This year many millions more will be swept from employer based plans and find themselves in the same capsizing boat.
They seize the verbal high ground, shaping the debate with words that obscure, change, even reverse the meaning of important things.
In this decade, only fringe web sites even reveal that Michelle Obama schmoozed a $12,000 gown for herself from a snob designer.
Some viewers of the Coke ad sense the song reflects the spirit that Reagan described, but, they’re being poured a glass of syrup more in tune with Obama’s sensibilities.
The Left is trying to redefine “keep your plan” and “keep your doctor” to mean instead “move up to Obama plans and doctors.” They’re trying to bleach his lie into truth.
If a male politician found a sugar mommy to pay his way through school, and to accept and raise his children as her own without him, he wouldn't dare make heroic single daddy-hood the centerpiece of his identity and campaign. If he tried, the media would slaughter him. If he were a Republican, anyway.
The idea the president is pivoting to inequality is too rich. Redistribution is the organizing principle of his presidency. Taking from the Americans he calls “the haves,” the “fat cats” and giving to those he calls “the poor” and “have nots” has been his constant goal.
Obama has debased and coarsened his presidency--and national politics--to match the Chicago street fighting of the community organizer he was.
When it comes to Brooks representing conservative views at the New York Times and on the News Hour, I propose we trade David for Arthur.
Brooks argues the executive could forge solutions on things like immigration reform (and presumably the rest of his litany of tragically unpassed bills) that Congress is just too polarized to tackle.
It’s critical we keep lobbing the softball set-ups so our guy can blame everything bad in the world on Republicans. But still, to look honest, we probably have to throw the occasional fast ball, don’t you think?
Real reporters confront ambitious. They call bigwigs out for inconsistencies and contradictions. They might even venture to ask a question or two based on premises different from the assumptions of The Man they are questioning.
In recent days, organized labor turned harshly and vocally against the so called “Affordable Care Act.” Three leaders of America’s largest unions, including Jimmy Hoffa, wrote a jaw-dropping letter to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Excerpts of their arguments sound like a Republican opposition brief:
In the harsh light of the IRS scandal, and news other agencies targeted conservatives, it’s impossible to doubt the administration saw an even more useful tool in FEC prosecutions aimed to silence inconvenient groups.
Outrage over offensive statements is a one-way racket meant only to harm conservatives. If anyone right of center crosses a line, then call in America's head-hacking Taliban. But anyone left of center crosses lines equal or worse, then, what? Did you hear that tree in the forest? No, did you?
Evidence of the administration’s incompetence, policy fails, and dirty deeds is piling up as fast as the worthless national media can be dragged and shamed into grudgingly reporting it. But don’t fool yourself that liberals will be reflective, conciliatory, or interested in fence-mending.
It’s not just their mortality in the balance, but all of ours. We were young when we discovered the song. They were young when they created and performed it.
Liberals offer permanent excuses for abuses: Everyone does it. Yet when you examine the record, not everyone does do it.
How, exactly, does a free people overthrow an abusive bureaucracy that, as David Axelrod asserts, is too vast for even the president to be aware of, let alone control?
Not too long ago, trashing George Bush was a Hillary-approved form of patriotic dissent. Back in the day, progressives and Move On types competed proudly and exuberantly to vocalize their Bush hate, all to the national media’s approving, saturation coverage.