be having a hard time keeping its head above water---so why are its polling numbers improving? A Gallup poll released today reveals that, for all his troubles, President Obama has managed to force his personal approval rating back over the 50% mark, with 51% of American adults willing to say that they have a "favorable opinion" of Obama. A generic sort of benchmark---and completely separate from his job approval rating, which normally clocks in lower than general favorability---but still a significant one, because it serves as a hint about how well the Administration is doing in terms of optics, generally. Obama's approval ratings with regards to his handling of the economy and foreign affairs are also up, but still well below the 50% mark. Americans like the guy, but generally dislike his policies---what a bizarre piece of data. More from Gallup:
The recent improvement in Obama's economy and foreign affairs approval ratings mirrors the trajectory of his overall job approval rating, which was 40% in Nov. 3-9 Gallup Daily tracking but was 47% in the latest weekly average, through Feb. 15. The increase has been aided by more positive economic news, including lower gas prices, which have boosted Americans' perceptions of the U.S. economy's health to the best they have been since the 2007-2009 recession. The more positive economic news may also explain why his economic approval rating has increased more (up 10 percentage points) than his foreign affairs approval rating (up five points) since November. While the economy is getting better, Obama continues to deal with a challenging international environment, including the Ukraine conflict, the Islamic State's presence in Iraq and Syria, as well as the ongoing threats of international terrorism, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and North Korea and Iran. As a result, his foreign affairs rating remains on the low side relative to his 2009-2013 ratings.

Posted by Amy Miller on February 18, 2015 39 Comments
We've had several posts up dealing with the Obama Administration's stunning inability to talk about ISIS without digging itself into a rhetorical trench---and a new op-ed by Obama just made things a whole lot worse. Right now, the Administration has a budding---nay, flowering---PR problem with their Middle East policy, so it makes sense that the man himself would take to the media to attempt to explain what they're thinking with this strategy. What doesn't make sense is that the finished product would clash so fundamentally with what the American people actually need to hear. From his op-ed:
More broadly, groups like al Qaeda and ISIL exploit the anger that festers when people feel that injustice and corruption leave them with no chance of improving their lives. The world has to offer today's youth something better. Governments that deny human rights play into the hands of extremists who claim that violence is the only way to achieve change. Efforts to counter violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies. Those efforts must be matched by economic, educational and entrepreneurial development so people have hope for a life of dignity. Finally — with al Qaeda and ISIL peddling the lie that the United States is at war with Islam — all of us have a role to play by upholding the pluralistic values that define us as Americans. This week, we'll be joined by people of many faiths, including Muslim Americans who make extraordinary contributions to our country every day. It's a reminder that America is successful because we welcome people of all faiths and backgrounds.
There's a reason why we shouldn't elect a foreign policy novice to the position of Commander in Chief, and this is it.

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 17, 2015 6 Comments
By now, you've heard that ISIS released a video featuring the beheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya. The White House has released a statement but you might notice some missing words:
Statement by the Press Secretary on the Murder of Egyptian Citizens The United States condemns the despicable and cowardly murder of twenty-one Egyptian citizens in Libya by ISIL-affiliated terrorists. We offer our condolences to the families of the victims and our support to the Egyptian government and people as they grieve for their fellow citizens. ISIL’s barbarity knows no bounds. It is unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity. This wanton killing of innocents is just the most recent of the many vicious acts perpetrated by ISIL-affiliated terrorists against the people of the region, including the murders of dozens of Egyptian soldiers in the Sinai, which only further galvanizes the international community to unite against ISIL. This heinous act once again underscores the urgent need for a political resolution to the conflict in Libya, the continuation of which only benefits terrorist groups, including ISIL. We call on all Libyans to strongly reject this and all acts of terrorism and to unite in the face of this shared and growing threat. We continue to strongly support the efforts of the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General Bernardino Leon to facilitate formation of a national unity government and help foster a political solution in Libya.
It's astonishing how far the Obama administration will go to avoid saying those certain words: not only do they refuse to identify the attackers as Muslims, they won't identify the victims as Christians. Funny how he had no problem specifically mentioning Christians when he was talking about the crusades.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on February 13, 2015 15 Comments
Earlier this week, President Obama sat down to promote Obamacare interview with Buzzfeed and Vox.
Post by BuzzFeed Video.
That the President chose listacles, cat memes, and explainer 'journalism' was not unnoticed by Right leaning media, and thus outrage ensued. Many, like Fox New's Greta Van Susteren simply want our president to be SERIOUS. ISIS is crucifying and beheading their way across the Middle East, Yemen is in shambles, thanks to Senate Democrats, DHS could potentially start the month of March unfunded, Montana is trying to ban yoga pants, Jon Stewart is leaving The Daily Show, and the whole world is going to hell. And here's our President turned gif, wielding a Selfie Stick, striking his best Tom Cruise in a dirty mirror.

