Pat Dollard

Tweet

Both Articles Taken From Politico

Baby Killer Makes Enemies With Baby Killers

President Obama’s only been in office for eight days and some of his friends are already steaming mad at him.

The president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Cecile Richards, just sent an “urgent” email to supporters decrying Obama’s decision to jettison a family planning provision from the nearly $900 billion economic stimulus package to be voted on in the House Wednesday.

Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs confirmed Tuesday that Obama called House Ways and Means Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and asked him to drop the provision. The president “believed that the policy of increased funding for family planning was the right one…. He didn’t believe that this bill was the vehicle to make that happen,” Gibbs said.

“I’m stunned,” Richards wrote in the e-mail. “Removing this provision is a betrayal of millions of low-income women, and it will place an even greater burden on state budgets that are already strained to the breaking point.”

Richards’s e-mail faults “Congressional leaders” for the decision to drop the provision, but she didn’t urge Planned Parenthood members to call their member of Congress. Instead, supporters were advised to direct their ire at the White House, by phone or e-mail.

White House communications director Ellen Moran, a former executive director of EMILY’s List, referred questions about the new grassroots lobbying effort to the White House press office, which had no immediate response.

The legislative language in question would relieve states of the need to seek a Medicaid waiver from the federal government before spending. Richards contends the provision would actually save the federal government $700 million over ten years, though Republicans have said the measure would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and do little to boost the economy.

Do You Still Believe in Change?
Above: President Obama Doing Nothing, But At Least He Looks Good Doing It

Barack Obama has been president for more than a week now, and nothing has changed. Nothing. The stock market is still way down, layoffs continue, and we still don’t have universal health care.

Where is the change we can believe in? Nobody told us it was going to take more than a week.

Hillary Clinton warned us about this. On Feb. 25 last year, campaigning against Obama in Rhode Island, she mocked him for promising too much.

“Now, I could stand up here and say, ‘Let’s just get everybody together. Let’s get unified,’” Clinton said as the crowd giggled. “The skies will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing, and the world will be perfect.”

The crowd laughed and applauded.

“Maybe I’ve just lived a little long, but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be,” Clinton went on. “You are not going to wave a magic wand to make special interests disappear.”

But what did she know? People wanted hope; they wanted the magic wand. (Someone told me Obama has made Clinton his secretary of state. Very funny. Next somebody is going to tell me he made a tax evader his secretary of the treasury.)

We’re Waiting…

So how much time does President Obama have?

Well, how much time do you have? How much time before your job disappears? How much time before you can’t pay your mortgage or meet your other obligations? How much time before your savings (assuming you have any) are gone?

Obama is guaranteed a paycheck for the next four years. Are you?

All of which he realizes. And he wants to work quickly.

“The American people expect action,” he said Tuesday after meeting with Republican House members on Capitol Hill. “The key right now is to keep politics to a minimum. I do hope that we can all put politics aside and do the American people’s business right now.”

There are at least four reasons this won’t be easy: The problem is massive; nobody really knows what will work; the proposed fixes are not popular with the American people; and members of Congress hardly ever put politics aside. It is like asking them to put oxygen aside.

You would think spending money to help save the economy — our jobs, our savings, our lives — would have massive public support, but that is not so. In a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted a few weeks ago, people were asked which things they feared Obama “will go too far” in pushing.

Guess what No. 1 was? Pulling troops out of Iraq too quickly? No, only 41 percent of Americans fear that. Appointing liberal justices to the Supreme Court? No, only 38 percent are concerned about that. How about “promoting a liberal agenda on social issues such as gay rights and abortion”? Nope, just 36 percent of the country is worried about that.

The No. 1 fear that Americans have when it comes to Barack Obama is that he will go too far in “providing financial aid and loans to corporations.” That got 52 percent, the only concern shared by a majority of people.

Wall Street has not helped with this. Last year, Congress approved a $700 billion bailout for troubled financial institutions, some of which went for wild parties, huge bonuses, a $230,000 annual salary for a chauffeur and $1.2 million for an office redecoration that included an $88,000 area rug. (Maybe it was made out of Corinthian leather.)

Main Street is upset with this. Main Street thinks good money may be thrown after bad. The original bailout bill, which set in motion the spending of $350 billion, passed the Senate last year by a vote of 74-25. The vote this month to spend the second $350 billion passed by a vote of only 52-42.

Now Barack Obama has his own plan. It is not a bailout bill but a stimulus bill, and it has an $825 billion price tag. There are probably enough Democrats in the House and Senate to pass it, but Obama wants bipartisan support. He wants the nation to pull together. And he also may have to go back to Congress for even more money, and that may be impossible without some real bipartisanship.

Link: Obama’s “plan”

Why is bipartisanship so difficult? One reason is decade upon decade of gerrymandering, which has left almost all congressional districts with large Republican majorities or large Democratic majorities. That is why incumbents almost never lose.

But incumbents can lose primaries, especially if an opponent claims to be a more “real,” i.e. more partisan, Republican or a more “real” Democrat. So incumbents don’t like to risk votes that make them look less partisan. They see no profit in it.

Wait a second. Aren’t our lawmakers supposed to put concern for the nation above concern for their own reelection?

Yes. And the skies will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing, and the world will be perfect.

In other words, don’t make me laugh.