More than two months after President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress urging them to pass his new stimulus bill, polls show that Americans’ approval of his handling of the economy has dropped even further. After two months of bus tours, rallies, and campaign-style events, Americans see the same failed economic policies from the Obama White House that have made things worse.
Last week, a CBS News poll found “President Obama’s ratings on the most important issue for his re-election — the economy — have posted the weakest showing of his presidency, according to a poll released Friday by CBS News. About 60 percent of voters said they disapprove of Mr. Obama’s handling of the economy, the highest on record. Just 34 percent approve of the job he is doing on the matter.”
Today, Gallup writes, “Economic issues overshadow all others as Americans’ primary concerns. Thirty-six percent say unemployment or jobs and 30% say the economy in general is the most important problem facing the United States.” In addition, Gallup notes, “The ongoing concern about the economy helps explain the high level of dissatisfaction with current conditions in the United States. Now, 12% of Americans are satisfied and 86% dissatisfied with the way things are going in the U.S. . . . In a perhaps ominous sign for Barack Obama as he seeks re-election next year, today’s 12% satisfaction rating is no better than when he took office in January 2009.”
And Politico reports that a new Politico/George Washington University Battleground Poll finds, “Overwhelmingly, voters continue to say Obama is performing poorly on the issue they care about most. About three-fifths of those polled identified the economy, jobs or spending as the single most important issue. Nationally, only 35 percent approved of how Obama is doing on the economy — down 3 points since September — compared with 62 percent who disapproved; 40 percent approved of his approach to jobs and just 33 percent approved of his handling of the budget, including spending and deficits.”
Clearly, the American people are not impressed with bus tours and speeches featuring more of the same failed spending, taxing, and regulating policies from President Obama.
First, St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley proposes selling county parks to make up for an alleged budget deficit. Now we learn that in order to save money, Dooley has been ordering the county’s domestic abuse shelter to only admit county residents – all while his political appointees keep their cushy taxpayer funded jobs!
St. Louis County officials are denying reports that they have been requiring proof of residency from abuse victims seeking entry to the county’s domestic violence shelter.
Michelle Schiller-Baker, executive director of St. Martha’s Hall, a domestic violence shelter in the city of St. Louis, said her staff has been getting reports for months that the county’s Kathy J. Weinman Shelter has been turning women and children away who were not county residents.
Schiller-Baker said she called the county’s director of human services, Andrea Jackson-Jennings, to confirm reports that the county had begun to turn some away.
“Andrea told me that yes, at this time, the county shelter was only accepting county residents,” Schiller-Baker said Thursday. “I asked Andrea who decided to make this change and she said the decision came from (County Executive) Charlie Dooley and (the county’s Chief Operating Officer) Garry Earls, because Weinman is a taxpayer-funded shelter.” Dooley and Earls could not immediately be reached for comment.
Speculation is rampant today that 2nd district congressional candidate Ed martin will switch races and will run instead for Lt. Governor. Sources say look for an announcement in the coming days. DEVELOPING…..
What’s the deal with Governor Nixon when it comes to his travel and budgets? An AP story yesterday details how Nixon is paying a former Mizzou football player to be his ‘travel aide.’ There’s nothing wrong with the governor having a travel aide – as long as it’s paid out of the governor’s own budget:
The Missouri budget specifically prohibits the Department of Economic Development, as well as most other state agencies, from paying for the travel or staffing costs of the governor’s office or other statewide officials.Nixon spokesman Scott Holste said Wednesday that he didn’t believe the administration violated that budget law with Gettys’ work arrangement…
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Kurt Schaefer, a Republican from Columbia whose district includes the university, said Gettys’ summertime travels with the governor raise questions about whether he really was a Department of Economic Development employee or was essentially an employee of Nixon’s office. Read more…
Readers will remember that MOPNS broke the story in 2007 on how Nixon was using his official vehicle while campaigning for governor:
“As a Member of Congress, it has always been painfully obvious to me that our immigration policy is broken, and we need to fix it. From my point of view, that means that immigrants must obey the law. And the American people have to find a way to help the twelve million undocumented immigrants come out of the shadows to become lawful and productive members of our society.”— Lacy Clay
What a bunch of poppycock! We wish these Democrats would just be honest and say the real reason they want these people to be legal is so they can have a new crop of millions voters to vote for them. If “[illegal] immigrants must obey the law,” then how about asking them to at least enter the country legally? No one except hardcore racists are against immigration – and the Democrats know this. This is so disingenuous that its sickening! Below are a couple of examples of what our “humanity for illegal immigration” hath wrought!
An unemployed member of the Carpenter’s Union picketing the construction of a mini strip shopping center in Northwoods, MO., a suburb in North St. Louis County. Non union, Hispanic workers were observed working on the project,
“As a person who grew up in public housing I knew what it was like to be poor but being poor when I was a boy was dramatically different than being poor now.”
Rep. Cleaver made that statement last week while he and a few of his Democrat congressional colleagues were doing what Democrats do best; engaging in meaningless symbolism over real substance. To show solidarity with the poor, Cleaver somehow survived for seven days on $4.50 worth of food a day. What a sacrifice! We do have to admit that we agree with Cleaver that being poor today is different than being poor back in his day. Check out these statistics from The Heritage Foundation:
During the year 4% of the poor became temporarily homeless. Forty percent live in apartments, less than 10% in mobile homes or trailers and about 50% live in standard one-family homes. In fact, 42% own their own home.
