Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, February 21, 2013

As President Obama faces a tough showdown with congressional Republicans over the looming sequestration cuts, a new poll shows the commander-in-chief with his highest approval rating in over three years. A Bloomberg National poll released Wednesday found that 55 percent of Americans approve of Obama's performance, his highest rating in the poll since September 2009. The poll also found that 49 percent of respondents believe that the president's proposals to increase government spending in key areas are more likely to spur job creation than GOP-backed efforts to cut both spending and taxes.

Advertisement

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

Corky

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

Additionally, the Bloomberg poll found Republican popularity at a record low. Just 35 percent of respondents said they have a favorable view of the GOP, marking the lowest ratings for the party since the poll began three years ago. The Republican rating also marked a six point drop over the last six months.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

We are heading to third world status.

Keep sending good paying jobs to foreign countries through "free trade" agreements and we will get there.

#1 | Posted by 726 at 2013-02-21 12:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, they are. $16 trillion debt and unfunded mandates will get their attention in time.

Everyone who is not in denial has figured out exactly how we got here with 2 unfunded wars, an unfunded Medicare prescription drug company handout and the budget destroying Bush Tax cuts.

Which is exactly why that other guy (what was his name?) did not have a snowballs chance in hell.

#2 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-21 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Back in September 2009, no doubt a majority of Americans probably believed that if this full retard spent $5 trillion in deficit money over the next four years, the economy would be doing better than it is.
But it isn't."

Yes it is.

#3 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-02-21 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Back in September 2009, no doubt a majority of Americans probably believed that if this full retard spent $5 trillion in deficit money over the next four years, the economy would be doing better than it is.
But it isn't."

Yes it is.
#37 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

This response makes no sense. Are you suggesting the economy is doing better than it is?

#4 | Posted by TXLIBERTARIAN at 2013-02-21 02:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Are you suggesting the economy is doing better than it is?

#38 | Posted by TXLIBERTARIAN

It is certainly doing better than anyone associated with the Party of NO! would like to admit.

#5 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-21 02:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

The economy still sucks. Gas prices are going through the roof. THAT is the next big thing. When gas costs too much, there will be a revolt and a pull back. You can only get used to higher prices at a price point. There are people out there only making $200 a week. They arent going to put all of it into a gas tank. Once spending pulls back, we will see Obama for what he really is on something he cant blame on someone else.

#6 | Posted by boaz at 2013-02-21 03:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ah, Boaz, my Alabama Jamma, Petrol is an international commodity. Obama has nothing to do with oil prices.

If the Neocon wet dream of war with Iran is realized, though, what do you suppose will happen to oil prices?

Who do you think will benefit?

#7 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-02-21 03:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Once gas prices get to high, people will drive less, and start buying more fuel efficient vehicles. That in turn will slow demand for oil and the price will once again drop until it reaches a point when people start to drive more again. Haven't we seen this before.

#8 | Posted by schmanch at 2013-02-21 03:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

If the Neocon wet dream of war with Iran is realized
#41 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

Please by all means point us to that statement and or quote. Somebody needs to go the the wood shed is is some pol or you for making up stuff?

#9 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-21 03:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

The economy still sucks. Gas prices are going through the roof.

Definitely room for impovement.

How are all those jobs bills coming along in Congress?

How is that aggressive energy policy reform proposal that Obama put forward coming along in Congress?

www.whitehouse.gov

What's that you say? They are too busy avoiding dealing with the sequestration and deficit to actually do anything about the economy and energy?

Most Do Nothing Congress ever. Since the last Congress that is.

#10 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-21 03:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" - The J McCain (R)Boys Band

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-21 03:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Gas prices are going through the roof."

Which is funny 'cause they dropped very low where I am about two months ago, and they're only creeping back up--nowhere near any gas-price roof I've ever seen. YMMV, but you know, you said it as if true everywhere.

"Please by all means point us to that statement and or quote. "

No quote, but the neocon movement has been about American hegemony for as long as it has existed. And war with Iran would certainly fill that bill. Hegemony generally involves war...

#12 | Posted by pragmatist at 2013-02-21 03:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Paneocon,
Very odd that you are totally unaware of this. This took all of 3 seconds to find.

By all means, go to the woodshead and do what you will.

"The anti-Hagel campaign gained steam last week after Bloomberg News reported that "Hagel has emerged as the leading candidate to become President Barack Obama's next secretary of defense." Neocon leader and Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol -- a key figure in getting the United States into war with Iraq -- joined in on Friday, first simply publishing anti-Hagel talking points Republicans have been circulating on Capitol Hill and then with a follow up piece of his own in which he criticizes Hagel for being cautious about the United States going to war with Iran:
Anti-Israel propagandists are thrilled. Stephen Walt, junior partner of the better-known Israel-hater John Mearsheimer, writes that if President Obama nominates Hagel, it will be "a smart move." … Furthermore, Walt writes approvingly, Hagel is "generally thought to be skeptical about the use of military force against Iran."
Hagel certainly does have anti-Israel, pro-appeasement-of-Iran bona fides. While still a senator, Hagel said that "a military strike against Iran, a military option, is not a viable, feasible, responsible option."
Got that? Hagel is an Iran appeaser because he thinks that war with Iran might not be the best way to prevent the Islamic Republic from obtaining nuclear weapons. We've all seen this movie many times before: Disagree with the neocons on Israel and/or Iran policy? Well then you're an anti-Semite and an Iran apologist (both smears the Weekly Standard launched at Hagel last week).
So just what has Hagel said about Iran? He's called for direct talks with the Islamic Republic, warned of the consequences of war and urged "caution, patience, and a focus on multilateral diplomacy."

