Obama's Communication Skills Are Not Optimal

"Echoing" your interviewer is not always the best way to make an important point:

President Barack Obama, during an interview shown on Comedy Central, has responded to a question about his administration's confused communication after the Benghazi attack, by saying: 'If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.' 

...Stewart asked: 'Is part of the investigation helping the communication between these divisions? 'Not just what happened in Benghazi, but what happened within. 

'Because I would say, even you would admit, it was not the optimal response, at least to the American people, as far as all of us being on the same page.' 

Obama responded: 'Here's what I’ll say. If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.'

Stewart was being respectfully circumspect by using the phrase "not optimal." Obama acted stupidly by parroting those words to whitewash the failures of his response to the Benghazi attack.

*Image credit: Alexa Shrugged

Obama From Every Angle...

Hat Tip: Thoughts From Concentrate

(By the way, if you're not on Tumblr, you should be.)

Quote of The Day: Romney or Obama?

It's Romney or Obama. Take your pick:

ABO.

At least Romney isn’t Obama and can be pressured into doing some of the right things. No hope for Barry, he’s rotten to the core.

As bad as Mitt Romney is, can anyone say that he'd be worse than Obama?

Update: I know conservatives are supposed to fall in line for Romney now that he's truly the inevitable nominee, but I cannot lie. To paraphrase a great leader, I'm not willing to light my pants on fire to try and get support for Mitt Romney. I am who I am...

As a conservative, I can't pretend to be keen on what Romney is selling.

This article is a few weeks old now, but I think it provides a timeless lesson on the folly of the rudderless, unpricipled "compromise" (and the rigidity and intolerance) of the standard moderate.

Update II: Another oldie but goodie: On conservative compromise, via Peggy Noonan, a yardstick metaphor...

Imagine that over at the 36-inch end you’ve got pure liberal thinking—more and larger government programs, a bigger government that costs more in the many ways that cost can be calculated. Over at the other end you’ve got conservative thinking—a government that is growing smaller and less demanding and is less expensive. You assume that when the two major parties are negotiating bills in Washington, they sort of lay down the yardstick and begin negotiations at the 18-inch line. Each party pulls in the direction it wants, and the dominant party moves the government a few inches in their direction.

But if you look at the past half century or so you have to think: How come even when Republicans are in charge, even when they’re dominant, government has always gotten larger and more expensive? It’s always grown! It’s as if something inexorable in our political reality—with those who think in liberal terms dominating the establishment, the media, the academy—has always tilted the starting point in negotiations away from 18 inches, and always toward liberalism, toward the 36-inch point.

Democrats on the Hill or in the White House try to pull it up to 30, Republicans try to pull it back to 25. A deal is struck at 28. Washington Republicans call it victory: “Hey, it coulda been 29!” But regular conservative-minded or Republican voters see yet another loss. They could live with 18. They’d like eight. Instead it’s 28.

For conservatives on the ground, it has often felt as if Democrats (and moderate Republicans) were always saying, “We should spend a trillion dollars,” and the Republican Party would respond, “No, too costly. How about $700 billion?” Conservatives on the ground are thinking, “How about nothing? How about we don’t spend more money but finally start cutting.”

Read the rest.

Obama on Solyndra: Congress Did It!

By the Left Coast Rebel

As you may know, the blame-shifting White House Occupier blame-shifted the Solyndra debacle to fill in the blank, or "anyone other than Teh Won" (ie. Congress.)

Though predictable at best, I find the timing (how many months after Solyndra's bankruptcy?) laughable, and frankly desperate. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean the miscreants and morons in the press won't run with it like the knee-pad-donning Obama-water-carrying-sycophants they are.

In other words,

Obama -- "Hey, look over there! It ain't me! It was Congress!"

Half-wit mainstream press -- "Oh, wow, look, shiny!"

Unfortunately for Team O the following story in The Hill (hardly a right-of-center source) dispels the Obama notion of Congress dun it, not me:

Several key White House offices were involved with the Obama administration’s messaging plans and other preparations as the collapse of the taxpayer-backed solar company Solyndra was imminent, newly released documents show.
The latest White House documents delivered to House Republicans on Friday again highlight the extent to which senior administration officials braced for the fallout as Solyndra – a company President Obama had personally visited – was about to go under.

