Obama nails the reason for his falling polls.

Just when we’d thought we’d heard everything possible from President Obama and his acolytes, today rolled around. Today makes a lie out of “you can’t teach old dogs…” and while we’re not up to life’s standard for being a dog, we are old.  :-)

For a tad of background the President’s approval rating has been taking a beating lately, it’s down in the 30s and amazingly enough, he’s been lower that George W. Bush at the same point in his Presidency. That’s got to leave a mark.

There’s lots of discussion about just why the President has fallen so far so fast, after all it was just over a year ago that he’d been reelected in an election that wasn’t even close. Democrats hadn’t recaptured the House but they held onto the Senate and the House Republicans were – as usual – in total disorder.

Then the stuff really hit the fan and Mr. Obama had a, shall we say, less than stellar year. And, at least at this point, this year’s no shaping up to be any better.

The President is back to doing what he’s good at. He’s giving interviews to “professional journalists” who would make Monica Lewinsky blush and today’s heart throbbing episode is logged (thank you Christmas Vacation) at the New Yorker magazine’s website.

“There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black President,” Obama said. “Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt precisely because I’m a black President.”

English: Monica Lewinsky, from her government ...

That comment goes completely unchallenged by the author. But not by us.

The President obviously feels that the reason his ratings are down are because of a bunch of racist white hicks who object to a black President. That comment is so stupid it’s almost beyond belief. This guy is a graduate of Columbia and Harvard Law and based on this example their standards for rational thought are significantly lower than we experienced at Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo back in the dark ages.

We are unable to put together an argument to support the idea that people who have a problem with the idea of a “black President” are bringing down the President’s approval rating. It’s not like Barack Obama was identifying as a “white guy” prior to 2013. Those folks would have been solidly opposed to his Presidency from well before Day One.

We’re beginning to understand just why things have gotten so messed [we would have preferred a less family-friendly word here] up.

With reference to those “white folks” who really like him and are giving him the benefit of the doubt because he’s black, well we would hold that those folks are acting totally from racist motives. They’re willing to overlook five years of complete incompetence in everything this President has touched simply because – as the President notes – “…because [he’s] black.”

Here’s a hint from somebody who, based on that exchange, is a whole lot brighter than you are Mr. President. Give up on the “racist” thing. There are a whole lot more people who are willing to stay on their knees before you simply because you’re black than there could ever be on the other extreme. You’re problems are not the result of “racism”.

Your problems are the result of policies that have been discredited for decades combined with an amazing level of incompetence by you and everyone who works for you.

Enhanced by Zemanta

CurmudgeonCheckOut

Shortlink:

Posted by on January 20, 2014.
Filed under Barack Obama.
Tagged with: .
Michael Becker is a long time activist and a businessman. He's been involved in the pro-life movement since 1976 and has been counseling addicts and ministering to prison inmates since 1980.Becker is a Curmudgeon. He has decades of experience as an operations executive in turnaround situations and in mortgage banking. He blogs regularly at The Right Curmudgeon, The Minority Report, Wizbang, Unified Patriots and Joe for America. He lives in Phoenix and is almost always armed.

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • Vagabond661

    I dislike his white socialist half.

  • Lawrence Westlake

    What an insult this blog post is to Lewinsky. That aside, leftism is a mental disorder, not an actual ideology, so that tripe from Obama isn’t surprising. Probably the greatest irony here is that the New Yorker’s target audience is so retarded you could sit them down with a flow chart explaining all of the absurdities and unintended ironies of a half-white, affirmative action president tying his job approval to the dark color of his skin, and they’d not be able even to follow along without projecting their own racism. A veritable feedback loop of political ironies.

    • jim_m

      Your comments are an insult to every blog post and yet you keep on making them.

  • jim_m

    There are indeed a lot of blacks who voted for obama simply because he is black. If you figure they are 12% of the population that would give you between 20 and 30 million people who voted for him because he is black. Add to that a few million leftist idiots who voted for him because he is black and it would be cool to vote for the first black president!

    I doubt that you could find that many who voted against him for the same reason. Hell, I doubt you could find half as many.

    But hey, it’s MLK day, the day set aside for leftists to harangue all white people and tell us how we are all racists for not judging people by the color of their skin. Or something like that.

