Why so low? “The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 34% of the nation’s voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-two percent (32%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of +2, his lowest total to date. . .” Maybe people are working on their taxes. It couldn’t be that Americans were irked by the president’s world apology tour, could it?
Ari Fleischer observes: “A very small number of taxpayers — the 10% of the country that makes more than $92,400 a year — pay 72.4% of the nation’s income taxes. They’re the tip of the triangle that’s supporting virtually everyone and everything. Their burden keeps getting heavier.” And about 50% of people pay no federal income tax. His proposal: everyone pays income tax, we create a multi-tiered, progressive system with no deductions.
An interesting contrast between Obama and Bush on religious holidays. I’m reminded that Bush always spared us the mushy “these-holidays-are-really-all-the-same.” He or his presidential proclamation writer invariably expressed what the Jewish holidays were all about on their own terms and without reference to a political agenda.
Better find another country to pick up the slack: “Reversing its role as the world’s fastest-growing buyer of U.S. Treasuries and other foreign bonds, the Chinese government actually sold bonds heavily in January and February before resuming purchases in March, according to data released this weekend by China’s central bank.” Our massive fiscal irresponsibility only “works” if their is appetite for more and more of our bonds.
Another subsidy, another $8B down the . . . er . . . drain.
A fascinating breakdown of who lacks health insurance and who we should really worry about.
“Hot contest over ‘card check’ continues,” blares the headline. Not really. Actually not at all.
This must-read explains why a “pubic option” in healthcare reform is not an option, but the end of private insurance. Hint: when liberals use “choice” or “option” be very wary.
From the Daily News: “Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, once a right-leaning Blue Dog Democrat who touted civil unions over gay marriage, has morphed in three short months into a poster girl for the Human Rights Campaign.” When you move left you have “evolved,” when you move right you have flip-flopped.
A smart take: “One of the more underplayed stories in the past couple of weeks is the effort made on the part of the Obama Administration and its Democratic allies in Congress to kill the D.C. school choice program. This is an unfair and heartless act on the part of an Administration claiming to want to improve the state of American education, an act that puts the teachers’ unions ahead of students and their families.”
If the tea party protests turn out hundreds of thousands of people will CNN look biased or out to lunch — or both — by ignoring them?
The Washington Post and Obama spin team play ball together (fetch?) over the First Dog? Well, it is cute. And yes, front page treatment is silly, but it was Easter Sunday after all and not exactly a big news day (until the captain’s rescue).
Jamie Kirchick raises a great question: when is it time for gay rights groups to declare victory and pack it in? An equally relevant query for a number of ethnic or race-based civil rights groups.