A White House memo that noted the danger of “imminent bankruptcy” at the end of August 2011 says, “OMB, DPC and NEC have been working with press and OLA to be prepared for this news to break.”

Quick question: If the Solyndra corruption story was entirely Congress's fault, then why did the White House scramble as the company crumbled?

Inquiring minds would like to know...

More debate at Memeorandum.

Updated: This post is just screaming for one of Right Klik's Quickmeme graphics. I'm thinking something along the lines of the Upvoting Obama image,

"Wait, Axelrod, You Mean We Can Blame Solyndra on Congress 6 Months After its Taxpayer-Funded Bankruptcy?

WINNING!

Love Me at Quickmeme

Quickmeme.com is a fun place to slap a trenchant little quip on an amusing picture. Lately, more conservatives have been leaving their mark at Quickmeme. Check out the "College Liberal" memes and the ones on Rutherford B Hayes.

It looks like "Upvoting Obama" is catching on fast. Kindly browse out the fine selection of anti-Obamacare memes by yours truly and give me some love by clicking on the smiley faces. Popular memes rise to the top.

SAMPLES:

→ VOTE HERE (Shamelessly borrowed from David Burge)

→ VOTE HERE

→ VOTE HERE

MORE HERE.

Cosmic Slop: Extraterrestrial Reagan Comes For The Blacks

With the race-obsessed left, little has changed in 20 years.

Enjoy the paranoid racism and hateful stereotypes of another one of Obama's close friends (language alert):

Favorite quote: "Well, Dad, it looks like your chickens are finally comin' home to roost."

Movie by Obama's nutty friend, Derek Bell:

Derek Bell’s bottom line: if it comforts whites, it’s bad; if it comforts blacks–i.e., Farrakhan–it’s good. Bell, along with Farrakhan and so many others, offers victimization as a consolation.

The paper bag references were a lot of fun too!

Mission Accomplished

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."

Obama's Satan

Somebody found a video of Rick Santorum talking to people at a Catholic school in 2008 about the Devil, a.k.a. Satan. (Apparently, talking to Catholics about Satan is a bad idea -- especially if you're going to be running for president several years from now.)

Question: Does Barack Obama believe in the Devil?

Obama is a Christian, isn’t he?

Last time Gallup checked, belief in the Devil was at 70% and rising.

Having come from Jeremiah Wright’s church, Obama might be inclined to believe in a Satan embodied by the United States of America, but that still counts, right?

Update (via insty): Thinking along the same lines...

Weird religion: Satan is against America. Normal religion: "God damn America."

GOP Following Ted Kennedy's "Moral Conviction" Tradition

An excellent point from Red Mass Group: In their quest to eliminate freedom of choice in health care, Democrats are moving to the left of Ted Kennedy...

The progressive movement is in an all out war on the so called Blunt Amendment and Scott Brown's push for it. They are hitting at the phrase "moral conviction" as a code word for all people to stop providing birth control coverage. Jim Braude hit Brown repeatedly last night with this phrase.

The problem for the left is this is the exact same language used by Ted Kennedy to define a conscience clause. In 1994 and 1995 Ted Kennedy introduced health care bills. Both of which had seemingly identical language regarding a moral conviction clause:

"A Health Professional Or A Health Facility May Not Be Required To Provide An Item Or Service In The Comprehensive Benefit Package If The Professional Or Facility Objects To Doing So On The Basis Of A Religious Belief Or Moral Conviction." (S. 2296, Introduced 7/19/94)

"A Health Professional Or A Health Facility May Not Be Required To Provide An Item Or Service Under A Certified Health Plan If The Professional Or Facility Objects To Doing So On The Basis Of A Religious Belief Or Moral Conviction." (S. 168, Introduced 1/5/95)

The KosKids say that the Blount amendment goes beyond the Religious Freedom argument, by including a moral conviction clause.

In Obama's Democrat Party, your inalienable "right" to popular health care amenities is more important than anything guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Hat tip: Mike Stopa

Fixed It: Obama's New Campaign Ad

Obama has released his first ad for the 2012 presidential campaign. There were a few small problems. I took the liberty of making some adjustments:

You're welcome, Mr. Obama!

