Obama Should Withdraw In Favor Of Hillary?

Obama Should Withdraw In Favor Of Hillary?


“He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”

By Dell Hill

You deserve some comedic relief from all of the horrible news of the past several weeks...months?...years?

I couldn’t think of anything to say that would brighten your day, but two Democrat party pollsters have saved my bacon.  Patrick H. Caddell and Doublas E. Schoen combined their political genius and put together this op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal.  

“When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality—and he must reach the same conclusion.

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments.  He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Never before has there been such an obvious potential successor—one who has been a loyal and effective member of the president's administration, who has the stature to take on the office, and who is the only leader capable of uniting the country around a bipartisan economic and foreign policy.

Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president's political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern—not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.

Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off.

Associated Press
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics 2012 General Election Average (43.8%-43.%). Meanwhile, voters disapprove of the president's performance 49%-41% in the most recent Gallup survey, and 63% of voters disapprove of his handling of the economy, according to the most recent CNN/ORC poll.

Consequently, he has to make the case that the Republicans, who have garnered even lower ratings in the polls for their unwillingness to compromise and settle for gridlock, represent a more risky and dangerous choice than the current administration—an argument he's clearly begun to articulate.

One year ago in these pages, we warned that if President Obama continued down his overly partisan road, the nation would be "guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it." The result has been exactly as we predicted: stalemate in Washington, fights over the debt ceiling, an inability to tackle the debt and deficit, and paralysis exacerbating market turmoil and economic decline.

If President Obama were to withdraw, he would put great pressure on the Republicans to come to the table and negotiate—especially if the president singularly focused in the way we have suggested on the economy, job creation, and debt and deficit reduction. By taking himself out of the campaign, he would change the dynamic from who is more to blame—George W. Bush or Barack Obama?—to a more constructive dialogue about our nation's future.

Even though Mrs. Clinton has expressed no interest in running, and we have no information to suggest that she is running any sort of stealth campaign, it is clear that she commands majority support throughout the country. A CNN/ORC poll released in late September had Mrs. Clinton's approval rating at an all-time high of 69%—even better than when she was the nation's first lady. Meanwhile, a Time Magazine poll shows that Mrs. Clinton is favored over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney by 17 points (55%-38%), and Texas Gov. Rick Perry by 26 points (58%-32%).

But this is about more than electoral politics. Not only is Mrs. Clinton better positioned to win in 2012 than Mr. Obama, but she is better positioned to govern if she does. Given her strong public support, she has the ability to step above partisan politics, reach out to Republicans, change the dialogue, and break the gridlock in Washington.

President Bill Clinton reached a historic agreement with the Republicans in 1997 that led to a balanced budget. Were Mrs. Clinton to become the Democratic nominee, her argument would almost certainly have to be about reconciliation and about an overarching deal to rein in the federal deficit. She will understand implicitly the need to draw up a bipartisan plan with elements similar to her husband's in the mid-to-late '90s—entitlement reform, reform of the Defense Department, reining in spending, all the while working to preserve the country's social safety net.

Having unique experience in government as first lady, senator and now as Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton is more qualified than any presidential candidate in recent memory, including her husband. Her election would arguably be as historic an event as the election of President Obama in 2008.

By going down the re-election road and into partisan mode, the president has effectively guaranteed that the remainder of his term will be marred by the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity, common purpose, and most of all, our economic strength. If he continues on this course it is certain that the 2012 campaign will exacerbate the divisions in our country and weaken our national identity to such a degree that the scorched-earth campaign that President George W. Bush ran in the 2002 midterms and the 2004 presidential election will pale in comparison.

We write as patriots and Democrats—concerned about the fate of our party and, most of all, our country. We do not write as people who have been in contact with Mrs. Clinton or her political operation. Nor would we expect to be directly involved in any Clinton campaign.

If President Obama is not willing to seize the moral high ground and step aside, then the two Democratic leaders in Congress, Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, must urge the president not to seek re-election—for the good of the party and most of all for the good of the country. And they must present the only clear alternative—Hillary Clinton.”

You may now continue laughing until such time as you’ve wet your pants or fifteen minutes is up....

