Gay Patriot Header Image

Is Obama’s Wee-Wee Moment a Defining One?

While others have made much of the President’s use of the term, “wee-weed” up in the clip below, what struck me more than anything was how Mr. Obama has personalized the issue, as if it’s all about him winning.

(H/t Michelle).

Basically, this shows that he is not particularly good on defense. No wonder he references Sarah Palin.  Her nomination threw him off (before the financial crisis bailed him out); she (all too briefly alas) stole his thunder.  In the tw0-week window between the GOP convention and the Lehman Brothers collapse, his campaign was floundering and some wondered if his handlers could put “put the wheels back on.”

Here, he seems just as flustered and defensive as he did in the first two weeks of September.

One thing is clear, Sarah Palin really gets Barack Obama’s goat.

Whole Foods Boycotters Brook no Dissent

Left-wing complainers notwithstanding, those who have read Whole Foods CEO John Mackey’s Wall Street Journal Op-Ed proposing alternatives to Obamacare know that he neither maligns the President nor pushes for the election of any candidate.  He merely puts forward “eight reforms that would greatly lower the cost of health care for everyone”.

And yet because he dared take issue with the plans Dear Leader is putting forward, he has put the President’s most ardent defenders into a tizzy.  How dare he offer alternatives!  I wonder if any conservative groups promoted boycotts of companies when their CEOs took issue, in a civil manner, with George W. Bush’s policies.

Commenting on the Whole Foods boycott, Matt Welch writes:

I’ll just make one observation: The liberal commentariat keeps telling us that we need to have a “serious debate” about reforming our dysfunctional health care system. Well, love ’em or hate ’em, Mackey came up with eight tangible ideas to do just that, and this is the reaction he gets.

(H/t:  Instapundit.)

I think it’s time to get some more cheese–and there’s a Whole Foods just around the corner–and they have such a wonderful olive bar and a great (though pricey) produce section.

Maine Gay Marriage ad: “Fluffy,” but Step in Right Direction

“EqualityMaine” has released its first ad in the campaign to veto the people’s veto of the bill passed by the elected legislature and signed by the elected Governor to recognize same-sex marriages in the Pine Tree State.

It’s a decent ad which avoids the pitfalls of some of the other so-called “equality” groups in other states; they don’t attack opponents of gay marriage, but then again, they don’t really make the case for gay marriage.  The tone is right, but the message is, well, the message is isn’t very clear.

That said, I do like the mix of various couples, gay and straight alike, showing them without describing them.

All that said, this seems a little too, well, fluffy, but then again, this is the first ad, perhaps this is part of a strategy, and, over the course of the campaign, they’ll certainly roll out a few more ads, quite possibly with more specifics, making a stronger case for gay marriage.

Still, given the tone of this ad, it does represent a step in the right direction in the gay marriage debates.

Ma’am, You’ve Got Some ‘Splaining to Do

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 1:24 pm - August 22, 2009.
Filed under: 2010 Elections,California politics

Unemployment in California hits post-World War II high

After taking office in a recession, California’s Junior Senator, Ma’am Barbara Boxer, has focused more on promoting left-wing causes than looking out for the Golden State.  So, if she ever decides to face her constituents, we need ask her what she’s done to reduce regulation in Washington in order to spur job creation in his jurisdiction.

And if she doesn’t do her job, well, then we’ll have to replace her with someone up to the task.

Athena Says Pull the Plug on Obamacare

And if Obama, like the Greek heroes, wishes to find success in his endeavors, he’ll heed the advice of the owl-eyed goddess blogress pundit.

Peggy Noonan contends (and I agree) that if the President pulls make from making this a priority and admits he “made a mistake,” it will increase his standing with the American people:

I suspect the American people would appreciate seeing Barack Obama learn from this, and keep going. He’s their president. He will be for the next few difficult years, which will no doubt contain moments he will have to lead us through. They also probably wouldn’t mind seeing a wry, modest, very human and self-critical stance from a new president who doesn’t strut and doesn’t swagger but does have a level of 1950s cool, Old Vegas cool, of supreme and confident smoothness that one wouldn’t mind seeing ruffled a bit by that old ruffler, reality.

Basically, Peggy thinks the president has failed to rally the American people around his notion of reform because he hasn’t clearly explained it:

Every big idea that works is marked by simplicity, by clarity. You can understand it when you hear it, and you can explain it to people. . . . . The president’s health-care plan is not clear, and I mean that not only in the sense of “he hasn’t told us his plan.” I mean it in terms of the voodoo phrases, this gobbledygook, this secret language of government that no one understands—”single payer,” “public option,” “insurance marketplace exchange.” No one understands what this stuff means, nobody normal.

And when normal people don’t know what the words mean, they don’t say to themselves, “I may not understand, but my trusty government surely does, and will treat me and mine with respect.” They think, “I can’t get what these people are talking about. They must be trying to get one past me. So I’ll vote no.”

In that last paragraph above, Peggy gets at the essence of the problem.  Unlike President Obama, the American people have a natural distrust of government.  We may give new leaders the benefit of the doubt, but we still want them to explain what they are doing.  In terms we can understand.  Especially when there is a near-trillion dollar price tag attached.

It’s Peggy, just read the whole thing.

Wonder How This News Will Impact This Chart?

AP sources: $2 trillion higher deficit projected:

The Obama administration expects the federal deficit over the next decade to be $2 trillion bigger than previously estimated, White House officials said Friday, a setback for a president already facing a Congress and public wary over spending.

(Via Glenn).

Commenting on this bombshell, Hugh asks, “Given this enormous error with its staggering implications, why would anyone believe any of his assurances about the costs of Obamacare?

UPDATE:  Looks like the information confirms that the White House got its estimates wrong and now accept the CBO’s numbers:

The new projections bring the White House numbers in line with estimates by the independent and non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). In June, CBO projected a 9.1 trillion deficit.

(Via: Powerline).