Robert Gibbs Admits Barack Obama Gave Up on Trying to Change Washington A Long Time Ago

DailyCaller.com:

Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was uncharacteristically candid during an appearance on MSNBC Tusday morning, claiming “the White House sort of stopped trying” to change the “dysfunction” in Washington, D.C.

Gibbs spoke on a “Morning Joe” panel about President Obama’s relative lack of measurable accomplishments as he goes into his State of the Union speech this evening. “Robert, I know you’re not in the White House anymore –” MSNBC host Willie Geist began. “Thank God!” Gibbs interjected, prompting some incredulous laughs from the panel. ”Well, there’s a moment of honestly,” Geist grinned.

“But you’re obviously — you know the president very well,” the host continued. “We know what this poll says about how the country’s feeling about him. How is he feeling about the country right now? I mean, this is a guy who came in five years ago saying, ‘Change comes from outside Washington. We’re gonna break the fever, we’re going to change the way Washington does business. We’re going to get things done.’ And he’s learned some pretty hard lessons in how Washington actually works and doesn’t work.”

“Well, I think the ability to change Washington is something that, long ago, the White House sort of stopped trying to do,” Gibbs began. “Whether or not that’s a good thing, we’ll look back on history. I do think that, you know, this is a story of Washington dysfunction . . . Everything in this speech is what the public wants to hear. The public just doesn’t simply think that this group of people assembled in this room is remotely capable of solving those problems.”

“2013 was a lost year for the president,” the former press secretary continued. “He was buffeted by crisis after crisis. I think the test of this speech will be, do the American people who do watch, do they feel like this president has a plan to get some of those things done? Or is this just another speech out of Washington?”

Gibbs is a long-time Obama loyalist, joining the president’s Illinois Senate campaign way back in 2004. He followed him through the Senate to the White House, where he served as press secretary and close personal adviser to President Obama until early 2011. Some of his recent commentary, however, suggests the communications professional may have soured on the president’s leadership — and certainly shows relief that his tenure as White House spin doctor is now over.

RELATED: Gibbs: If Dems Lose Senate, 2015 SOTU ‘Will Be an Exceedingly Minimal Affair’

Obama Pollster: Reporters Should Stop Covering Polls in 2014

DailyCaller.com:

After a year of seeing President Obama’s approval ratings plummet, the president’s pollster is offering a strikingly candid and pessimistic New Year’s resolution.

Reporters should go the next “year without reporting any public polling data,” Joel Benenson, president and CEO of Benenson Strategy Group, said.

His comments were made to reporter Mike Allen, who published them in his daily “Politico Playbook” morning newsletter on Tuesday.

Benenson explained that he thinks the polling often reported by news organizations lacks the proper context.

Asked his New Year’s resolution: “Here’s one — with a variation, if mine is too extreme: Go one year without reporting any public polling data.”

“Rationale: Most public polling continues to be reported on strictly from a topline, horserace-type perspective that does nothing, or at best very little, to illuminate the news of the day.”

Benenson offered an alternative if “this is too strict.”

“Go one year without reporting any public polling data that doesn’t provide in an in-depth analysis of the underlying dynamics that are truly shaping the data,” he said.

RELATED: ‘Can’t find’ a good one: Robert Gibbs says this is the ‘worst year’ of Obama’s presidency

Robert Gibbs: ‘Inexplicable’ If Obama Doesn’t Fire Someone Over Obamacare Website

Just ask Eric Holder and Kathleen Sebelius, no matter how much of an utter fail you are within his administration, Barack Obama holds no one accountable:

Former White House Press Sec. Robert Gibbs joined the panel guests appearing on MSNBC’s Now on Monday, and expressed a much less sanguine view of the White House’s political prospects in the wake of the problem-plagued launch of HealthCare.Gov. He said it would be “inexplicable” if President Barack Obama did not shake up the personnel involved in that failure.

MSNBC host Alex Wagner began by observing that the inadvertent “indictment” of government by using the prhase “private sector velocity” to describe the latest fixes to the insurance exchange website might have been a bad decision. Gibbs replied that, often times, “the truth is the best way to go at it.” 

“This has been a completely unnecessary embarrassment,” Gibbs said. “It’s been an embarrassment for activist government in many ways.”

Wagner noted that influential National Journal columnist Ron Fournier has called for the president to shake up his staff to account for the failures associated with the implementation of the ACA. 