  • http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/ Joseph G Figliola

    As it relates specifically to the Empty Suit’s declining poll numbers … root cause has one word. ObamaCare. The cause and the effect will both get worse.

  • Hank_M

    So Barry finally uses the race card.

    What’s his excuse going to be in 2015 and 2016?

    • Walter_Cronanty

      He’ll go back to the old tried and true – “It’s Bush’s fault!”

  • 914

    Such immaturity.

  • Paul Hooson

    Every recent appointment of Obama seems to introduce yet another lightweight personality, who doesn’t impress me as being quite up to the job. – I miss the old days when someone like Ronald Reagan actually appointed people I really like to positions, and I often found myself approving of the job they achieved, despite my political differences with Reagan. Those were the good old days compared to this….

    • jim_m

      When people are measured by ideological correctness and not competence this is what you get.

      • Paul Hooson

        What Reagan told me from his quality appointees was that he was able to delegate responsibility to the right people to get results. The bottom line was that he was a good manager. – What I see from Obama is very weak management skills.

        • jim_m

          You assume that obama is managing the operation of the government. In reality he is only managing the ideology.

          What he wants is a mindless group-think that never questions the statements and orders that come out of his office. What he wants is an admin that always projects the party line and never admits error or fault and never admits that something may in fact have gone wrong.

        • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

          Very weak managerial skills? More like nonexistent – there was nothing in his record that indicated he could successfully assistant-manage a McDonald’s, much less a city, county, or state. (Or a strip club – but he’d have done much less harm there… ;-) )

          And lucky us – we’ve been suffering through his OJT for pretty much the hardest, most responsible job in the free world.

          But he does have Charisma! Doesn’t he look GREAT on stage, with a good telepromptered speech!

    • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

      Carter’s starting to look better and better in retrospect.

  • lasveraneras

    Incompetence? In 2008 he made it perfectly clear his administration’s
    primary objective was going to be “fundamentally transforming the USA.”
    Seems he’s doing a more than competent job at just that very thing.

    If you assume that the phrase meant growing government size and reach,
    weakening the U.S. image and strength worldwide, and undercutting civil
    society and the private economy – all core beliefs of the Progressive
    Left – he’s a transformational champ!

    How long will these “transformations” last
    in the post-Obama world? Has Obama and the Progressive Left effected a structural change or are his laws and policies likely to erode quickly? In other words has Obama-ism damaged the roots of American exceptionalism, individual freedom and the Rule of Law?

    We shall find out the answer to these questions soon enough. But use of the word “competence” seems inappropriate in the context of defining Obama and his impact.

    • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

      Fundamental transformation: Ferrari into bridge abutment at 90 MPH.

      May be survivable, likely not… :-(

  • http://www.outsidethebeltway.com rodney dill

    He is right in that people that are racist would likely reflect negatively in the polls. Where this argument is specious is that it would result in an increase in the disapproval rating. These people would’ve always been against him and still would be and wouldn’t be able to contribute to an ‘increase’ in the disapproval level, as they never would’ve changed from approve to disapprove.

    At least he gave some credit to the idea that many blacks and some whites gave him a ‘free card’ on some issues because he is black. Though his supporters changing their minds is likely to biggest reason for the shift towards disapproval.

  • stan25

    Man that race card deck is really getting dog-eared. The faces of those cards are getting so worn out that people can’t even tell if the spots are diamond, hearts, clubs or spades. Yet the liberals keep playing with the same deck even after everyone can see what cards they are holding.

    • Walter_Cronanty

      I think they lost a couple cards from that deck back in the 60s. Still play ‘em though.

  • yetanotherjohn

    Obama’s Black? Who knew. I guess the falling poll numbers is from all those racist who have gone 5 years with him as president who didn’t realise he was Black. If they were racist and knew, then by the president’s explanation they would never have supported him.
    He might be able to explain away the falling numbers because of people who expressed support for him because he was black and despite his failings, until just to much has happened to ignore. Those racist abandoning him could correspond to his poll drops. So if it is racism, then it is the “reverse racism”.

  • Brucehenry

    Just as I suspected, if you read the linked New Yorker article you find that the block quote cited here is NOT in response to a question about falling poll numbers. It’s about the larger question of who supports and who opposes him.

