"What Gov. Romney and his advisers don’t seem to understand is this: If you’re a worker whose job went overseas, you don’t need somebody trying to explain to you the difference between outsourcing and offshoring, you need someone who’s going to wake up every day and fight for American jobs and investment here in the United States."
I’m not going to sit here and pretend that everything is getting better as fast as anybody was hoping for, but let’s be honest about something. The President was right on this one.
You don’t win elections by correcting people after they’ve just been told they don’t have a job. Let them call it what they want while you, as the President, focus on the economy. The general idea is for people not to need to know the difference between unemployment situations.
"He is a jackass, but he’s talented."
— President Obama still prefers Jay-Z over Kanye West
Tech companies and their venture capital backers, angered by a bipartisan push for Internet anti-piracy legislation known as SOPA, are key beneficiaries of the JOBS Act — a fact not lost on Democratic leaders. Rapid-fire public stock offerings and free-wheeling funding are the lifeblood of the Silicon Valley landscape, and the JOBS Act promises to make it easier for financiers and their clients in the technology industry to raise money for their companies’ operations.
“What happened coming out of the SOPA fight is, people in Washington and Congress really sat up and took notice and said, ‘There is actually work to be done here. This is not just kids in T-shirts running around Palo Alto on skateboards. This really is a community looking to create the next wave of businesses that will jumpstart the American economy,’” says Michael McGeary, a strategist with the venture capital firm Hattery, based in San Francisco. “And Congress is very opportunistic this way. They saw there was this community that was very engaged … And we would like to say thank you to them.”
The JOBS Act, say McGreary and other venture capitalists who work regularly with Silicon Valley, goes a long way toward sweetening the bitterness brewed by the SOPA scuffle.
But in deciding to back the JOBS Act, Democrats were forced to choose between two allies — labor and the tech industry. Democrats stuck with Silicon Valley, secure in the belief that union loyalty isn’t going anywhere. It’s yet another political battle pitting nominal allies against one another because large sums of money are at stake.
— Obama JOBS Act Leaves Labor Fuming In Democratic Feud
Zach Carter and Ryan Grim
"The powerful shouldn’t get to create one set of rules while there’s a different set of rules for everybody else, especially at a time when there is a deficit of trust between this city and the rest of this country. We were sent here to serve the American people and look out for their interests, not our own interests."
— President Barack Obama, after signing the STOCK Act into law on Wednesday.
Undermining the credibility of black public figures who’ve served the community for decades (i.e. Jeremiah Wright) might not be the best way to defend a man who will be out of office by the year 2016. We must learn how to love President Obama while simultaneously supporting advocates for our community, and honestly realize that one is not a substitute for the other. It is possible to take advantage of the present without mortgaging the future. Integration into the White House is not the same as building an independently prosperous community that doesn’t need white American validation in order to be strong.
My point is not to say that the Obama presidency should not be respected or supported. Instead, it is to say that the divides in black leadership that have been caused by the Obama presidency must heal quickly in order for us to move forward as a collective. Also, no group of politicians should be allowed to play black public figures against one another by rewarding some for their loyalty and blocking others from having access to the negotiating table. Divide and conquer is a common political tactic, and it ultimately leads us to waste our votes by providing political support without having a clear agenda. The bottom line is that Obama is not going to be president forever, and we’ve got to have a Plan B.
— What Happens to “Us” When Obama Is No Longer President?
Dr. Boyce Watkins
"You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there. If you’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future"
— Rick Santorum, telling an audience in Texas that the United States would be better off with four more years of President Obama than with Mitt Romney in the White House.
"Stated simply, we’re about promoting the private sector. They’re about protecting the privileged sector. We’re a fair shot, and a fair shake. They’re about no rules, no risk. And no accountability."
— Vice President Joe Biden, according to prepared remarks provided to CNN, in a speech that he’s expected to deliver at the United Auto Workers Local 12 Hall in Toledo, Ohio this afternoon.
"I’m not here to talk about President Obama. I think he is great. I’m here to talk about my dad and what he would bring to the country."
— Matt Romney, son of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, during an interview with Hawaii’s KITV.
"As I’ve written before, we’ve now had three consecutive presidents who have had experience with recreational drugs. One of them was a particularly horrible chief executive, but all have lived remarkably successful lives. They’re rich and have seemingly well-adjusted family lives and they were Presidents of the United States. Do any of them think that their lives would have been markedly improved had the state intervened to set them on the straight and narrow, back when they were using? I don’t think president Obama spends his day thinking, “man, if only I had an arrest record in college, I wouldn’t have had to deal with this John Boehner asshole; why didn’t someone stop me from going down this path of incredible success?"
You really should start following him if you aren’t already.
Something odd happened Monday. An Obama administration official delivered a major speech outlining the president’s position on a national topic that has been the subject of intense debate. Yet the Republican field was largely silent.
Why? Because when it comes to allowing a group of government officials to decide to target accused terrorists with lethal stikes — a death panel, if you will — President Barack Obama and Republican candidates are largely on the same page.
As Attorney General Eric Holder laid out in a speech in Chicago, the Obama administration believes that U.S. citizens can be targeted for killing under certain circumstances and that an executive branch review of the evidence against a subject of targeted killing counts as due process under the Constitution.
While most of the Republican candidates haven’t gone into great detail about the legal reasoning behind their views on executive power, two Republican presidential candidates still in the race — Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich — are on the record in support of targeted killing. Ron Paul is a definite “no,” while Rick Santorum didn’t answer the New York Times survey.
— Obama, Romney And Gingrich Agree: The Government Doesn’t Need A Court To Kill You
Ryan J. Reilly
"The only way historically that a country has ultimately decided not to get nuclear weapons without constant military intervention has been when they themselves take (nuclear weapons) off the table. That’s what happened in Libya, that’s what happened in South Africa."
— President Obama, discussing his belief that Iran should not gain access to nuclear weapons, during an interview with the Atlantic.