#13 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-02-21 04:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

#46 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST

I really don't think it is reasonable to accuse anyone of wanting a war, much less a war with a potential nuclear power. No one is that stupid.

#14 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-21 04:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

#47 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

The only thing that proves is that Hagel is a tool for wanting to taking the military option off the table. You guys must suck at poker, but I rather have you playing cards than negotiating with Iran over nuclear weapons.

#15 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-21 04:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

You are being obstinate Paneocon.

You asked that I source my statement and I did.

You know it is true as well as anybody.

"Bill Kristol -- a key figure in getting the United States into war with Iraq -- joined in on Friday, first simply publishing anti-Hagel talking points Republicans have been circulating on Capitol Hill and then with a follow up piece of his own in which he criticizes Hagel for being cautious about the United States going to war with Iran"

You asked for a source. I gave it to you. If you wanna pretend it aint so, fine. Just done stick yer bony fingers into your hairy little ears and shout "La la la la la" when your request is answered.

#16 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-02-21 05:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just done stick yer bony fingers into your hairy little ears and shout "La la la la la" when your request is answered.

#50 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour

Whiskey... you are going to need something a little more powerful than "facts" to pierce the Paleocon Reality Distortion Field.

#17 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-21 05:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah, I dunno why I try Donner.

#18 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-02-21 06:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah, I dunno why I try Donner.
#52 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

You don't know why you try to put lipstick on a pig? It's a legitimate question which only you have the answer to.

#19 | Posted by TXLIBERTARIAN at 2013-02-21 07:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

You don't know why you try to put lipstick on a pig? It's a legitimate question which only you have the answer to.

#53 | Posted by TXLIBERTARIAN

I don't know why he tries to put lipstick on that pig either. And I think it is against the moderation policy to call Paleocon a pig.

#20 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-21 08:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I'd be willing to wager at least as many people voted against Obama for his black skin"

I agree, Snoof, as far as rank bigots go. But in this case we saw too many people voting to be "part of the historic moment" of the first African-American president rather than looking at what this economic maniac was proposing.
You'll see. The bills come due soon enough.

#21 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-21 08:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

#50 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

I read that three time and I don't see where anyone said they want war with anyone. If that statement constitutes proof then Bush's weapons of mass destruction should have been no problem for you

#22 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-21 09:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

#51 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY
#52 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

Tweedledee and Tweedledum could find the truth with both hands. Folks this is the future of the modern Democrat party? I weep for my country.

#23 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-21 09:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Tweedledee and Tweedledum could find the truth with both hands.

Tweedledee and Tweedledum had four hands amongst them and more brains and a better grasp of reality than you apparently.

And just FYI..I am not the future of the Democratic Party I am the present. My kids are the future.

And YOU are gonna just love working for them.

#24 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-21 09:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hell, I would even have a 55% approval rating against this GOP.

#26 | Posted by drewinnj at 2013-02-22 08:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

New title

"Obama Approval at a 3-year high, America's intelligence at an all-time low"

No surprise though, we have no journalists, they went on vacation when the Messiah was elected. Long live the welfare state.

#27 | Posted by danv at 2013-02-22 09:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

This isn't rocket science. GOP blows big time. Keep whining, that will help, i'm sure.

#28 | Posted by drewinnj at 2013-02-22 09:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ya well Hitler was popular too.. right before he signed the Nazi Weapon Law of 1938 and decided to exterminate all the Jewish people.

#29 | Posted by SamSpade at 2013-02-22 09:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ok, comparing Obama to Hitler now? You serious? Or just stupid. Or both?

#30 | Posted by drewinnj at 2013-02-22 10:38 AM | Reply | Flag:


This isn't rocket science. GOP blows big time. Keep whining, that will help, i'm sure.

#62 | Posted by drewinnj

It's almost comical isn't it? It used to be the lefties whining and complaining about the president's policies and now, the righties are at it. Just more bread and circus to keep the masses occupied.

#31 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-22 10:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

GOP running out of Old White Men

#32 | Posted by drewinnj at 2013-02-22 11:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's not just the GOP. The US as a whole is running out of OWM. Soon to be the new minority.

#33 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-22 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Ya well Hitler was popular too.. right before he signed the Nazi Weapon Law of 1938 and decided to exterminate all the Jewish people."

And you're expecting Obama to do something like that? Paranoid much?

#34 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-22 11:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Paneocon, google "neocons seek war with Iran".

You are familiar with Google, yes?

#35 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-02-22 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

#67...Ain't life a bitch

#36 | Posted by drewinnj at 2013-02-22 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

#70

Yes it is, but they can look forward to all the freebies they will get if they play the race card.