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 08, 2015 53 Comments
BuzzFeed News has announced that it's been granted an interview with President Obama on Tuesday. In their heart of hearts, Buzzfeed readers want to know what type of cat Obama was in a prior or will be in a future life. Or at least, which 80's sitcom character Obama most easily identifies with or which animated cat GIF he finds most endearing. But since Buzzfeed News has been transformed under Editor-in-Chief Ben Smith from pussy cat (Meow) to King of the Internet Jungle (hear them Roar), Smith is seeking reader input as to questions to ask:
What Should We Ask President Obama? BuzzFeed News will interview President Barack Obama Tuesday as the president works to sign Americans up for his signature health care policy, prepares for a final chance to push through other elements of his agenda, and balances an economic recovery with crises around the world. BuzzFeed News has had our share of big stories and big interviews, but this will be our first interview with a sitting president of the United States. (President Bush missed his chance back in the day.) It’s a nice tribute to the work my colleagues have done to take this place from an ambitious, zany experiment to one of the most ambitious new news and media organizations in the world. Separately, and also exciting, our inspired cousins at BuzzFeed Motion Pictures will be shooting a video with President Obama. The BuzzFeed News interview is also an opportunity for our readers, here and across the social web, to give us some ideas. Since its inception, BuzzFeed News has covered everything from the marriage wars to the shooting war in Eastern Ukraine, and our reporters have filed searing dispatches from Ferguson to Freetown. I’m hoping to ask the president about what’s next — and what you think is next. So tell us your toughest questions — in whatever form you think that question is best asked.
The reaction on Twitter was swift.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 27, 2015 3 Comments
Iranian media outlet Press TV made a major error yesterday when they mistook an Israeli satire article for actual news. I realize that most of us have been fooled at some point by a link on Facebook or Twitter making some sort of ridiculous claim, but Press TV reached a whole new level of gullible with this one: they actually believed that President Obama used social media to diss Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. By unfriending him. On Facebook. Via Israelly Cool:
The report was based on this satirical piece by The Israeli Daily, which they even cite!
The icy relationship between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu hit a new low this week, with the American president ‘defriending’ the Israeli Premier on Facebook. Though it’s unclear exactly when Obama made the move to delete his Israeli counterpart as a Facebook friend – most likely around the time Netanyahu accepted Boehner’s controversial invite – Netanyahu only learned of the snub yesterday, according to a source close to the prime minister. “Bibi was looking at [Attorney General] Eric Holder’s page, and he happened to check what friends they had in common,” the source explained. “And he sees [Secretary of State John] Kerry, Bill [Clinton], Hill [ary Clinton], Fabio, but no Obama. So he goes to Obama’s page, and sure enough it says ‘Add Friend.’ We were in complete disbelief.” While the White House had no official comment, a source close to the President said Obama had reached his maximum allowed Friends and wished to add Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif after a pleasant meeting on Iran’s nuclear program. The source said the defriending wasn’t personal, but conceded Obama had gotten sick of seeing Sara Netanyahu on his newsfeed and the Prime Minister’s daily invitations to play Candy Crush.
How they could treat that seriously is anyone’s guess. Now if only Obama treated their nuclear ambitions this seriously.
The outlet finally removed the article and associated social media postings, but fortunately for you and me, Google cache is forever: Press TV Obama Unfriends Netanyahu FB post

