Overall this was a very controlled game and circus, but one where Obama, I think, came out ahead.

It was filled with talking points and more than a few inaccurate facts (with no forum to dispute them of course).

Obama struck the wrong tone with me by taking the attitude early on that  Democrats were trying to help, and the Republican’s disagreement was simply unthinkable.  That is not how you generate respect for disagreement.

One thing I will say at the beginning of this is that Obama was very comfortable in the environment, very prepared for the questions, and handled his answers well.  No blindsides, or if they were, he handled them well.  He is quick on his feet, he had facts and examples at hand, and he is personable, even when irritated.

He also lost me on some issue, like his deflections on some criticisms.

Will this spur bipartisanship?  To his credit he did call out both sides for this, but his focus was on the Republicans more than not for being disingenuous.  He is correct to a degree, the Republicans do take a confrontational knee jerk stance.  But to even insinuate that it is not politics as usual for both sides is purely misleading.   He himself has stooped to this as well.

I had hoped that the lesson of Brown being elected would do some good.  Indeed, Obama seemed to suggest that today in interviews.  He correctly noted that people are angry.  The problem is, he is not getting what they are angry at.

I got this today and it seems to suggest they learned the wrong lesson.

Yesterday’s disappointing election results show deep discontent with the pace of change. I know the OFA community and the President share that frustration.

We also saw what we knew to be true all along: Any change worth making is hard and will be fought at every turn. While it doesn’t take away the sting of this loss, there is no road to real change without setbacks along the way.

We could have simply sought to do things that were easy, that wouldn’t stir up controversy. But changes that aren’t controversial rarely solve the problem.

Our country continues to face the same fundamental challenges it faced yesterday. Our health care system still needs reform. Wall Street still needs to be held accountable. We still need to create good jobs. And we still need to continue building a clean energy economy.

I have been considering this for a few days now and I believe that the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama is in a sense more revealing than it is disturbing.

The obvious revelation, that the award has nothing to do with actual *peace* is not what I mean.  That was made long ago when it was awarded to Yassir Arafat and Le Duc Tho, and many others over its history.  So the fact that Obama has not contributed an iota to actual peace is not the point.

It is not that the award is often given for political grandstanding, as the award to the IAEA, the UN Peacpekeepers, the UN itself or even Al Gore and the lying IPCC shows.  Of course it is. o

It was not even that Obama is such a cult of personality figure that eiven his lack of accomplishment is not enough to knock him off that pedestal.nt

The real revelation to me is what this shows about liberalism and one of the several philosophies at its core:  Intentions are more important than actions and should likewise be rewarded more than accomplishments.

In the speech to congress last night, Obama said this:

There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

This prompted Rep Joe Wilson (R, SC) to vocally call him a liar.

So….who lied?

Answer:  Neither and Both.

The problem lies in the nuance of the statements.

The reforms do NOT apply to illegals, but they also do not include any provision to actually check to see if someone is illegal, so they are shadow rules at best. 

Factcheck.org sums it up:

The president is correct: The House bill contains a section (Sec. 246) titled “NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS,” which states: “Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

If the prepared remarks are an accurate indication, and I have no reason to believe they are not, then all the fuss has been wasted time.

As Hot Air notes, had he just released this instead of that study guide that even the White House admits was poorly set up, then we would not be here:

In fact, had the White House skipped the study guide and simply released the speech from the beginning, it seems unlikely that this would have created much controversy at all.

…

I think the White House and Obama fouled this up from the beginning, making it look much more political than necessary, and gave their critics a boatload of ammunition with which to attack them. The speech, included in its entirety below, turned out to be entirely innocuous. But by asking teachers to impress upon children the need to “help President Obama,” they made it look blatantly political. They seem to have forgotten that they’re the public servants, and that the people do not live to serve political masters. As Frank Wilson puts it in another context, Americans see themselves as citizens, not subjects, with the President only of a higher rank for the temporary period of time that we put him there. This has been incompetently handled from beginning to end, including the highly embarrassing scheduling that inadvertently excluded millions of students from the speech.

At Obama’s town hall meeting the there are so many plants now they should be called greenhouse meetings.