“It will be inexplicable if somebody involved in the creation of the website doesn’t get fired or a group of people don’t get fired,” Gibbs added. 

“There aren’t good excuses for not firing people,” he continued. “Private sector velocity should also include the velocity of moving somebody’s framed pictures out of their office and into a new job.”

RELATED:  Is the HealthCare.gov Fix Too Late to Save Obamacare?

Media Critic Trashes MSNBC ‘State Propaganda’ Following Hiring Of Ex-Obama Advisers

Mediaite.com:

On a regular basis, there’s no shortage of criticism directed at Fox News for being consistently and unfairly biased. But Baltimore Sun media critic David Zurawik argues that MSNBC, having hired ex-Obama advisers David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs, is worse.

The network is now “all but a bona fide organ of state propaganda,” he writes, asserting that it is in step with the government’s voice, aiding in masking its activities. In making his point, Zurawik looked to a segment on Andrea Mitchell‘s show in which Axelrod joined in to talk about the sequester.

“There is a belief among some Republicans in Congress that maybe this sequester’s all right,” Axelrod said on the show. “Maybe this is another way of shrinking government in a dramatic way. That’s a dangerous idea, but it’s not uncommon in some quarters on Capitol Hill.”

Which begs the question: “What is this if not exactly the spin Team Obama seemed to be working on all week?” While the president doesn’t seem to be willing to sit down for many substantial interviews, he notes, we’re still getting his message loud and clear — through MSNBC, the “so-called news channel.”

It’s “same kind of oppositional attack-dog stuff” they did when they worked for Obama. Despite their own insistence that’s not the case: As you might recall, Gibbs told Howard Kurtz, of his new role, “I don’t see it either as being a cheerleader for the president or as a spokesman for the administration’s point of view.”

Axelrod offered a similar view.

Zurawik readily dismisses this argument: They’re both on network that “serves as TV mouthpiece for the White House.”

RELATED:  MSNBC’s Axelrod And Gibbs Deny ‘Pro-Obama’ Allegations, Claim Mantle Of ‘Independent’ Analysis

Barack Obama’s Pathetic Justification For Killing 16-Year-Old American Boy

Remember folks, to liberals killing innocent Americans is only good when it's a Democrat who's doing it:

After being cornered by activist reporters at Lynn University, former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs offered a misleading defense of the Obama administration’s use of a “kill list” to determine which target should next be evaporated by a drone strike, and offered a truly pathetic justification for the drone killing of an innocent 16-year-old American citizen.

Gibbs initially dodged several questions about President Obama’s hypocritical support for the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, but was eventually cornered by We Are Change reporters, who provoked the following exchange:

REPORTER: How will Obama defend his secret ‘kill list’ at next week’s debate?
GIBBS: Look, this president has taken the fight to al Qaeda.
REPORTER: Does that justify a kill list?
GIBBS: When there are people who are trying to harm us, and have pledged to bring terror to these shores, we’ve taken that fight to them.
REPORTER: Without due process of law?
GIBBS: We have taken the fight to them.

As the Atlantic‘s Conor Friedersdorf notes, this defense is especially misleading because “since the kill list itself is secret, there’s no way to offer a specific counterexample. But we do know that U.S. drones are targeting people who’ve never pledged to carry out attacks in the United States. Take Pakistan, where the CIA kills some people without even knowing their identities…. The vast majority would never make their way to New York or Washington, D.C., and the Obama Administration would never agree to rules that permitted only the killing of threats to ‘the homeland.’”

Nevertheless, Gibbs wholeheartedly defended the unauthorized drone strikes and dismissed the reporter. But later on, that reporter’s colleague Sierra Adamson was able to ask Gibbs to defend the drone strike killing of 16-year-old American citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki.

For some background: Abudlrahman was the son of Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born terrorist who was killed by a drone in Yemen in early September 2011. The elder al-Awlaki was a known terrorist who had left American for Yemen to join up with al Qaeda. During his time as a leader, he accrued a body count by inciting multiple violent terrorist acts against Americans. The Obama administration celebrated his assassination, and “targeted killings” became a frequent topic of discussion culminating with the New York Times story revealing the administration’s use of a secret “kill list” for drone targets.

But the younger al-Awlaki was on no such list. As Esquire reported, he was not a member of al Qaeda when he was killed by a drone strike two weeks after his father. “Nor was he ‘an inspiration,’ as his father styled himself, for those determined to draw American blood; nor had he gone ‘operational,’ as American authorities said his father had, in drawing up plots against Americans and American interests. He was a boy who hadn’t seen his father in two years, since his father had gone into hiding,” the magazine explained.