#37 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-22 12:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who is "they"? Who is playing the race card now? "They" will be Americans like you and me. And "they" ain't showing too much love to GOP.

#38 | Posted by drewinnj at 2013-02-22 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

they = old white men. I was just projecting out to it's logical end based on history. I'm sure their will be lobbying groups complaining about all those rich black, hispanic or asian guys.

#39 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-22 01:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why isn't the media jumping all over the high fuel prices, and the housing/oil/stock bubble (2008 part 2)? The crash WILL come, you know.

And yes, I jumped all over Bush in 2006-2008 for the same thing, so let me say it:
Obama's fault!

#40 | Posted by e1g1 at 2013-02-22 01:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

"And you're expecting Obama to do something like that? Paranoid much?

#68 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-22 11:43 AM | Reply | Flag"

Normally, I would agree, but when homeland security buys 100's of millions of rounds of ammunition and fully automatic rifles, shouldn't a free people question why?

#41 | Posted by danv at 2013-02-22 04:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

"And you're expecting Obama to do something like that? Paranoid much?

#68 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-22 11:43 AM | Reply | Flag"

Normally, I would agree, but when homeland security buys 100's of millions of rounds of ammunition and fully automatic rifles, shouldn't a free people question why?

#42 | Posted by danv at 2013-02-22 04:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

No.. no comparison at all. I find it somewhat odd that anyone whom would articulate their ideals upon the people with false pretenses - somewhat appalling. Well let me word that another way.. silver tongue people whom blatantly mislead the public by fear mongering and fabricating doom and gloom should not be in charge of any taxpayer funded position.

#43 | Posted by SamSpade at 2013-02-22 04:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

All time high equals all time high for people on food stamps and disability

#44 | Posted by Maverick at 2013-02-22 04:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Lord Jesus,
Please expedite the end of the Republican Party so that America can replace it with a party better able to communicate with the people and can play the political game on the same field as the socialists who have been allowed to successfully purchased a majority using the promise of a never ending chest filled with gold for every Dem voter.
AMEN.

#45 | Posted by libertarian_gi at 2013-02-22 07:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Legitimate lesser evil arguments for reelecting Barack Obama are "so last year." Should we be grateful too that he won? Very likely. But that is small consolation for the fact that we must now look "forward" to four more years of him. What is urgent now is to understand how the results of that election burden us.

Those burdens fall into two distinct categories: those that follow from Obama's ineffectualness, and those that follow from his being on the wrong side of the main issues of our time. For the former category, it is unfortunate that Obama is not more effective than he is; for the others, it is fortunate indeed.

It is generally accepted that when Obama tries, as he did in this year's State of the Union address or when he is out campaigning, he can be a pretty good salesman, not in all demographic sectors, but in enough.

It is equally clear that when it comes to leadership, he is not much good at all. His sales pitch can draw majorities to his side, especially when public opinion is already more or less on board; but the man can't get anything done.

Tea Partiers and GOP establishment types know it too; they set their course by it. The right has more than its fair share of morons and lunatics. But so what? On Obama's character, they are more right than not.

Unless you assume Obama is lying about what he wants to do. In that case he is actually effective.

#46 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-22 10:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The economy still sucks. Gas prices are going through the roof. "

I continually am a flabbergasted at associations like this. Doesn't everyone understand that when the economy tanks that gas prices go down? And when business and consumption get hot that gas prices go up? It's basic supply and demand coupled with the strong association of energy costs with the strength of the global economy. When everyone has a job, they are buying a lot more gas. I sure see in in our metropolitan area. Really, we should be hoping for higher gas prices as a harbinger of better times.

#47 | Posted by mad_as_hell at 2013-02-22 10:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

"As President Obama faces a tough showdown with congressional Republicans over the looming sequestration cuts..."

The cuts Obama agreed to, remember?
"I voted for the cuts before I voted against the cuts?"

#48 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-22 10:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

But in this case we saw too many people voting to be "part of the historic moment" of the first African-American president rather than looking at what this economic maniac was proposing.

How many people is "too many"? My brother was convinced Obama would never be reelected precisely because of the reason you state above. It's obvious both you and he overestimated the relevance of that factor, while completely overlooking the lack of substance and credibility of the only (realistically electable) alternative to Obama in '08 and '12.

I mean seriously, after the worst financial crisis in a century, John McCain didn't even try to project an aura of stability and responsibility, bragging about his lack of understanding how the economy works and saying he thinks zero interest rates are a good idea, displaying extremely poor judgement with his VP pick... and then then the losing party spent the next four years blatantly obstructing the recovery, insinuated the voters are stupid, displaying the same Michael-Moorish mentality the Democrats did in Bush's first term, and then nominated John Kerry v2.0... if you really can't see how these things affected most people's voting decision more than the man's skin color, then it says a lot about your own biases and inability to see the situation as it really is.

#49 | Posted by sentinel at 2013-02-23 06:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama, Holder Called Out for Not Enforcing Current Gun Laws

#50 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2013-02-23 07:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2013 World Readable

 

Advertisement