Original propaganda here.

Update:

Near the end of the video, Obama points to a quote from Politifact from January 21, 2009: "kept a campaign promise to toughen ethics rules." A couple of observations:

1. Does this have anything to do with his energy policy? It looks like this quote is almost completely unrelated to the main theme of the video.
2. This is an old quote. Has Obama been as "tough" with lobbyists as he was the day after inauguration?

Update II:

The Lonely Conservative: Obama Can’t Run On His Record, So He’s Making One Up

Update III:

Obama takes credit for things he didn't do and he fabricates the rest. Even the Washington Post can't swallow these lies:

...figures are correct, but they are also not tethered to anything Obama has done.

...the Energy Department cited a host of reasons why foreign oil imports have declined, noting the main reason was “a significant contraction in consumption” because of the poor economy and changes in efficiency that began “two years before the 2008 crisis”—ie, before Obama took office.

Then, in bold type, the ad proclaims: President Obama “kept a campaign promise to toughen ethics rules” and it cites: “PolitiFact, 1/21/09.”

Politifact did write that on Jan. 21, 2009, but then it almost immediately changed its ruling as Obama began granting waivers to his ethics policy...

The suggestion that Obama was responsible for the 2.7 million clean-energy jobs or the decline in foreign oil imports is bad enough... We have more trouble with the citation of PolitiFact.

Update IV:

Obama's First Ad Riddled with Falsehoods...

Politifact: “We Rate Obama's ‘Revolving Door’ Policy For Former Lobbyists His Biggest Broken Promise...”

Solyndra, Obama’s Poster-Child For “American Ingenuity And Dynamism,” Declared Bankruptcy...

Obama did not create 2.7 million green jobs...

This is a bad way to start a presidential ad campaign, even by Democrat standards.

Brain Freeze: Can We Trust This Man to Run The Country?

There's been a lot of talk about brain freezes in the news lately. Can we trust brain-frozen politicians with the world's most important work?

Rush Limbaugh:

We got the Iranians with nukes. We got Occupy Wall Street. We got an economy going to hell in a handbasket. We got Fast and Furious. We got the attorney general saying, "I'm not gonna apologize," and then he writes an apology letter and shows it to the media first. And this is the lead item on ABC's World News Tonight complete with a look at the science that explains show stopping brain freeze, which translates me, "Okay, we're gonna show you official science about why Rick Perry is an absolute blooming idiot. And we're not gonna have to say it. We're gonna get a scientist in here to say it for you so that you have no doubt that this guy is a stupid, dumb idiot. The lead item on ABC's World News Tonight. And when they finally got to the report by reporter John Berman, he mentions three politicians in addition to Perry who also look stupid, who all happen to be Republicans.

(emphasis added)

Obama The Theocrat

Obama criticizes Republicans:

“I trust in God, but God wants to see us help ourselves by putting people to work.”

How does Obama know what God's politics is? He is building a religion:

*Parody and irony alert

Breaking News: Obama is Repeating Himself!

Today's BIG Newsflash (10/6/11):

President Obama is embracing the term “ObamaCare” on the campaign stump, attempting to turn the tables on critics who use it in a derogatory way.

“They call it ObamaCare?” the president told supporters at a St. Louis fundraiser Tuesday evening. “I do care! You should care, too.”

BIG Newsflash 7+ weeks ago (8/15/11):

Today the president was referring to The Afffordable Care Act, which he pointed out is "also known as Obamacare."

"By the way, I have no problem with folks saying Obama cares. I do care," Obama said. "If the other side wants to be the folks that don't care, that's fine with me.”

(emphasis added)

I guess if you're a member of Obama's Media Support Team, transcribing the words of the greatest orator of all time, there's no need to come up with actual news. Besides, I'm sure the MSM's most talented reporters are still digging under rocks somewhere in West Texas.

Hat tip: JWF

x-posted

Warren Buffett and The Limbaugh Rule

I'm racking my brain trying to remember: When was Warren Buffett was elected to speak for anyone?