    So Becker bases this post on a completely false premise — that Obama is blaming falling poll numbers on racism — and you geniuses buy it.

    Shocker.

    It’s the 19th paragraph of the article. Note that there was no question asked about poll numbers and that the quote is part of a larger conversation. Then keep reading as Obama goes on to express his thoughts about why some people oppose his administration and why some support it.

    • jim_m

      Polling is a reflection of who supports him and who does not. so your point is?

      Bottom line is that obama plays the race card.

      • Brucehenry

        Obama may “play the race card,” according to you, but didn’t in this instance.

        BTW, the fact that you’re sick of hearing about it doesn’t make every mention of race a playing of the “race card.”

        My point is that Becker presents this as if Obama was asked, “Why are your numbers down?” and then responds with this quote. But the quote is not in response to poll numbers but in a discussion of something else. So Becker calls Obama “stupid” for responding in this way, but Obama was NOT responding to why his poll numbers have slipped.

        So we see that there is either stupidity or dishonesty at play here. Either Becker read the article he linked to and THINKS it says what he says — stupidity — or he KNOWS Obama’s comments weren’t in response to that question — dishonesty.

        That’s my point, genius.

        The statement that some people support Obama just because he’s black and that some people oppose him just because he’s black is undeniably true. The only debate is how many of each there are.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          You are just a perpetual apologist for racism.

          • Brucehenry

            Well, that’s one way to read my comment. It’s wrong, but it’s one way.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Yeah, you’re just perpetually misunderstood.

            Fracking racist.

          • Brucehenry

            “You’re”

          • jim_m

            No. He’s right. You are providing an excuse for baseless accusations of racism against all white people. There are no proper polls showing that people voted against obama purely because of race. Every time race is brought up it is because the left wants to stoke racial hate against white conservatives.

          • Brucehenry

            Oh yeah every time.

            You are a genius.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            You are a racist.

          • jim_m

            SInce every time I hear it, it is a baseless accusation saing that people oppose his policies because they are racists. Maybe it is possible for people to oppose socialize medicine on principle. Maybe people could oppose his tragic foreign policy on principle. Maybe, just maybe, you’re being a racist for presuming otherwise.

            But obama and the left deny this. You cover for this denial.

          • Brucehenry

            Did you even read the link? In your eagerness to dismiss everything Obama says as “playing the race card” you must have missed where Obama says that it is INDEED possible to oppose his policies without being a racist. Not only is it possible, says Obama, but the norm.

          • jim_m

            Then that’s a first. Still, why even bring up the idea of racist opposition when the numbers are almost certainly vanishingly small when compared to the people opposing his policies because they are crap? The only reason is to put forward the notion that the numbers are the other way around, that the majority of opposition is because he is black and the principles opposition is microscopic.

          • Brucehenry

            I don’t think he DID bring it up, the interviewer did.

            And just as we have no proof that the number is substantial, there is also no proof that it is “vanishingly small.”

            I think that’s one of those things that you “intuitively” know but others don’t necessarily have that same intuition.

          • jim_m

            It is vanishingly small. I don’t know of anyone,nor have I heard of anyone who has voted in this manner. Have you?

            I think the onus is on the person alleging that people are racist to prove his point.

          • Brucehenry

            LOL no I don’t know anyone who admits to it that’s for sure, in either direction!

            I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but open naked racism is out of style, as it were. Frowned upon. Simply not done old man. NOBODY admits to racist motives publicly, Jim, and many don’t admit to them privately, or even to themselves.

          • jim_m

            Let’s think about this. For someone to oppose obama for racist reasons they would have to be in favor of all his policies (or at least more in favor of his platform than Romney’s) and they would have had to override that inclination toward his policies on the basis of race.

            So since the only people who agree with his policies are lefty idiots like yourself, tell us Bruce, how many of your friends refused to vote for obama based on his race?

            Because ZERO conservatives needed to appeal to race as a reason to vote against him. The only people who would have voted against him based on race are lefties.

          • Brucehenry

            Your logic is impeccable except that people are not logical, as a rule.

