There has been quite a bit of commentary – not to say, ‘gloating’ – about the Democrats’ rather problematical 2016 prospects*. To wit: their front-runners are all old (late sixties to early seventies), all have baggage, and all distinctly lacking in any sort of executive experience whatsoever**. Worse, their front-runners are also their bench, as the surviving Democratic governors aren’t exactly anything to write home about, either. And that’s what I want to write about. Consider this list:
- Florida: Alex Sink (66)
- Iowa: Chet Culver (48)
- Michigan: Virgil Bernero (50)
- Ohio: Ted Strickland (73)
- New Mexico: Diane Denish (65)
- Pennslyvania: Donald Onorato (53)
- Wisconsin: Tom Barrett (61)
All seven people on that list (data via here) were Democrats who lost a governor’s race in 2010, but kept their opponent down below 60% of the vote (we’ll skip Maine, because those races are always weird). They’re also races where the GOP thus picked up the seat (Florida is a special case, because Charlie Crist, but it’s such an important seat we’re keeping it on the list). In other words, these were almost all Democratic-held governorships that were lost to the GOP. Continue reading The TRUE Great Failure of Barack Obama.
Andrew Malcolm is quite blunt:
As the Labor Department today reported more disappointing hiring news for January, including an unexpected jump in the unemployment rate, President Obama joined thousands of other American employers and let his own White House jobs council go.
The President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness expired in obscurity Thursday in an unmarked bureaucratic grave. Created two years ago to display the Chicagoan’s alleged concern with high unemployment, whatever its PR showcase value had long since ended.
Continue reading White House job council closes as unemployment rate increases.
Matt Bai probably didn’t mean this the way it came out.
If administrations are to be judged solely on results, rather than in the context of the times, then Mr. Obama can’t possibly make a compelling argument for his own re-election — not when unemployment refuses to fall below 9 percent.
Particularly since Bai probably doesn’t want you to consider that “context of the times” includes “the country elected an untested and unskilled Messianic figure who literally promised that his election would result in the seas receding.” Or “the country gave said secular Messiah one of the most lopsided Congressional majorities in living memory, and he urinated it away on health care rationing and a stimulus that didn’t work.” Or even “You know, when George W Bush was President gas prices AND unemployment were about half what they are now.”
So… are you better off than you were three years ago? How about two years? Shoot, how’s this fiscal quarter shaping up for you, in comparison to the last one?
Q. What do you call the White House abjectly caving on its plan to placate Green religious fanatics by inflicting restrictive, job-killing air pollution rules on the American economy?
What? Not punchy enough?
Moe Lane Continue reading #rsrh Hey, #p2! Stop me if you’ve heard this one already…
Should it be:
Barack Obama has now, in just a year’s time, become the single most inept president perhaps in all of American history, and certainly in my lifetime.
Or should it be:
Of course, I don’t give a [expletive deleted] about Barack Obama anymore, other than my desire that really ugly things happen to him as payment in kind for the grandest act of betrayal we’ve seen since Benedict Arnold did his thing.
The first is inaccurate (we still have a ways to go before James Buchanan, Warren Harding [UPDATE: Ken Hite raked me over the coals for this one; and Ken’s got a point. Particularly about how I should have used Woodrow Wilson, instead], and/or Jimmie Carter), while the second is frankly vile (if you want the President dead, just come out and say so so that the United States Secret Service can get on with investigating you to a fare-thee-well). So it’s hard to categorize which is more representative of the idiocy which is this article…
PS: What? Oh, sorry: the quotes are from a piece by Lefty professor David Michael Green, for CommonDreams.org. Via Newsbusters, via Instapundit.
PPS: Professor Green: the Charge of the Light Brigade consisted of several hundred men who actually managed to accomplish their primary purpose, despite taking almost 50% casualties. For comparison, the Battle of the Crater lost us nearly 3,800 troops in a single afternoon, with absolutely no result. Of course, the first set of military victims were mostly white British, while the second set were mostly African-Americans fighting for a government run by the Republican party; so it’s entirely possible that you think that the latter group had it coming.
Crossposted to RedState.
[UPDATE]: Welcome, Instapundit readers. If you haven’t seen the alternate universe Watchmen Saturday cartoon intro, may I suggest that you check it out?
…Glenn Reynolds is actually giving moral credit to a news organization for not memory-holing a straw poll that’s not coming out as expected.
And that’s not the sign of how far we’ve fallen: it’s that I can see Glenn’s point. That’s just flat-out depressing.
Crossposted to RedState.
Guess what happened when we switched Presidents Tuesday?
Yup, it’s now triggering Obama. At least on Yahoo; Google fixed this problem a while back, although if I understand this fellow correctly Obama’s bio is going to be increasingly linked with “failure” until everything’s resolved. There’s a certain air of “the President’s tech team should have been on top of this:” I dunno if that’s fair. At any rate, Google’s going to go back in and fix this again – probably with the help of the aforementioned tech team.
And that’s pretty much the point of this post: I just felt like pointing out that if you played Googlebombing games with Bush’s name, congratulations: you’ve helped ensure that the Obama administration has more, fairly tedious work to do.
Have a nice day!
Crossposted at RedState.