Well this seems mildly inappropriate for a presidential campaign website.
It is an e-card with a woman’s image and an attached caption which reads, “Vote like your lady parts depend on it.”
And a comment which accompanies the image states, “because they kinda do.”
You know, because the Republican war on women extends to banishing and/or controlling your lady parts.
Here is the description of the campaign site:
This is the Obama 2012 campaign’s official home on Tumblr. Have a story, photo, or video you’d like to share here? Go ahead and submit it today.
If this were on Romney’s campaign website, it’d be plastered all over the media. But not so for the Obama campaign, where you will hear nary a peep from mainstream journalists.
The childish attempt at humor would seem to be beneath the dignity of the President, but then we’ve learned that little is actually beneath the moral character of this administration.
UPDATE: The campaign has scrubbed the image from their website.
Wait, what? Mainstream journalists are biased?
Tuesday’s Starting Point began with a bang (and a whimper, on our end) as host Soledad O’Brien and Romney surrogate John Sununu entered into a heated argument over Medicare.
“I understand that this is a Republican talking point because I’ve heard it repeated over and over again,” said O’Brien after Sununu insisted the Romney and Ryan plans were different. “And these numbers have been debunked, as you know, by the Congressional Budget Office.”
“No they haven’t,” said Sununu.
“Yes, they have,” answered O’Brien.
It got worse, or better, depending on your perspective…
“Soledad, stop this!” said Sununu. “All you’re doing is mimicking the stuff that comes out of the White House and gets repeated on the Democratic blog boards out there….”
“I’m telling you what FactCheck.com tells you,” she insisted. “I’m telling you what the CBO tells you. I’m telling you what CNN’s independent analysis does.”
“Put an Obama bumper sticker on your forehead when you do this,” Sununu shot back.
Beyond fantastic! Watch for yourself…
It was just last month that Obama Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter claimed that Mitt Romney is either a liar or a felon, insisting that he misrepresented his time spent at Bain Capital. Upon hearing the accusations, the Romney campaign insisted that the President issue an apology for the remarks.
Instead, the campaign has doubled down on the outrageous accusation, running an ad that attacks Romney for not releasing more tax returns, at one point flashing the words “felons” and “tax records” on the screen.
The Weekly Standard reports:
The latest web ad from Barack Obama’s campaign goes after Mitt Romney for not releasing more tax returns than he already has. The ad, titled “Mitt Romney’s Tax Returns: When Will He Come Clean?,” at one point flashes two words onscreen, “FELONS” and “TAX RECORDS.”
The words, “FELONS” and “TAX RECORDS,” are displayed onscreen for at least six seconds, so the Obama campaign wants to make sure its viewers see the words.
Given the title of the ad–and the subject–the ad wants viewers to consider that Mitt Romney might not be releasing more tax returns because, the Obama campaign is suggesting, he might be a felon.
Here’s the video…
President Obama, in a speech regarding the economy and jobs in Jacksonville, Florida today, claimed he spends “every waking hour thinking about you”.
Here is the full quote (video below):
“And most of all, I would wake up every single day, every single day and spend every waking hour thinking about you. Fighting as hard as I knew how for you.”
The problem is that this doesn’t match up with a recent report indicating that he hasn’t spent a single hour – let alone every waking hour – to meet with his own jobs council in over six months. The Wall Street Journal reported:
“President Barack Obama is at odds with some of his handpicked outside advisers on hot-button election topics such as regulations and corporate taxes. Many of the recommendations at issue stem from the president’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, a group of business and labor leaders with whom Mr. Obama hasn’t met in six months.”
Another report from the National Journal shows that the President has had time to attend 106 political fundraisers during that same six month period.
And then there’s a report from Breitbart today showing that Obama has spent more time golfing (over 100 rounds) than he has spent focusing on the economy.
An eye-opening new report by the Government Accountability Institute reveals that President Barack Obama averages just eight minutes more a week on economic meetings than the average dog owner spends walking their dog.
When it was recently reported that Mr. Obama had played his 100th round of golf, the president said that playing golf was “the only time that for six hours, I’m outside.” Therefore, by his own estimate, the president has spent 600 hours playing golf, as compared to just 412 hours in economic meetings of any kind throughout his presidency…
… just how little time Mr. Obama has spent working on the economy can be seen in the data contained in the Government Accountability Institute’s analysis:
- Throughout the first 1,257 days of his presidency, Mr. Obama has spent just 412 hours in economic meetings or briefings of any kind
- In 2012, so far Obama has spent just 24 total hours in economic meetings of any kind
- Assuming a six day, 10-hour workweek, Obama has spent less than 4 percent of his total time in economic meetings or briefings of any kind
- There were 773 days (72 percent), excluding Sundays, in which he had no economic meetings
- Mr. Obama has spent an average of 138 minutes a week in economic meetings. According to a study published in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, new dog owners spent an average of 130 minutes a week walking their dogs
The study, which was based upon the president’s official schedule, practically bent over backwards to include anything even remotely akin to an economic meeting.
And here is the video of Obama’s outrageous claim…
“I absolutely reject” the notion that the individual mandate is a tax.
“… for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.”
“That’s not a tax increase…”
“… you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase.”
And now, the latest from Mister Smith Media…
Support for President Obama among African-American voters is plummeting in North Carolina, likely a result of his ‘evolution’ from opposing gay marriage, to becoming the nation’s first gay President.
North Carolina, considered a crucial enough swing state for the Democrat party to hold their convention there, is leaning Romney right now, 48 to 46 percent according to a new poll.
But the stunning information coming out of this poll is that Obama only leads the African-American vote by a clip of 76 to 20 percent. Still a huge difference sure, but in 2008 Obama beat McCain for the African-American vote by a 95 to 5 percent margin. Just last month, Obama led 87 to 11 percent, so clearly blacks are abandoning Obama like the sinking Titanic his campaign has become.