            But no, people would not have to be in favor of all of his policies to vote against him because of race. Because for most people who voted against him because of race, I would think, it would be only part of the reason. Maybe not even one they admitted to their friends, or even themselves. Speculation on my part and unquantifiable, yes, but as a working class white Southerner who talks to people and is at least something of a judge of character, I have my opinions. Your mileage may vary.

          • jim_m

            Well, we agree. Because if people were logical there would not be lefties.

            I did not claim that they would have to support all his policies just that they would have to support them more than they did Romney’s and that race tipped them the other way. So, once more, by definition such people are not conservatives.

            And I happen to know a number of people who voted for obama simply because he is black and they wanted to see a black man in the oval office even though they did not like his platform (vs McCain in those cases).

          • Brucehenry

            Or did they simply think that McCain (and Palin!) were simply not the right choice and that Obama’s being black was kind of a cool “bonus”?

            I’m pretty sure quite a few folks just didn’t like McCain and were scared of putting into power a fool who would nominate Sarah Freaking Palin to high office, so they voted for Obama simply because he was the only other choice.

          • jim_m

            No. They said specifically that they were excited about electing a black president ad that his politics really didn’t enter into it.

            I think you will find that the evidence for racism getting him elected far outweighs the evidence of people voting against him.

          • Brucehenry

            Fine if you say so but that doesn’t make my original point incorrect. I was right as rain that Becker was PRETENDING that Obama’s comments were in response to a question about poll numbers. They weren’t.

          • jim_m

            Nope. They were an outright appeal to racism.

        • jim_m

          OK. SO obama was not responding to why his numbers have slipped, he was just throwing out a gratuitous reference to racism and how people hate him because he is black. That’s worse.

          The fact that your side can barely finish a sentence without crying racism is proof enough that the claims are all bogus. So what if there might have been someone, somewhere that voted against obama because he is black. You got data to back it up Where are the polls showing us how people are racist? And not just bogus polls showing that they disagree, which is what you would normally toss out. Let’s see a direct poll where people are asked if they voted against him because he is black.

          He throws out this unsubstantiated accusation because he wants to marginalize and stigmatize his opposition. You are no different.

          • Brucehenry

            OK Jim. I guess you think that NO ONE voted against Obama simply because he’s black, but LOTS OF FOLKS voted for him because of it. If you sincerely believe that, that’s fine, but I don’t think you do.

            The point is that the basis of Becker’s article is that Obama is blaming racism for the recent drop in his poll numbers, but the quote Becker uses to illustrate that ummm DOESN’T.

          • jim_m

            I didn’t say that. I simply said that you have no data that supports it. I think that intuitively, we all think that there are likely some people who cast their votes that way. I believe that the blacks and lefty whites that voted for him simply because he is black outnumber the no votes by tens of millions of votes.

            The point is that the left brings this up although there is no proof that there is a meaningful number of votes, yet the elephant in the room is the tens of millions of people who voted for him in an equally racist manner.

          • Brucehenry

            I’ll agree with most of that, Jim. Maybe even the tens of millions thingie.

            I don’t understand why you get so upset when I point out that Becker is wrong on the facts. He is.

            The reporter and Obama were having a conversation and Obama made a comment that we all “intuitively” know is likely true. It wasn’t an answer to the question “Why are your poll numbers falling?” but in this article Becker PRETENDS, either stupidly or dishonestly, that it was. That was why I originally commented.

  • GarandFan

    “There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black President,”

    Yeah, but evidently not enough to keep you from being elected TWICE.

    “Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some
    white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt
    precisely because I’m a black President.”

    Yeah. You could shit on the US Constitution at high noon on the National Mall, and every one of them would give you a standing ovation.

    You’ll note that King Barack didn’t say how many voted for him because they thought he’d be a COMPETENT president.

    • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

      I’ll be honest – I thought he’d do a hell of a lot better. Yeah, his resume’ was thin as single-ply discount toilet paper, but there had to be SOMETHING there, or he wouldn’t get the nod from the Party.

      Okay, I was wrong about that. He’s done a lot worse that I ever expected he would.

      We might make it through the next three years, if he doesn’t have a fucking nervous breakdown because ‘everyone hates me because I’m black!!!!’ and he declares himself King Napoleon Obama the First for the ‘good of the country’.