Barack Obama spoke the Congressional Black Caucus on Saturday. The Captain of the Titanic was reassuring the passengers that he was only stopping for ice. It was reported in various ways;
In this report, Obama takes a shot at Boehner:
President Obama kept at his renewed effort to stress the economy, telling the Congressional Black Caucus dinner Saturday night that the recession “made matters much worse” in the African-American community.
In his speech, the president also didn’t pass up another opportunity to take a shot at Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio).
Then he went to praise himself:
“As has been true with other recessions, this one came down with a particular vengeance on African-American communities,” Obama said.
The president rattled off a succession of things his administration has done since he took office, including bailing out GM and Chrysler, healthcare reform, Wall Street regulatory reform, and ending the combat mission in Iraq.
Those things have really helped create jobs. In China, that is.
Then he hinted at something:
The president accused his opponents of hatching “a plan to turn back the clock on all the progress we’ve made.”
Over at Politico:
President Barack Obama on Saturday sought to fire up his most loyal base of support, telling the audience at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual dinner that “the time for action is now” to protect the changes brought by his administration and the Democratic-led Congress, such as health care reform and the financial system overhaul.
Health care costs are going up and insurance rates are on their way up like a rocket to cover the “free” things Obama promised. Financial reform has made it more difficult than ever for people to refinance to lower rates and you cannot get a loan for real estate investment no matter how worthy a borrower you are.
But it was the PMSNBC article that really catches your eye.
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama came out swinging against Republicans in a fiery campaign-season speech to black lawmakers Saturday night, urging them to “guard the change” he was delivering with the kind of organizing that propelled the civil rights movement.
With the GOP hoping to regain power on Capitol Hill in the November election, Obama described his adversaries as “a crowd … that wants to do what’s right politically, instead of what’s right — period.” He never named the opposing party, referring to it as “the other side.”
“The other side.”
Gee, what could that mean? This is the guy who thrives on code (created or saved). He chooses words very carefully. He has never shied away from naming his “adversaries.” A search for “Obama attacks Republicans” yields 17 million hits.
Then he went on to link this struggle with civil rights:
“What made the civil rights movement possible were foot soldiers like so many of you, sitting down at lunch counters and standing up for freedom. What made it possible for me to be here today are Americans throughout our history making our union more equal, making our union more just, making our union more perfect,” Obama said. “That’s what we need again.”
There’s no doubt as to what Obama was doing, and it wasn’t about appealing to the better interests of people.
Then I saw the story from Reuters:
Obama urges blacks to vote and “guard the change
An image sprang to mind immediately- this is already happening.
RW,
And you are just so concerned about the ultra conservatives that you are trying to make sure they don’t get fooled by someone who migh actually be more liberal than they think?
Is that it?
Your just doing those poor ultra conservatives a service?
Nan, you’re all over the place, but I think the key thing you do not understand is that Liberals aren’t throwing witches under the bus because O’Donnell dabbled in witchcraft. Where are you seeing that? This is about the very real potential for blatant hypocrisy on this woman’s part. This isn’t a person who has reserved her personal religious beliefs as a private matter. She’s been very publically religious for years and her religious beliefs have informed her stances in such areas as sexuality and marriage. So this goes right to the heart of her credibility. And where is she to clear this up for everyone? Why cancel two interviews on Sunday where she could have put this to rest? Her campaign’s bungling of this matter is just another open question about her and her competency for the job.
A serious charge has been leveled against Ms. O’Donnell: that she’s been “using campaign funds for personal living expenses”. If true, spurned on by the Tea Party Express, many hard-working and well-meaning conservative donors have been unwittingly paying Ms. O’Donnell’s gas, grocery and bowling expenses while she chose not to have a job. Is that what’s referred to as ‘wealth redistribution’?
http://citizensforethics.org/crew-calls-for-odonnell-criminal-investigation
@Tom:
No, not so serious at all considering that paying herself a salary from campaign contributions is entirely legal and customary.
Aye,
According to the charges, she didn’t call it a ‘salary’ and thus didn’t declare it as income nor pay income taxes on it. Are you okay with that?