The night the 16-year-old was killed in Yemen, he was reportedly saying goodbye to his second cousin who had temporarily housed him during his search to find his (unbeknownst to him) already-dead father. He was seated on the side of the ride, eating dinner over an open flame. An American drone appeared in sky and killed everyone there.

With that story in mind, Adamson confronted Gibbs and the following exchange ensued [emphasis mine]:

ADAMSON: Do you think the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son is justifiable?
GIBBS: I am not going to get into Anwar al-Awlaki’s son. I know that Anwar al-Awlaki renounced his citizenship.
ADAMSON: His son was still an American citizen.
GIBBS: He did great harm to people in this country and was a regional al Qaeda commander hoping to inflict harm and destruction…
ADAMSON: But it’s an American citizen that is being targeted without due process, without trial. And, he’s underage. He’s a minor.
GIBBS: I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don’t think becoming an al Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.

RELATED: S.E. Cupp’s Debate Advice For Romney: Attack Obama’s Foreign Policy Failures ‘From The Left’

Report: US Knew Benghazi Raid Was a Terrorist Attack Within 24 Hours

Townhall.com:

For a full week following the deadly ambush at the US consulate in Benghazi, the Obama administration told the American public that the incident was triggered by a "spontaneous protest" over an anti-Islam video that spun out of hand.  They've equivocated over recent days, as the himself president has begun to hedge -- finally allowing that other forces may have had a hand in the destruction.  Today, national security correspondent Eli Lake has a bombshell exclusive in Newsweek/The Daily Beast that destroys the administration's official story and points to an intentional cover-up:

Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda–affiliated operatives were behind the attack, and had even pinpointed the location of one of those attackers. Three separate U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the early information was enough to show that the attack was planned and the work of al Qaeda affiliates operating in Eastern Libya. Nonetheless, it took until late last week for the White House and the administration to formally acknowledge that the Benghazi assault was a terrorist attack. On Sunday, Obama adviser Robert Gibbs explained the evolving narrative as a function of new information coming in quickly on the attacks. "We learned more information every single day about what happened,” Gibbs said on Fox News. “Nobody wants to get to the bottom of this faster than we do.”

The intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast did so anonymously because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. They said U.S. intelligence agencies developed leads on four of the participants of the attacks within 24 hours of the fire fight that took place mainly at an annex near the Benghazi consulate. For one of those individuals, the U.S. agencies were able to find his location after his use of social media. “We had two kinds of intelligence on one guy,” this official said. “We believe we had enough to target him.” Another U.S. intelligence official said, “There was very good information on this in the first 24 hours. These guys have a return address. There are camps of people and a wide variety of things we could do.”  A spokesman for the National Security Council declined to comment for the story. But another U.S. intelligence official said, “I can’t get into specific numbers but soon after the attack we had a pretty good beat on some individuals involved in the attack.”

RELATED: House Armed Services chair: Obama admin hiding truth on Libya until after election; Update: “Full explanation”?

Robert Gibbs Asked About “Pep Rally” Tone At Tucson Memorial

Mediaite.com:

While many people have given President Obama’s speech at last night’s memorial high marks, some have been angered, not so much for what Obama said, but for how his words impacted the audience. According to some, Obama gave a speech people enjoyed just too much for a solemn, serious event. To paraphrase Tropic Thunder, everyone knows you don’t go “full inspirational” at a memorial. The key phrase being tossed around has been that the atmosphere was too much like a “pep rally.” It was this critique that CBS’ Mark Knoller asked Robert Gibbs about.


Gibbs responded about as you’d respect, saying that the response was a celebration of the lives of the deceased. However, he did admit that he was surprised that the speech received so much applause.


“I will say that I read the speech several times and thought that there wouldn’t be a lot of applause if any. I think many of us thought that. But I think there was a celebration, again, of the lives of those who had been impacted. Not just at that grocery store but throughout the country. And I think that, if that is part of the healing process, then that’s a good thing.”

Robert Gibbs Resigns

Hard to get away with being so smug, snarky and condescending when the GOP's got some say in matters, so Gibbs takes the coward's way out:

Robert Gibbs is resigning from his role as President Obama's official spokesman in order to speak more effectively for Obama.