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 25, 2015 12 Comments
As the race for 2016 shifts into gear, old conflicts are reemerging between Hillary Clinton supporters and Team Obama; this time, it's over access to Obama's massive email lists. Amie Parnes and Niall Stanage of The Hill reported:
Obama, Clinton tensions build over email lists ahead of 2016 New tensions are emerging in the relationship between allies of President Obama and Hillary Clinton. At issue is the fate of the political equivalent of gold dust — the enormous email list, comprised of many millions of supporters and donors, that the Obama team has compiled over the course of his two presidential campaigns. The Clinton camp would dearly love to get its hands on the list, but there is no promise as yet that the president’s aides will comply. There are “large concerns” about the lists among Clinton supporters, one Hillary ally told The Hill. To the Clintons and their friends, it’s near unthinkable that a Democratic president — who has plenty of reasons to want a member of his party to succeed him — would withhold such a valuable commodity. But Team Obama has long believed that the president’s support is built upon the bedrock of his personal qualities rather than mere party identification. His people are loath to be seen as treating the passion of his supporters in a cavalier fashion. “There’s a lot of data — voter data, massive email lists — that Obama built and there are a lot of people who want to make sure that he spreads that wealth,” the Clinton ally said. “They want to make sure he doesn’t take it in a suitcase back to Chicago and move on. No one wants to see it disappear or have it used just to build a library.”
Democrats are probably hoping everyone has forgotten how ugly the conflict between Hillary and Obama became during the 2008 Democratic primary. There's plenty of evidence that the rift never healed.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 23, 2015 23 Comments
I didn't expect to enjoy President Obama's sit-down interview with YouTube stars Bethany Mota, GloZell Green and Hank Green, first because before today I couldn't name a "YouTube star" to save my life, and second, because of a variety of rapid-fire thoughts involving things like gravitas and Presidential and I'd like to see more of Jake Tapper on my screen, TBH. Of course, I saw this news at the same time I was seeing reports of Yemen burning to the ground, so maybe I was a little irritated that this was taking up space on my wire. I didn't care. I was worried about real issues. As it turns out, so were Hank, GloZell, and Bethany. Watch: Was it "journalism?" We can fight about that all day, but I don't think it matters, because it worked. Hank Green peppered the President with questions, but he pulled it off well and I didn't feel like his Obamacare PSA ruined it (even though I groaned and yelled OH OF COURSE YOU DID HANK because, predictable.) GloZell Green calls Castro a dick at 22:07, which is inappropriate in almost any scenario, but she moved on and asked Obama a question about Cuba. (Then she accidentally called the First Lady the President's "first wife," which was hilarious and human.) Bethany Mota made 19 look smart, which is hard to do with the Justin Biebers of the world running around making 19 look mind-numbingly stupid. (She also asked about Boko Haram, which is more than I can say about most MSM outlets.)

Posted by Amy Miller on January 21, 2015 8 Comments
In last night's State of the Union address, President Obama made a lot of promises. From free community college, to middle class tax breaks, to massive tax hikes on the wealthy and investors, the President served up a bill of goods that, given a Republican-controlled Congress, will take a miracle to become reality. This is nothing new for Obama, who has a pretty poor record of delivering on his most high-profile promises. He hasn't allowed Congress to address our broken immigration system; he hasn't eliminated the threat of al-Qaeda; he hasn't closed the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay; and he certainly hasn't brought the kind of "change" that America wants or deserves. Based on an informal tally, President Obama has broken a whopping 112 SOTU promises during his time as President. I don't think any reasonable person would argue that no president has ever added aspirational policy goals to his annual address to the nation, but coming from a man who came into office claiming revolutionary status, the number seems...high? Grabien compiled a video montage of all 112 broken promises. Click below the fold for an all-too-long list of bullet points highlighting all the ways Obama has failed to live up to his promises. 112, and counting. I wonder how long this list will be come 2016?

Posted by Amy Miller on January 20, 2015 11 Comments
A new poll from Pew reveals that the words most often used to describe President Obama are "Incompetent" and "Good Guy." Behold: Barack Obama, undisputed leader of the free world, commander in chief of the most lethal fighting force on the planet...lovable doofus? No wonder our international reputation is circling the drain. More:
However, some new words have emerged in the descriptions of Obama: Among the roughly half of respondents asked the question (N=746), dictator is mentioned by 12, while eight describe Obama as impressive. Neither word had been used in nine prior surveys asking for one-word descriptions of Obama since he became president. And a perennial critique of Obama – socialist – is not as prominent on the list of descriptions as in the past; in the new survey, five respondents describe Obama as a socialist. In April 2009, when Obama was generally described in positive terms (and his job approval was much higher than it is today), socialist stood out among the negatives. Still, many of the descriptions of Obama are the same as those used in the past. Some supporters continue to point to his intelligence (21 mentions; another nine call him smart), while opponents describe him as an idiot or stupid (12). Nearly equal numbers call him honest (12) and a liar (11).
There's even a fun infographic that throws the miserable truth into full relief!