While refusing to put his billions where his mouth is (with a voluntary infusion of his own money to the U.S. Treasury), Buffett has lobbied relentlessly for higher taxes for financially successful Americans, many of whom hold only a tiny fraction of the wealth that Buffett enjoys.

To the best of my knowledge, Warren Buffett has never been elected to any government position, but Obama is pushing Congress to establish Buffett's punitive taxation scheme, a.k.a. the "Buffett Rule."

Can you imagine what would happen if a conservative Republican president promoted this sort of legislative gratification for his or her controversial supporters?

How about a minimum tax for the 47% of Americans who pay no income tax at all. We could call that the "Limbaugh Rule." Tax the poor! Shouldn't everyone pay his fair share?

Speaking of paying a fair share, I find it hard to imagine that George Soros feels that he's sending enough to Uncle Sam. Make it easy for him. Take a billion dollars a year until he says to stop. Call that the "Koch Brothers Tax."

When that tax has been implemented, we can move on to repeal the "Eisenhower tax cut" on the movie industry. Call that the "Instapundit Rule."

While we're at it, lets allow all taxpayers under the age of 55 to opt out of Social Security and Medicare. COMPLETELY. You can call that the "RightKlik Fairness for the Future Initiative."

Shameless partisan pandering -- apparently it's only okay if Dems do it.

x-posted

Obama's Slo-Mo Train Wreck

Photo Credit, Associated Press; Hat Tip, Christopher Oakley

Two important notes:

1. These numbers come from two of the most important members of Obama's Media Support Team, i.e., CBS and the New York Times.

2. This poll included all adults, including adults who are unlikely to vote. Polls that include adults who are not expected to vote tend to skew favorably for Democrats.

With those caveats, Obama's bad news is probably even worse than it would appear at first glance:

"Obama’s approval rating has slipped to 43% - his lowest so far - while his disapproval rating has reached an all-time high in this poll of 50%..."

The hope came early, finally comes the change. Even apart from his job performance, Americans don't like Obama anymore:

"And for the first time, more Americans have an unfavorable opinion of Barack Obama than a favorable one..."

The unfavorable opinion has surged to its current high from only 34% in January.

Discussion: Memeorandum

x-posted

UPDATE: Some train wrecks are fun to watch!

Obama's Vitriol and The Era of Antipathy

Rep. Carson and his wife Mariama with Barack Obama

By now you've probably heard excerpts of André Carson's outrageous hate speech:

Rep. Andre Carson, a Democrat from Indiana ... said at a [Congressional Black Caucus] event in Miami that some in Congress would “love to see us as second-class citizens” and “some of them in Congress right now of this tea party movement would love to see you and me ... hanging on a tree.”

Although not as dulcet or urbane as the original, Carson's jarring message was a fairly accurate street translation of one of Obama's most infamous statements (emphasis added):

...in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and ... when they hear ... a-, a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by — it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black guy named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism ...

You go into some of these small towns in, in, Pennsylvania, a lot, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced 'em. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate, and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to their guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or ... uh, anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations...

Anxiety, xenophobia, religious bigotry, racism and resistance to Obama's transformational leftist goals: to Obama's allies, these are all symptoms of the same malignant psychological disease.

From the very beginning, long before the Tea Party emerged in its current form, Obama and his friends have portrayed their opposition as a narrow-minded but dangerously destructive enemy that must be vigorously confronted, and -- if necessary -- defeated and punished:

"'I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors,' Barack Obama told a crowd in Elko, Nev. 'I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.'"

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”

"...we're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us..."

Ruthless pragmatism, indeed.

Hat tip: Proof

Related discussion: Memeorandum

New York Times: Obama Is Failing Miserably, So Let's Talk About Jesus

Anything to distract from Obama's miserable failures...

The economy is in the latrine, likewise for Obama's approval numbers, so Obama's "Journolist" fanboys at the New York Times have no choice but to change the subject and try to portray the GOP as a radical bunch of Dixiecrat crucaders whose judgement is clouded by tribal superstitions.