"The best service I can provide this president is, for the next couple of years, outside this building," said Gibbs, who announced Wednesday that he would leave his press secretary job in early February. He will then hit the lucrative speaking circuit and become a paid consultant to the Obama reelection campaign.


The resignation of Gibbs is further evidence that the 2012 presidential campaign has already begun and that Obama, who lacks the numerous surrogates of past presidents, needs to deploy Gibbs to the front lines of the public debate. Gibbs will be unchained from the government salary and decorum expected from the press room podium, especially in a White House that has an officially stated disdain for partisan politics. Obama's longtime attack dog can finally bare his teeth.


Gibbs's move also exposes the shortcomings of the room he is leaving, and the decreased political significance of a podium-bound official voice in a raucous virtual age.


On Wednesday afternoon, around the time Republicans exuberantly took over the House, Gibbs arrived at his daily briefing in a charcoal pinstriped suit and blue pastel tie dotted with commas - an appropriate pattern for the famously long-winded spokesman.

Politiks As Usual: In The News 12/27/10

'Octomom' Faces Eviction From Southern California Home

Republican Lawmaker Attacked On Christmas

Senate Approves Nuclear Arms Pact With Russia

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Repeal A Mistake

Celebrity Christmas Cards Are Naughty Notes

Planned Parenthood Federal Funding Rose In '09 As Does Abortions

How Tough Will The New GOP Congress Be On Illegals?

Liberal Blogger Details Bradley Manning's Inhumane Treatment - His Blankets Hurt


Larry King: Sean Hannity & Rachel Maddow Are "Preachers" Who Offer "No Learning Experience"

Robert Gibbs: Finally Republicans Will Be Accountable For Governing Too

Obama Embraces "Death Panel" Concept In Medicare Rule

A Faux Compassionate Christmas, Courtesy Of The Left

Robert Gibbs On Keith Olbermann’s Nazi Appeasement Tax Compromise Comparison: ‘Stop.’

Hey it's a leader of the "sanctimonious" Left Barry was talking about the other day, getting his ass handed to him by....Robert Gibbs!

During his patented Special Comment segment last week, Countdown host Keith Olbermann showed his displeasure with President Obama’s compromise on the Bush Tax Cuts by comparing it to Nazi appeasement. At Monday’s White House briefing, I asked Press Secretary Robert Gibbs if the White House had any reaction to the comparison. Gibbs responded that he doubted the President had heard Olbermann’s remarks, reiterated that the White House thinks the compromise is a good deal, and addressed the appeasement charge. See Gibbs’ response after the jump.


I was more interested in Gibbs’ thoughts on such heated opposition rhetoric coming from someone who’s so influential with the President’s base, but Gibbs opted to teach Keith Olbermann a quick mini-course on Godwin’s Law.


Transcript:


Robert Gibbs: Tommy…


Tommy Christopher: Thank you, Robert. Thank you, Les. I have three quick questions. First one, last week during his Special Comment, Keith Olbermann compared the President’s tax compromise to Nazi appeasement. I wanted to see if you guys had a reaction to that. Did the President hear that? Or, what do you think about that?


Robert Gibbs: I doubt the President heard that. I, obviously, have given a number of answers that would denote that we think it’s a good agreement.And…I would say this to Democrats or Republicans, whenever you compare anything to what the Nazis did, if you ever get to that point in your speech, stop. Because nothing does, and hopefully, God willing, nothing ever will.


The entire point of Godwin’s Law, of course, is that those who violate it make themselves irrelevant. In the case of Keith Olbermann, though, a little light Nazi rhetoric isn’t going to break the spell he has over much of the President’s base. While Bill Clinton’s Friday appearance at the White House may help to sway rank-and-file Democrats, the former President is no hero to the Kos nation over which Olbermann holds sway. Appeasing them may be a tricky thing.

White House Defends Ghailani Prosecution Amid Criticism of Terror Policy

FOXNews.com:

The White House is pushing back against criticism of its commitment to prosecuting some terror suspects in civilian courts after a federal jury convicted former Guantanamo Bay detainee Ahmed Ghailani on only one of 285 charges.

Ghailani was convicted of conspiring in Al Qaeda's 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa and faces a sentence of 20 years to life behind bars. The Justice Department has said it will seek the maximum punishment.

White House chief spokesman Robert Gibbs said Thursday that the administration will use "all the tools at our disposal" to try Guantanamo Bay detainees. But Republicans have seized on the Ghailani verdict as an example why all terror suspects should be prosecuted in military commissions.