Posted by Amy Miller on January 20, 2015 13 Comments
When President Obama walks into the House chamber tonight to deliver the State of the Union address, most in attendance will already know exactly which policy items he has chosen as his priorities for the next year. According to a report by the Washington Times, Obama has the worst State of the Union record since Gerald Ford was in office, which says a lot not only about how Washington feels about his leadership, but about how the American people feel about his pet policies. So, what's the point of all the pomp and circumstance? Emotionally-triggering buzzwords, of course. Although most of America doesn't stand at attention when the President makes a speech, people in general know what the State of the Union is, either because they watch the event on TV, or because they media bombards them with clips and talking points for a week after it's over. Policy primers don't win hearts and minds, but soaring speeches serve as a wonderful distraction. The people at The Atlantic wanted to find out what types of buzzwords Presidents tend to pick up and recycle. The result? An interactive data visualization tool that you can use to find out how many times each President talked about, say, the Constitution: SOTU constitution chart Or war:

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 20, 2015 29 Comments
Last night on Special Report with Bret Baier, Bret asked Charles Krauthammer for his thoughts on Obama's proposal to raise the capital gains tax. Krauthammer pointed out that like all things Obama says and does, this is about left wing political ideology. Via National Review:
Krauthammer’s Take: Obama ‘Wants to Punish the Rich Regardless of Effect on Economy’ The president’s proposal to raise the capital gains tax has nothing to do with America’s economic vitality, and everything to do with ideology, says Charles Krauthammer. “Obama was asked about whether raising the capital gains tax is something he would support even — this was a famous question asked by Charlie Gibson in the run-up to the 2008 campaign — even if it lowered revenues, which it does, which is of course totally illogical; you raise taxes to bring in revenue. Obama’s answer, a famous answer, was, yes, in the name of ‘fairness.’”​ “This is a man who wants to punish the rich regardless of its effect on the economy,” said Krauthammer.
Watch the exchange: Obama seems set on denying the reality of the new Republican-controlled Senate.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 18, 2015 8 Comments
Coverage of the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris this month may be about spun out, but questions regarding media censorship of the attacks, the cover of Charlie Hebdo, and Obama's absence from the Paris unity march rage on. On Meet the Press this weekend, Chuck Todd spoke with the new editor of Charlie Hebdo, Gerard Biard, about American media outlets' decision to blur out the cover of the satirical magazine.
“Listen,” Briard replied, “we cannot blame newspapers that already suffer much difficulty in getting published and distributed in totalitarian regimes for not publishing a cartoon that could get them at best jail, at worst death.” “But,” he said, “I’m quite critical of newspapers published in democratic countries. This cartoon is not just a little figure — a little Muhammad — it’s a symbol of freedom of speech, of freedom of religion, of freedom of democracy and secularism. It is this symbol that they refuse to publish.” “What they must understand,” Briard continued, “is that when they blur it out — when they decline to publish it — they blur out democracy, secularism, freedom of religion, and they insult the citizenship.”
Not every journalist shares the sentiments of those who chose to censor their reporting. Last week, Jake Tapper rocked everyone's world when he said that he was ashamed by the absence of U.S. leaders from the Paris rallies; he called out not only the Obama administration, but also current Congressional leadership and potential candidates for president.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 18, 2015 32 Comments
President Obama will lay out an official policy of picking winners and losers in this Tuesday's State of the Union address. We already know that the Administration's new messaging tactic involves a lot less policy and a lot more emotional manipulation, but its latest announcement regarding a plan to penalize the nation's top earners takes populist sentiment to a new level. Via Bloomberg (emphasis mine):
The president’s address is intended to lay out an agenda for his final two years in office and help the Democratic Party retain the White House in the 2016 election with a legacy of policies that appeal to middle- and lower-income voters, who continued to lose ground as the economy rebounded from the recession. He would increase the top tax rate on capital gains and dividends to 28 percent from 23.8 percent. The rate was 15 percent when Obama took office in 2009, meaning that he’s proposing to almost double it over his two terms in office. He would also impose capital-gains taxes on asset transfers at death, ending what the White House calls “the largest capital gains loophole.” Under current law, assets held until death aren’t subject to those levies, creating an incentive for wealthy people to hold onto them. Heirs only have to pay capital-gains taxes when they sell and only on the value above what the assets were worth at death.
These changes will stash away $320 billion over the next to years and make it possible for the President to carve out new tax credits for higher education, child care, and dual-income households. It's vintage Obama, and not unexpected from a President who has made a name for himself by advocating against the interests of those who create jobs and drive the economy.