My Lord, what a butt-kissing piece of tripe this is!

Polls from CNN and Time Magazine?  Why didn’t you just call the DNC; poll the office workers and call it close enough?

And here’s a clue for you two warp-minded individuals;  it doesn’t matter WHO you trot out this time around.  The country has seen all of the “Hope and Change” it wants to see from Mr. Obama and his band of Democrat/Socialists.  The freight train that ran you over in 2010 is still on the tracks and picking up steam.  If I were you, I'd get off the tracks!

Jose Pimentel Arrested For Terrorist Plot In NYC

Jose Pimentel Arrested For Terrorist Plot In NYC


Pipe Bomb Builder Planned To Blow Up Police Stations?



By Dell Hill

“A Dominican with an anti-American grudge and apparent al-Awlaki connection has been busted for building a bomb in his upper Manhattan apartment to blow up a police station, sources said Sunday night.

Mayor Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly and Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. were expected to discuss details of the alleged terror threat at a City Hall press conference Sunday night.

The suspect had been under surveillance by the NYPD counter-terrorism officers for some time, a source said.

Cops raided his Convent Ave. apartment in upper Manhattan earlier this week when an NYPD informant tipped them off that the suspect was assembling a bomb, the source said.

The would-be saboteur has apparently learned to build an explosive through web sites founded by Anwar al—Awlaki, the American-born jihadist cleric killed in September in a CIA-led drone strike in Yemen, the source said.

The suspect was identified through one of the al-Awlaki web sites, where he posted anti-American comments, the source said.

UPDATE:  He’s identified as Jose Pimentel, a Muslim convert.

A Muslim convert was arrested today for allegedly making bombs in New York City after a year-long investigation.

According to initial accounts, Jose Pimentel, a loner who lives with his mother in the Bronx, was charged with making pipe bombs.

Officials say Pimentel is apparently a “lone wolf” with no known connection to any foreign terrorists or local radicalized individuals.

Ray Kelly said he referred to himself as “Osama Hussein”.

Does ‘Mostly Peaceful’ Include Firearms?

Does ‘Mostly Peaceful’ Include Firearms?


Law Enforcement Nightmare Continues With Gun Arrest



By Dell Hill

From a law enforcement standpoint, the worst case scenario is one that involves weapons.  Police officers across the country are fully aware of the fact that at least some of the protesters involved in the “occupy” movement are armed...or are seldom far away from...weapons of some kind.  I doubt strongly that we’ve heard about armed protesters, simply because once the word gets out it becomes a copy-cat kind of thing.  The next thing you know, weapons of one kind or another start showing up everywhere.  Therefore, if the press doesn’t ask, the police probably won’t volunteer the information regarding weapons unless that fact is directly associated with an arrest.

And now it begins.

Cops busted a man from Youngstown, Ohio this weekend for driving around the OWS protest and Lower Manhattan with an unregistered gun.
Law enforcement said Joshua Fellows, 32, had a .45-calibre handgun and 32 rounds of ammunition in a truck he’d rented in North Carolina.

Fellows was originally busted on Thursday at 12:40 p.m. at Broadway and Exchange Place on a reckless driving charge after cops saw up to 40 people jumping in and out of the Budget rental truck

They seized the truck and found the gun during a search, and found Fellows Saturday at 9:10 p.m. at West Street and Rector Place.

He was charged with criminal possession of a weapon, arraigned, and was later released.

In all police arrested five people during the weekend, including Fellows, a protester who threw liquid in a cop’s face and another alleged groper for attacking a woman, cops said today.”

Notice the disposition (thus far) of this protester’s case.  “Charged with criminal possession of a weapon, arraigned, and was later released”.  When any angry crowd realizes “it’s as simple as that”, more weapons will start to appear.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of the media continue to describe these events as “mostly peaceful”, which is about the same as saying a lady is “a little pregnant”.

Forgive Student Loans? In Other Words - I Pay For Your Education?

Forgive Student Loans?

In Other Words - I Pay For Your Education?