Hugh Hewitt explains:

Former editor of the New York Times Bill Keller is out with a piece that encourages his colleagues in the Manhattan-Beltway media elite to do their best to stoke the fires of religious intolerance by turning this presidential campaign into the occasion for an inquisition into all of the Republican's religious beliefs...

Having just returned from Jerusalem where one thinks a lot about the consequences of religious intolerance, Keller's naked appeal to prejudice is startling to me. Can he not know --really not know-- how his lines of inquiry play out and how they have always preceded the worst sort of religious intolerance?

So the New York Times thinks folks running for high office should answer obnoxious questions about their religious background?

Fair enough!

Let's ask Barack Hussein a few questions. He's an important guy in politics, right? Other conservative bloggers have already come up with a bunch of good questions ― here are mine:

• How does your "Christian faith" distinguish your thinking from that of atheists and agnostics?
• How does your "Christian faith" distinguish your thinking from that of Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and Jews?
• Do your religiopolitical views on "social justice" make you vulnerable to faith-based political decisions?
• You said, "It's that fundamental belief — I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper — that makes this country work." Do your relationships with your brother and other family members reflect your Christian faith?
• How do your deeply held religiopolitical beliefs interfere with your ability examine scientific issues with appropriate skepticism (e.g. AGW)?
• How many times did you attend services at Reverend Jeremiah Wright's church?
• Do you support or believe in Black Liberation Theology? Why or why not?
• Your spiritual adviser, Jim Wallis, runs a blog called "God's Politics." Do you believe that Jim's politics should be described as "God's politics?" Do you believe that your politics can be described as "God's politics?"
• Describe your relationship with Jim Wallis. How has he influenced your administration? Do you disagree with Jim Wallis on any issues?
• When you refer to people who "cling to religion" what does that phrase mean? Do you harbor antipathy toward people who, in your view, fit that description? Are you someone who refrains from clinging to religion?
• Would you have any hesitation about appointing a religiously conservative church-going Southern Baptist to the federal bench?
• Many religious leaders who are close to you and your administration believe that their religious views should shape public policy. Do you believe that your ability to maintain the wall of separation between Church and State has been compromised by your relationships with religious leaders?
• What, if anything, do you do to keep your religion out of your decisions in the Oval Office?

John has a score of great questions over at Verum Serum. Here are the ones I like best:

1. Do you believe the God of the Christian Bible is the same as the God of the Koran? Does this view influence your foreign policy?
4. Do you believe, as some liberals churchmen do (including some you’ve consulted with), that socialism is the system most compatible with the Gospels? Does this influence your public policy and if so how?
10. How do you integrate your faith with a scientific worldview including belief in evolution?
15. Do you believe Christ will return to earth in the future?

Bryan Preston adds this one: "What did you find so appealing and comforting about the preachings of the Reverent Jeremiah Wright?"

The fact that Obama is already in the White House should not exempt him from difficult questions about his religious and spiritual views. In fact, I would argue precisely to the contrary.

Related... Obama’s Enablers:

It’s counterintuitive, but Obama has been hurt by the media’s leniency. Both his presidency and reelection prospects have suffered. He’s grown lazy and complacent. The media have encouraged him to believe his speeches are irresistible political catnip, though they aren’t. His overreliance on words hasn’t helped.

Read the rest...

Most Likely to Succeed: Hussein vs Herman

College daze: Barack Obama vs. Herman Cain

So on a 90 degree Saturday in Hotlanta, Herman Cain drew 10,000 - 15,000 supporters. I'd say that's not bad for a "long shot" presidential candidate ― particularly considering the fact that the crowd came out to hear Cain officially announce what he had already officially announced that he would officially announce...

How big have your crowds been lately, Mitt?

You can read all about the Herminator's big day elsewhere. Just a Conservative Girl drove 11 hours to be there. Sam Foster officially announces his official congratulations.

Meanwhile, Herman makes his case for his candidacy in this clever piece at Fox News, Solving for X. Don't miss it.

As for the picture above, it's a side-by-side comparison of Hussein and Herman during their college days. One was studying mathematics and computer science, the other was studying Marxism and benzoylmethylecgonine. If they had been in the same class, who do you suppose would have been voted most likely to succeed?