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 16, 2015 13 Comments
Most Americans would be happy to hear that Obama is going on offense against ISIS, the people who carried out the attacks in Paris, or any of the other enemies of America. Unfortunately, there's only one group Obama consistently views as a threat: Republicans. Last night's headline on the Drudge Report was a story by Manu Raju of Politico. It looks like Obama is all fired up and ready to go:
Obama to Senate Dems: ‘I’m going to play offense’ President Barack Obama made clear Thursday in a closed-door session with Senate Democrats that he’s prepared to veto hostile legislation from the GOP-controlled Congress, including an Iran sanctions package on the front-burner of Capitol Hill. According to several sources at the Thursday summit in Baltimore, Obama vowed to defend his agenda against Republicans in Congress, promised to stand firm against GOP efforts to dismantle his agenda and called on his Democratic colleagues to help sustain his expected vetoes. The president also was explicit over his administration’s opposition to an Iran sanctions bill, promising to veto legislation with his administration in the midst of multilateral nuclear negotiations with the Middle Eastern regime. Even though Obama’s position on Iran sanctions differs from a number of powerful Democrats, the session, several sources said, was more of a pep rally than confrontation. Despite his lame-duck status, the president promised that he would not sit on the sidelines in the next two years. He vowed more executive actions to implement his agenda, something bound to prompt anger from Republicans who have called the president’s unilateral moves, particularly on immigration, an unconstitutional power grab.
Noah Rothman outlined Obama's current political stance in a new article for Townhall:

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 14, 2015 31 Comments
What is wrong with this picture? Neil Munro of The Daily Caller reports that Obama is planning to use his influence as president to run interference in the media on behalf of Jihadists. Naturally, he's doing it for the troops:
White House: Obama Will Fight Media To Stop Anti-Jihad Articles President Barack Obama has a moral responsibility to push back on the nation’s journalism community when it is planning to publish anti-jihadi articles that might cause a jihadi attack against the nation’s defenses forces, the White House’s press secretary said Jan. 12. “The president … will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform” whenever journalists’ work may provoke jihadist attacks, spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at the White House’s daily briefing. The unprecedented reversal of Americans’ civil-military relations, and of the president’s duty to protect the First Amendment, was pushed by Earnest as he tried to excuse the administration’s opposition in 2012 to the publication of anti-jihadi cartoons by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.
Here's a video report:

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 07, 2015 14 Comments
The new Republican congress was sworn in yesterday, and one of their first orders of business is an attempt to advance plans for the Keystone XL Pipeline. Unfortunately, obstructionist Democrats in the Obama administration are standing in the way of progress. Timothy Gardner and Richard Cowan of Reuters reported:
Republicans push Keystone bill, White House threatens veto Republican senators kicked off the new U.S. Congress with legislation to approve the Keystone XL pipeline to bring oil from Canada, but the White House promptly threatened a veto. With Republicans assuming full control of Congress on Tuesday after victories in the November elections, they have put Keystone at the center of their agenda and plan weeks of debate. They believe that the public spotlight on Keystone will pressure President Barack Obama to eventually approve the project. The White House was adamant that Obama would not sign the Keystone bill. "There is already a well-established process in place to consider whether or not infrastructure projects like this are in the best interest of the country," White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters.
A vote is set for Thursday.
Accessibility by WAH