“This is a transparent vote buying scheme.  Not only will this act of Roman-style patronage turn into votes for whoever is waiving the magic wand, those grateful little creatures will hail their Caesar and support his re-election as motivated campaign workers.” - The Admiral


By Dell Hill

Hat Tip - Admiral Smitty



It’s incredible folly to even think that student loan forgiveness is anything but a vote-buying scheme.  After all, the loans may be forgiven, but somebody has got to pay at some point in time...and that somebody is the US tax payer.  

“There’s No Free Lunch”

Super Committee Deadline Approachith With No ‘Deal’ In Sight

Super Committee Deadline Approachith With No ‘Deal’ In Sight


It Was Designed To Fail - Massive Cuts Kick In Without Full Congressional Action


By Dell Hill

If you resist the temptation to become one with your recliner, we invite you to consider this piece of updated political news.
   
Via Jazz Shaw @ Hot Air             
                           
“With the Washington Post reporting – and Senator Jon Kyl confirming – that there’s a general sense of malaise surrounding budget deal negotiations, the end may be in sight. Unfortunately, the light at the end of the tunnel is looking more and more like it’s the headlight of an oncoming train.

The congressional committee tasked with reducing the federal deficit is poised to admit defeat as soon as Monday, and its unfinished business will set up a year-end battle over emergency jobless benefits and an expiring payroll tax holiday.

Those provisions are among a host of measures set to lapse at the end of December. During nearly three months of negotiations, the “supercommittee” had been weighing whether to extend at least some of them as part of a broader plan to shave a minimum of $1.2 trillion over the next decade.

The mere fact of failure, should it occur, probably won’t come as a shock to most observers. (Our friends at Outside the Beltway, in fact, rather blandly call it “An Unsurprising Failure.”) But from all of these interviews and a sampling of the talking heads this weekend, what was more startling to me was an indication that a lot of these folks really never wanted the committee to succeed in the first place. But why? A few observations follow.

From the Left side of the aisle, there does seem to be one possible answer which led me to one of those forehead slapping, “I coulda’ had a V-8″ moments. I was watching a panel of entirely left wing pundits on MSNBC this morning, two of whom came out without prevarication and said they were openly hoping the group would fail to meet the deadline.

The reason?  Because then the sequestration would kick in and it leaves entitlement programs essentially untouched while making deep cuts in the military. And as one noted, such cuts to the military are, “long overdue.”

Further, they pointed out that failure would result in the end of the Bush era tax cuts which, as one of them put it, “would solve most of our problems right there.”

I’ve long since gotten over being shocked at hearing things like this, and in some ways it was rather refreshing to hear it stated so openly and honestly. Of course, it’s also disastrously wrong as far as I can tell, but at least it’s honest.

But there have been plenty on the Right who have adopted a hang dog attitude about the work the committee is attempting as well. The general consensus seems to be that if there were to be a deal, in order to get any of the Democrats on board it was going to involve massive tax increases. Better to give up and head to sequester rather than give in on that, goes this line of thinking.”

From Dell’s vantage point:

“...they pointed out that failure would result in the end of the Bush era tax cuts which, as one of them put it, “would solve most of our problems right there.”

Anyone who is so incredibly stupid as to believe that statement is even close to accurate should be drawn and quartered.

The entire super committee fiasco was the Democrat’s brainchild, designed to take control of the economy via a handful of people assigned to a super committee, rather than have those decisions made by congress as a whole.  If you can’t see and understand this political stunt, you’re either a Libtard who doesn’t know any better or a person who needs serious schooling in “the camps”.

Occupy The Recliner!

Occupy The Recliner


It’s a perfect day to enjoy your favorite NFL games, or watch the NASCAR Championship decided at Homestead Speedway.


Good Luck To Tony Stewart and Carl Edwards!

California Is A Wealthy State - The L.A. Times

California Is A Wealthy State - The L.A. Times


“They must eradicate collective bargaining rights for public sector workers; they must terminate open borders policies that allow sanctuary cities to exist in California; and they must rein in the regulatory superstate that has sent businesses fleeing the state in record numbers.”