What she might have done or not is technical. This is peanuts.
Obama ripped off the entire country with his fraudulent donations- hundreds of millions of dollars and no one knows where any of it came from.
So I can’t get stirred up with this. Obama obliterated the rules.
Your predictability is so absolute, they could rewrite the laws of physics using “Drjohn” as a constant.
Tom/Aye;
There is another, perhaps more obscure perspective concerning O’Donnell . . . that is the “protest vote” . . . O’Donnell got the nomination for that reason alone. Yes, the ” . . .Tea Party force” . . . “May The Force Be With YOU” . . . did come out in O’Donnell’s favor and the end result might be a “DINO” . . . for I do suspect that if the Democrat “Pet” Coons, should he get elected and fails to follow the “Force” that his term will amount to one!
Sometimes progress is measured in a less direct or more tortureous path.
Sure, Obama, Obama.
If he tramps all over the rules (and he routinely says he cares not for procedural rules) it’s only fair to offer the same forebearance to O’Donnell no matter what she did.
And CREW is George Soros, so their accusations make these ears deaf.
Your message is typically muddled, but I do believe you’re stating that you have no problem with bad behavior of any kind, as long as the person in question is on your side. That’s quite a startling position to take, considering your posts are collections of random text copied off the internet and strung together by your editorial whining about how evil the President is and how his crimes demand removal from office based on moral and ethical grounds. Now we see proof at last that it’s all about which side you’re on. There goes the shroud of simple moral piety from which you pronounced from above.
As for CREW, I doubt you were complaining when they called for an investigation of Charlie Rangel.
Tom
If you’re going to continue the insults this is going to be a tough conversation. I don’t usually choose to absorb ad hominem attacks for long from people who condone touching of children by strangers.
This is about equality. If Obama need not answer for his fraud, then no one need answer either. Or perhaps you think only women should be scrutinized carefully. I don’t know.
As for CREW, they have no credibility with me.
TOM: YOU are SPITTING too much here, insulting everyone, you address
IF to, you cannot help yourself on that, It’s not for everyone to help you.
you are among the best AMERICANS you can find, when you visit here at FA,
SO remember to be polite, and a good manner as the others are for you.
YOU are not with your own party who use this bullshit of yours. bye
I think that’s what blogging usually is.
At least we agree on something. And thanks for reading!
@ Tom, Charlie Rangel will get off with a reprimand. Who are You kidding? A Congressional “Ethics” Committee is a joke. If You or I cheated on taxes or lied on an Official statement on income,assets and net worth We would be facing Federal Court with sworn testimony and severe penalties.
Al Capone went to Prison on Tax Evasion. Charlie Rangel gets “show and tell” in Committee and no Federal charges or Trial with Sworn Testimony or any punitive actions of any real consequence.
Get off of that stuff right now.
Thanks, Bees, and well said!
@OT2
Charlie Rangel has become the Paris Hilton of the House.
OT2, I don’t have any point to make with Rangel aside from citing him as an example of a Democrat that CREW blew the whistle on.
I was curious what people in a party closely allied with religious conservatism would make of an ethically suspect candidate representing their side. What I’m taking away is that that’s secondary to winning and thus should be ignored. That’s a perfectly logical strategy, but at the very least it calls into question one of the more sanctimonious tenets held by some on the Right (i.e., only the Left play dirty). People of all stripes can situationally justify contradictory actions and beliefs; and critical thinking can easily be short-circuited, or even lobotomized, but an overzealous and ardent ideological streak. It’s fascinating to see it play out.
@ Tom, As Rangel does not represent me, I do not reside in Harlem, and I am neither a Democrat or a Republican, Rangel represents the arrogance of incumbency. The “Elite Class” that needs to depart DC and find a legal way to make a living.
Nuff said.
I am so tired of B.O. playing the race card!! Does he have anything else in his deck? Now he is saying that conservatives want “the black folk to stay home” on election day!! I don’t care what they do, everyone has a choice but they have to ask, what have the libs done for them, ever?