"It's time for the administration to listen to the 9/11 families and the American people and change course by putting all terror trials through our military commission system," Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch said in a written statement.

Robert Gibbs Once Took Part In Group That Refused To Disclose Donors

Before they make noise about certain things they outta look at themselves in the mirror first:

The White House plans to continue attacking groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other conservative organizations for not disclosing the names of donors behind political ads. But during the 2004 Democratic primary

campaign, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was involved with a political advocacy group that refused to reveal its own donors until the law required it.

During a press conference Tuesday, Gibbs scolded groups that would not disclose, and has said that Americans have a right to know who is behind “largely negative campaign attack ads.”

“Simply tell us who you are,” Gibbs said.

In a speech last week in Maryland, President Obama even called the practice “a threat to our democracy.”
“The American people deserve to know who’s trying to sway their elections,” Obama said.

Under campaign finance law, the Chamber is not required to release the names of its donors. When pressed by reporters as to why groups not mandated by law should disclose their donors, Gibbs said they should do it in “the spirit of political disclosure.”

During the 2003-2004 presidential primary season, however, Gibbs worked as the spokesman for a liberal  advocacy group that ran attack ads against then-Democratic candidate Howard Dean. The “secretive” group, called Americans for Jobs, Health Care & Progressive Values, spent months organizing scathing ads without disclosing who was paying for them.

One particularly damaging  TV spot that aired in December 2003 showed a photograph of Osama Bin Laden while an ominous voice declared, “Americans want a president that can face the dangers ahead. But Howard Dean has no military or foreign policy experience. And Howard Dean just cannot compete with George Bush on foreign policy. It’s time for Democrats to think about that. And think about it now.” The ad, part of a series of anti-Dean spots, crippled the Dean campaign.

The Dean camp was furious, and called on the group to disclose who had funded the ad.

Gretchen Carlson, Robert Gibbs Spar On Surge, Credit For Iraq Success

Mediaite.com:

Fox and Friends Gretchen Carlson interviewed Press Sec. Robert Gibbs earlier this morning ahead of President Obama’s speech on Iraq tonight, and whoah. Things got contentious pretty quickly.


You can watch the back and forth below but things turned south when Carlson asked Gibbs whether Obama was planning on explaining his ‘flip flop’ on the surge tonight, and Gibbs responded:


Gretchen, I’m happy to spend a lot of time looking back at decisions that were made four years ago or even seven and a half years ago…I think what’s important, while you guys play political games, is the president to laud our men and women, and to mark the end of our combat mission.


Carlson followed up by asking whether Obama would credit Bush tonight in his speech. And she kept asking it until Gibbs finally said: “Gretchen, I don’t know whether this is you actually interviewing me or just a tape of you looping the same question over and over.”


You get the picture. Later Carlson defended her tone saying that’s how she talks when she wants answers.

Robert Gibbs: Liberals Wouldn't Be Satisfied If Dennis Kucinich Was President"

TheHill.com:

The White House is simmering with anger at criticism from liberals who say President Obama is more concerned with deal-making than ideological purity.

During an interview with The Hill in his West Wing office, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs blasted liberal naysayers, whom he said would never regard anything the president did as good enough.

“I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy.”


The press secretary dismissed the “professional left” in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.”


Of those who complain that Obama caved to centrists on issues such as healthcare reform, Gibbs said: “They wouldn’t be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president.”

Robert Gibbs Apologizes to Shirley Sherrod on Behalf of Obama Administration

Mediaite.com:

As expected, the topic of the day at today’s White House briefing was Shirley Sherrod. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs fielded many questions on her ouster, apologizing on behalf of the administration for what he rightly called an “injustice.” In a dramatic turn, Jake Tapper informed Gibbs that Sherrod was watching the briefing, and Gibbs directed his apology to her. Tapper also pointed out that he (among others) had performed due diligence before acting on the story (unlike Secretary Tom Vilsack). See the remarkable exchange below.

Tapper also asked Gibbs if he agreed with critics who say the administration overreacted because they’re scared of conservative pundits, to which Gibbs replied, “No.” Responding to Chip Reid later in the briefing, Gibbs did not rule out the President speaking about this in the near future, and called this a “teachable moment.” I would bet that President Obama makes some sort of statement by the end of the day.