The vast majority are in good repair, with more living space per person than the average non-poor person in Britain, France or Sweden.
Ninety-six percent of poor parents say their children were never hungry during the year due to an inability to afford food.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning and 92% have a microwave.
One-third of poor households have a wide-screen plasma or LCD TV, 70% have a VCR and two-thirds have satellite/cable TV, the same proportion as own at least one DVD player.
Half of the poverty households have a personal computer and one-in-seven have two or more.
And half of those with children have a video game system like Xbox.
Almost 75% have a car or truck and nearly a third have two.
No surprise here that Koster is involved in something shady! Here’s an excerpt from a MOGOP press release:
According to the St Louis Post-Dispatch, Koster’s office has decided that it is not competent enough to handle a lawsuit against a drug manufacturer. Instead, he is outsourcing the legal work to an as-of-yet undermined law firm who will be selected by the Nixon Administration.
This has proven to be an incredibly profitable arrangement for both Nixon and Koster, who during the first 10 months of 2011 have accepted $567,000 in campaign contributions from the trial lawyers seeking this contract.
And it’s no wonder that these law firms are “investing” so heavily in Nixon and Koster—the winner of the contract could receive as much as $100 million in legal fees if the state wins the case.
Today, the Senate is debating a resolution of disapproval being offered by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) of the FCC’s new net neutrality regulations, which, if agreed to by the Senate, would overturn those regulations. A vote on the resolution, which requires only a majority for adoption, is scheduled for noon tomorrow.
Sen. Hutchison explains the problems with the net neutrality regulations. “Unless the Senate acts on a measure under consideration this week, Internet service providers will be subject to the [FCC’s] new ‘Net neutrality’ rules. Under these mandates, broadband companies would lose control over the traffic and technology flowing through their infrastructure. Government bureaucrats would tell companies what is and is not a ‘reasonable’ way to operate their systems. These regulatory burdens would discourage Internet service providers from innovating and investing, inject uncertainty into a thriving sector of our economy, and jeopardize the information industry’s vast potential for growth. More regulation would diminish broadband providers’ expected returns on their capital. Lower returns mean less investment, which means fewer jobs created. Smaller companies would suffer the most, as they operate on thinner margins. With unemployment over 9 percent, do we really need this kind of regulatory overreach?”
They note, “The government’s primary rationale for these new rules is that broadband providers must be prevented from blocking certain online content and services. On the surface, this is an admirable goal. We, too, believe in an open Internet free of unreasonable discrimination. But market forces have and will continue to prevent such discrimination. . . . [D]espite a decade of Net neutrality advocates’ doomsday warnings that rampant discrimination is imminent, the Internet remains open. The few instances of bad behavior have been dealt with swiftly by the free market or by the FCC using the tools it already has. In short, Net neutrality is a big-government solution in search of a problem.”
“Moreover,” they warn, “this FCC power grab is unprecedented and, in our estimation, unlawful. Congress has never given the commission the authority to regulate Internet providers’ management of their networks.”
Speaking on the floor this morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, “It’s now been two months since the President came before Congress and outlined his plan for tackling the jobs crisis — a plan that can best be described as a rehash of the same failed policies of the past few years disguised as a bipartisan overture, a political strategy masquerading as a serious legislative proposal. The president put this plan together knowing that Republicans would oppose it. In other words, it was actually designed to fail, as White House aides have readily admitted to reporters for weeks. This was not, I repeat, a serious effort to do something about jobs and the economy. It was a serious effort to help the President’s reelection campaign by making Republicans in Congress look intransigent. So what I’ve been saying for the past few weeks is let’s put the political games aside. We’ll have time for the election later. The American people want us to do something about jobs right now.”
And in fact, House Republicans have been doing just that. Leader McConnell pointed out, “While the President has been out on bus tours, Republicans in the House have been debating and passing bipartisan legislation aimed at making it easier for businesses across the country to grow and create jobs. And over the past two weeks, I’ve highlighted some of their good work. Yesterday, I mentioned in particular a bill the House passed just last week called the Small Company Capital Formation Act, or H.R. 1070, a bill that received 421 votes, including 183 Democrat votes. Only one person in the entire 435-member House of Representatives voted against this bill — just one. And President Obama endorsed the idea contained in this bill in his jobs speech to Congress in September. The question is: Why in the world wouldn’t the Democrat majority take it up and pass it here in the Senate?”
H.R. 1070 would remove a regulatory barrier that prevents small businesses from going public and improves their access to the capital they need to grow and create jobs. The Senate version has the bipartisan sponsorship of Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Jon Tester (D-MT). Job creators support the bill, as well. The AP wrote recently, “Companies use the cash they raise to grow — and that means hiring people.”
Surely this bill would be a no-brainer for Senate Democrats to take up and pass. As Leader McConnell said to majority Democrats, “Take up this legislation that’s already passed the House with the support of almost everybody over there, and show the American people that you care more about creating jobs than in creating campaign slogans.”