By Dell Hill via Director Blue

Poster Child for Insanity: Los Angeles Times Advocates for Even Higher Taxes So Californians Can "Pay It Forward"

Those sounds you just heard were California's beleaguered taxpayers
smacking themselves on their foreheads:




California's budget is almost never adopted by the legal deadline, but it was this year — in part because of a new simple-majority-vote requirement that left quarrelsome Republicans out of the discussion, and in part because daydreaming Democrats relied on a vaporous wish that the economy was going to improve and that the state would recoup $3.7 billion more in tax revenues than now seems likely. The shortfall is expected to trigger $2 billion in spending cuts, and Californians who think that's a good thing — that the cuts will impose needed fiscal discipline, or will force the state to make more responsible decisions, or will punish lazy freeloaders or greedy state workers — should wake up and smell the future...

...California is a wealthy state, with enough money and brains to create a future of opportunity and achievement for the next generation. As we face these new triggered cuts and even deeper cuts in the coming year, Californians must now show whether we still have sufficient regard for each other and for our successors to invest a little more today for an abundant, and sustainable, future.

The Times ignores the costs of California's operation as a sanctuary state, which the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates at $20 billion. Consider just one slice of that figure and the devastating effects that California's open borders policies have on taxpayers:


According to The Modesto Bee, the California correctional system spends $50,000 annually to house each prisoner. This translates to 10 percent of the entire state's budget -- more than double that of the immense California university system -- which is spent on prisoners.

The state prison system currently houses about 155,000 inmates, 21,000 of whom are illegal aliens. Thus, California is spending about $1,050,000,000 (one billion and fifty million dollars) on imprisonment of illegals alone.

There is only way out of this mess for California before cities and the state itself descend into bankruptcy and chaos: they must eradicate collective bargaining rights for public sector workers; they must terminate open borders policies that allow sanctuary cities to exist in California; and they must rein in the regulatory superstate that has sent businesses fleeing the state in record numbers.

The time is now, Californians. You don't have much time left to repair this mess. Reject the idiocy of the Los Angeles Times and the other leftists who have set the state on a course for economic collapse. Vote for freedom.”

A Comment From Dell:

California is boned.

This comment makes all the sense in the world.....

“There is only way out of this mess for California before cities and the state itself descend into bankruptcy and chaos: they must eradicate collective bargaining rights for public sector workers; they must terminate open borders policies that allow sanctuary cities to exist in California; and they must rein in the regulatory superstate that has sent businesses fleeing the state in record numbers.”

….But, we know that the Golden State’s political mindset is so warped, it will do NONE of those things.  

Jerry Brown will put forward a faux effort to reign in the public sector collective bargaining, but the union will bowl him over with political clout any time it feels like it.  

The state embraces - rather than opposes - a totally open border policy and let’s be honest here - California is a sanctuary State.  The fact that it costs California tax payers over a billion dollars a year to keep illegals in prison just doesn’t seem to resonate in Sacramento.  That cost alone would make up the entire annual budget of smaller states.

The only answer Governor Brown will have for that problem is to start releasing prisoners “early” - especially those prison sentences that are associated with crimes of non-violence.  That ploy, however, will do very little to reduce the deficit and will only succeed in putting an additional huge strain on the parole system.  Early release programs almost always include the proviso that the convict remains on parole until the original sentence has been completed.  When you consider the fact that crimes committed by sexual deviants are usually classified as “non violent”, you better understand the problems such programs create.  

As for businesses leaving?  It’s too late.  The exodus is long-since underway and every tax payer who can afford to do so is headed elsewhere.  I’ve talked with several and some are taking huge losses on California property just to flee the anticipated increase in every tax and fee imaginable.  The fact that the housing market nationwide is in the toilet isn’t helping matters for those beleaguered folks.

“I sold a house in California that had an appraised value of $280,000 for half that amount because it had been on the market for over a year and that was the best offer I got,” said one disgruntled former California resident.  “With the State in such deep financial trouble, I couldn’t believe it when the governor decided to spend a hundred billion dollars more on that high-speed rail system.  That was the last straw for me.  The unions control this state and they’re spending it into the ground”.

That person now calls Texas “home”.