Liberal on Liberal Violence: Nancy Pelosi Calls Robert Gibbs "Politically Inept"

Mediaite.com:

Did Press Secretary Robert Gibbs know he was about to set off a firestorm this Sunday when he “stated the obvious” to David Gregory that there “are enough seats in play” for the GOP to take the House this November? Chances are, yes. This administration if far too media savvy to think a quote like that would do anything but set off a firestorm. Their motivation for doing so, however, remains unclear.

I’ve noted in earlier posts I thought this was the administration’s subtle attempt to have its cake and eat it too. Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher thinks this was “stealth attempt to energize the Democratic base, and all those Obama voters who said “Mission: Accomplished” after he was elected.” Which also makes sense — a lot of ink has recently been devoted recently to the lack of enthusiasm in Obama’s base. 

One person who was apparently energized by Gibb’s comments was Nancy Pelosi, who apparently called Gibbs “politically inept” during Tuesday night’s House Democratic Caucus meeting. From CQPolitics:

Things heated up as Pelosi jumped in and blasted Gibbs for making “politically inept” comments, according to one source…“It was bad,” another source said. “She was like: ‘I don’t appreciate it. I don’t know who this guy is. I’ve never met him before. And he’s saying that we’re going to lose the House.’”

Funny that Pelosi would say that she doesn't know who the smug, condescending and arrogant Robert Gibbs even is, thus no surprise that Gibbs is now backpedaling.

Robert Gibbs Admits Republicans Could Win Control Of House In November

Yahoo.com:

Republicans could win control of the House of Representatives in elections in November, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs acknowledged on Sunday.

"There is no doubt there are enough seats at play that could cause Republicans to gain control, there is no doubt about that," Gibbs told NBC's "Meet the Press" talk show when asked whether the Democrats would maintain their majority in the House.

All 435 seats in the House are up for grabs in the November 2 election as well as 36 of the 100 seats in the Senate.

President Barack Obama will have a tougher time pushing his political agenda through Congress if Republicans make big gains in November and wipe out Democratic majorities in both the Senate and the House.

Americans have had enough of the lame, liberal excuse concerning what a mess they've had to "inherit". They want and need jobs, secure borders and less taxes. not an administration that's only concerned with promoting and garnering the interests of the Godless Left (20% of their constituents). The time for change is now.

Politiks As Usual: In The News 4/19/10

Poll Finds Nearly 8 In 10 Don't Trust Big Government

Toyota To Agree To $16.4M Government Fine

Judge Rules National Day Of Prayer Unconstitutional

Henry Waxman Cancels ObamaCare Meeting

Tom Coburn, Nancy Pelosi, And The Likeability Factor

Light Reaction To 2nd Gay Episcopalian Bishop Cheers Newsweek

Advocates Push For Stillborn Birth Certificates

Eric Holder: Miranda Warnings For Terrorists Won't Harm Interrogations

Bill Clinton: Criticize, Don't Demonize Officeholders, Dems Will Keep House & Senate

Press Corps Airs Grievances To White House

Is Obama Using Israel As Scapegoat For His Foreign Policy Failures?

"Christian" Singer Jennifer Knapp Comes Out As Lesbian

Is The Congressional Black Caucus Dying Of Neglect?

Politiks As Usual: In The News 2/1/10

Accused 9/11 Plotter Likely To Face Execution, Gibbs Says

White House To Roll Out $3.8 Trillion Budget Plan

Pentagon Starts Clock On Lifting Gay Ban

What's Provocative About The Tebow Super Bowl Ad?

Unemployment Lags Behind Economic Rebound

Hate Crimes Law Named No. 1 Anti-Christian Act Of 2009

Behar Accidentally Outs Gays, Says Monogamy Is 'Too Much Trouble'

Conviction In George Tiller's Murder

Michael Moore To Receive Taxpayer Subsidy He Criticized In 2008

2010 Dawned With Record Cold Gripping The Earth

Could Illinois' Senate Race Copy Massachusetts?

Americans Caught Trying To Take Children From Haiti

UN Climate Panel Shamed By Bogus Rainforest Claim

Obama Administration Doesn't Send Condolence Letters To Military Families

What's there to "examine" exactly? I know Presidents just sign off on those ready-made letters, but it still means a lot to families of troops around the country to receive a letter of acknowledgment from the President on their son or daughter's ultimate sacrifice. This is simply absurd and yet another slap in the face to our troops by Obama and his liberal minions.