Here is the story:

Video: Astroturfing at Obama’s NH “town hall”

Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit has the video evidence of the strategy used by Barack Obama to get a roomful of complacent supporters at his Portsmouth, New Hamsphire “town hall” yesterday. The group he launched, Organizing for America, had supporters bused into the event — and they went directly to the head of the line to get into the forum. It’s the quickest and most effective way to ensure that the President doesn’t have to answer any tougher questions than those about the “mean signs” of his opponents:

Andrew Malcolm says this shows a desperation in the administration, and that even with the White House organization, Obama’s losing on the ground:

While Obama’s poll popularity has slipped somewhat, the popularity of his keystone programs has slid dramatically. Now, we fully understand why the president set that early August deadline for a completed bill. His internal polls predicted the kind of coalescing opposition we’ve seen recently in congressional town halls around the country.

The title seems glib but sadly it is true.  According to some of the Democrats, having the audacity, the sheer gall to protest about Health Care means you are a political terrorist and are working out of the Nazi playbook:

Taking a page right out of Nancy Pelosi’s playbook of stating that town hall meeting protestors are sporting swastikas thus implying that they are Nazis, low rated radio host Bill Press is now accusing them of using Nazi tactics in a sanity-challenged column. This follows on the heels of Press’ attack on the protestors on Fox News as reported earlier this week by Seton Motley here in NewsBusters. Here is Press going completely over the edge on the subject of the protestors in his column:

…Taking a page right out of a Nazi playbook, organizers bus in professional protestors and arm them with instructions on how to take over meetings, shut down discussion, shout over any pro-health care reform speakers, and then post video of the resulting chaos on YouTube. It’s mob rule, pure and simple.

Yes, Andrew, who has been blogging in the tank for Obama for a while has suddenly joined the ranks of the Birthers¹, well sort of. 

He is essentially taking the same approach to the situation that I am.  That the real certificate is likely fully supportive of BHO, but the administrations refusal to provide it’s promised transparency is confusing.

Hat Tip Hot Air and Just One Minute:

The whole birth certificate issue gets weirder still:

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago….”

But why are we supposed to rely on the testimony of Dr Fukino, whom I believe entirely. It is not my job as a journalist or yours as a citizen to take public officials on trust. They are not to be trusted, whoever they are. It is our job to demand all the evidence we want or need. I know the electronic record is legit. I have no doubt that Obama has every constitutional right to be president. I think the Birthers are nuts. But there is no reason on earth that the original cannot be retrieved and shown. Jon Klein and CNN were wrong, and I retract my apology of yesterday.

Saw this at Sister Toldjah.  It really doesn’t say much that has not been said before, but it is a good summary.

Democrats wallow in a ‘culture of corruption’

….

But you know what? We ain’t seen nothing yet. For starters, the real corruption isn’t what the media are ignoring or downplaying as isolated incidents. It’s what the media are hailing as bold, inspirational leadership. The White House, as a matter of policy, is rewriting legal contracts, picking winners (mostly labor unions and mortgage defaulters) and singling out losers (evil “speculators”) while much of the media continue to ponder whether Obama is better than FDR.

If a Republican administration, staffed with cronies from Goldman Sachs and Citibank, was cutting special deals for its political allies, I suspect we’d be hearing fewer FDR analogies and more nouns ending with the suffix “gate.”

Just food for thought.

Newsbusters had more to say last December.

Essay: What About the Democrats’ ‘Culture of Corruption?’

…

After proposing the biggest budget in history leading to the worst deficit in history and decades of crushing debt, Obama final demanded some cuts:  17 Billion worth.

The only problem is the budget is 3.5 Trillion, making his cuts less a half of one percent.

Gee. I am overwhelmed….

And the result will be:

Obama budget cuts have little deficit impact

U.S. President Barack Obama’s budget suggests $17 billion in spending cuts for fiscal year 2010, but Congress already has rejected some of those proposals and the savings do little to dent a projected $1.17 trillion deficit.

Obama on Thursday released details of the spending cuts, most of which were announced during or after the initial roll-out of his $3.5 trillion budget in February. Fiscal year 2010 begins on October 1.

Here is a look at what some of the cuts mean for deficit reduction and the chances they have of getting approval from lawmakers:

* Obama’s budget calls for controversial healthcare reforms and legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming, but a huge fight is already underway in Congress over both initiatives.