For reasons that are not obvious to me, the fascists at Think Progress are circulating the picture of young Herman. Surely they didn't want to jump-start feelings of voter regret by reminding us of what a shady, metrosexual pot head we managed to let into the White House in '08.

X-posted

Obama's War on the First Amendment

Would you like to share your political views with other Americans by making a private contribution to an organization that shares your perspective?

You have every right to do so! Right?

Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Watch out buddy. Congress may not be able to silence you, but Obama believes that he can:

The White House last week began circulating a draft executive order that would require companies seeking government contracts to disclose contributions -- including those that otherwise would have been secret -- to groups that air political ads attacking or supporting candidates...

Administration critics, including the powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are seizing on the White House's draft executive order, in particular, as evidence of an attempt to use executive power to punish or silence political adversaries, while rewarding supporters.

Calling the draft executive order "an affront to the separation of powers ... (and) to free speech," chamber spokeswoman Blair Latoff said it "lays the groundwork for a political litmus test for companies that wish to do business with the federal government" and is "less about disclosure than intimidation."

I think the Chamber of Commerce is right. Remember this headline?

A War Of Lies Against The Chamber

And this one from the New York Times?

Is Obama’s War With U.S. Chamber of Commerce Over?

Of course the war isn't over. Bellicose Obama never ends his wars.

To the point, if King Obama doesn't monitor the political activities of his subjects, how will he know "whose ass to kick"? How will he be able to punish his enemies and reward his friends? How will his administration decide who will receive his coveted Weiner Waivers?

X-posted at LCR

Hey! Didn't you Know that Obama is a "moderate" Republican?

Teenage-faced useful idiot for the far-left cause
WaPo's Ezra Klein: in it so deep that rubber
galoshes are required

by the Left Coast Rebel

Via. Newsbusters:

Liberals are always trying to place themselves in the center. Washington Post business columnist Ezra Klein tried out the old saw on Tuesday that just as Bill Clinton described himself pejoratively as an “Eisenhower Republican,” Barack Obama isn’t a socialist, he’s a moderate Republican of the George H.W. Bush era:

Perhaps this is just the logical endpoint of two years spent arguing over what Barack Obama is — or isn’t. Muslim. Socialist. Marxist. Anti-colonialist. Racial healer. We’ve obsessed over every answer except the right one: President Obama, if you look closely at his positions, is a moderate Republican of the early 1990s. And the Republican Party he’s facing has abandoned many of its best ideas in its effort to oppose him.

If you put aside the emergency measures required by the financial crisis, three major policy ideas have dominated American politics in recent years: a plan that uses an individual mandate and tax subsidies to achieve near-universal health care; a cap-and-trade plan that attempts to raise the prices of environmental pollutants to better account for their costs; and bringing tax rates up from their Bush-era lows as part of a bid to reduce the deficit. In each case, the position that Obama and the Democrats have staked out is the very position that moderate Republicans have staked out before.

Klein has a huge “but” in this theory – if you leave out the massive stimulus program and TARP and taking over the auto industry, he’s not a socialist.

Ezra Klein (pictured in true form at the top of this post) has thrown down the gauntlet and gotten his useful-idiot marching orders to spread this "moderate" meme but like anything out of the press these days concerning Obama, the fiction is stranger than the truth.

In all fairness, Obama's undying affection for bankrupting debt, unpaid wars, bailouts et al. just throws steroids and jet fuel on top of the legacy of another: the disaster that we are in the midst of began in earnest under the profligate-presidency of George W. Bush (who was anything but a conservative or a moderate, but in actuality a big-government progressive himself).

But Obama The Moderate?

That's just the darndest-stupid thing I have read in a while, defies any semblance of logic, and is something only capable of a liberal academic head-in-the-sand type!

Ezra Klein was the teen-aged smiling face of Journolister (the 400+ press-only club that secretly got together to figure out how to trash the right and help elect Obama, among other things), so it figures that he is pushing this right now.

It's a not-so-subtle way of him saying, "hey, look, independents and swing voters, Obama's really not a far-left, South American-esque, saber-rattling class warrior!"

Will it work?

Cross posted to Proof Positive, Libertarian Patriot and Right Klik.