To add to the misery expressed in this poll, it is not a conservative think tank poll, nor even a supposedly objective media poll – it is from the Democrat leaning Public Policy Polling.
From Business Insider:
President Barack Obama is rapidly losing support among African-American voters in North Carolina, a new poll out today from the Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling shows.
The poll finds that Mitt Romney would get 20 percent of the African-American vote if the election were held today, compared with 76 percent for Obama. Overall, Romney has a 48 percent to 46 percent lead on Obama in the crucial swing state.
… All of Obama’s numbers with African-Americans are sliding. His approval rating is down from 86 percent to 77 percent. Romney’s favorability, meanwhile, has doubled from 9 percent to 18 percent.
… (Jim) Williams (polling analyst) added the obvious: If the results keep turning up like this, it would be “very bad news for him.”
Bad news for Obama = Good news for America.
… Of Obama’s Budget.
Sure that’s a bit of a shocking headline, but we learned over-the-top bombastic statements from the Democrats themselves – specifically, DNC Chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
DWS recently accused the Republicans of having “fully embraced extremism”. So when Democrats last month reached across the aisle with their Republican counterparts to defeat President Obama’s budget by a vote of 414-0, it stands to reason that they were also ‘fully embracing extremism’.
Extremists as you know, have a propensity for violence, a willingness to kill. In this case, it just happened to be the Obama budget proposal that fell victim to an attack by House member extremism.
So why provide this handy reminder for the radical left?
Because Debbie Wasserman Schultz seems to have already forgotten this case of budgetary violence in her extremist past.
Maggie Thurber points out that a little noticed aspect of an interview with Fox News Bret Baier, includes DWS placing blame for the strangling of Obama’s budget solely on the lap of Republicans. Trying to pawn that vote off on Republicans appears to be blowing up in her face however.
As Thurber points out, Democrat extremists also took part in the murder…
Baier, noting that Democrats have gone out of their way to criticize the budget presented by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), said there was no Democrat budget on the table.
Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) objected stating that Pres. Barack Obama had submitted a budget. But Baier continued saying the President’s budget wasn’t being voted on.
“That’s right, because House Republicans voted it down,” she said.
The vote on Obama’s most recent budget was 414-0.
It wasn’t just House Republicans who voted it down – not a single Democrat voted for it, including Wasserman Schultz herself!
A statement addressing the budget vote from the Karen Harrington for Congress website adds:
Interestingly enough, and somewhat shocking, Obama’s Cheerleader-in-Chief, DNC Chair/Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was present for the vote, and voted a resounding ‘Nay’ to the measure.
Yes, you read correctly, Debbie voted against her boss’ budget.
Thurber asks, “Hypocrisy, lies,distortions …how does she live with herself?“
It’s easy… when you’re extreme.
I’d like to know what parallel universe you have to be in for this to make sens.
Via Washington Examiner:
The increase in number may be a trend since 2000, but the labor force participation rate rose steadily between 1984 and 2000. While it did drop slightly between 2000 and 2007, an extreme drop off occurred beginning in 2008 – when Obama took the reigns on the economy. Here is a graph from Zerohedge:
And of course, we discussed it here last week. The 1.2 million worker drop off in one month was far and away a record number.
The President continues his record-setting ways, and his Press Secretary spins it as a positive.
Here’s a demonstration of the importance of reading the fine print when there is any new policy presented by this administration. The Shark Tank is reporting on a Marine who claims his combat pay has been eliminated despite being in a war zone, unless he or she is actively being shot at or in imminent danger.
President Obama’s latest policy outrage makes no attempt to hide his contempt for our military, as he is ordering that our troops serving overseas in war zones overseas are not to receive combat pay unless they are being shot at, or at risk of being injured by hostile aggression. A Marine who lives in Florida has just posted a note on Facebook which stated that he received a letter from his MyPay account that he would only be receiving his Hazard pay (Imminent Danger Pay) if he is actually in a hostile area and at risk of being shot at.
Here is the Marine’s statement (language):
So I just got a letter from MyPay (the way we get paid in the military), saying that I will only (receive) Combat Pay while deployed for the days that I take fire or am in a hostile area. Now, as an Infantry Marine, I’m constantly in a combat zone…it may not always be popping off, but for them to take that away from us is bullshit. Now, the aviation tech who sits on Camp Leatherneck, sure, I can see him not getting Combat Pay, but to take it away from the grunts, the ground pounders, the front line of defense…come on, Uncle Sam. You let the Liberals win a big one here… Marine from Florida
This particular Marine is apparently stationed in Afghanistan.
Essentially, our service men and women can be in a combat zone for a month (just an example), and if they are shot at on three of those days, they will only receive three days worth of combat pay.
Please read more at The Shark Tank…
Obama reportedly set to blame the results of the study on Bush.
Via the Washington Examiner:
Most of the soaring $1 trillion federal deficit is the blame of President Obama’s spending and political deals according to a pro-Obama think tank that pegged former President George W. Bush’s responsibility at just 35 percent.
While opening its analysis by blaming Bush and showing pictures of Senate GOP leaders, the Center for American Progress said that the other 65 percent of the deficit surge came on Obama’s watch, a combination of high spending, extension of the Bush tax cuts and additional defense spending.
“The analysis reveals that events that occurred before January 2009, including the onset of the Great Recession and increased spending—especially on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq—attributed to 35 percent of the swing from surplus to deficit,” said the center founded by long-time Obama advisor John Podesta.
“The remainder of the deterioration did happen after 2009…”
File that under ‘duh’.
To be sure, Bush is not without blame for abandoning free-market principals, but Obama’s European-style socialism has made the economy infinitely worse.