Today's Situation Room:
Wolf Blitzer delivers the most important breaking news and political, international, and national security stories of the day. Tune to The Situation Room weekdays 5-7pm ET on CNN.
BLITZER'S BLOG: Obama’s glaring omission
By CNN's Wolf Blitzer
(CNN) – President Obama’s campaign has released a powerful new 60-second ad touting his accomplishments since taking office. It points specifically to the U.S. auto industry coming back, the killing of Osama bin Laden, the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, and the improving U.S. economy. “Instead of losing jobs,” the announcer on the ad says, “we’re creating them – over 4.2 million so far.”
Those are all good points.
But in that ad, the Obama-Biden campaign once again failed to mention what is arguably the administration’s No. 1 legislative achievement over the past three-and-a-half years: the health care reform law.
I also noticed that the president really didn’t spend much time praising his health care achievement in his two lengthy campaign speeches on Saturday in the swing states of Ohio and Virginia. There were some very brief passing references, including the law’s allowing 2.5 million young people to stay on their parents’ insurance plans and denying insurance companies the right to have “unchecked power to cancel your policy or deny you coverage or charge women differently from men.”
Those, too, are certainly good points.
But what I didn’t hear was a robust statement taking credit for pushing the Affordable Health Care Act through Congress.
Maybe that’s because polls have shown that the health care law is not all that popular. Most on the right don’t like the federal mandates requiring everyone to purchase health insurance if they can afford the premiums. Others, on the left, don’t believe that the law goes far enough; they would have preferred a government-sponsored single-payer option along the lines of what Canada has.
But if the president is truly proud of his legislative achievement, why isn’t he singing its praises loudly and clearly?
One reason may be the U.S. Supreme Court. It is supposed to decide next month whether the health care law’s mandates are in fact constitutional. Many court watchers believe the justices will rule against the president, based on what they heard during the oral arguments. That would certainly be embarrassing.
Based on history, I know those question-and-answer sessions can be misleading, and I’m not ready to make a prediction.
Having said that, I still wonder why the president and his top aides have not been more forceful in taking credit for the health care law.
Follow Wolf on Twitter: @WolfBlitzerCNN
RELATED ARTICLE: Obama outlines case for re-election at first official campaign rally
 |
Post by: Filed under: 2012 election • Barack Obama • Health Care • Politics • Situation Room • Wolf Blitzer |
About this Show
The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer is the command center for breaking news, politics and extraordinary reports from around the world. Tune in weeknights from 5-7pm ET on CNN.
"But if the president is truly proud of his legislative achievement, why isn’t he singing its praises loudly and clearly?"
Because he has plenty of other things to say and that one just causes contention.
The American people are still waiting for Rmoney to start talking about his own records instead of criticisms.
The President didn't write the bill, or read it. I believe they expect it to fail, they have a far worse plan on deck to replace it.
Finally an astute observation by CNN. I think judging by recent history the Supreme Court is probably a non-factor though. How many Democrats ran on PPACA during the 2010 elections? I believe it was... 1? Maybe 2? Most of them acted as if the political fight that consumed the better part of a year did not happen because people don't like the law as written (they like parts of it, but the individual mandate is a total deal breaker for a majority of people). The simplest explanation then is the President's reticence in running on PPACA is he is looking at polls the same way the Dems did in 2010.
That is why he did it first thing when elected. Back then he thoguht by now everyone would of forgot about it. They have not.
I guess Obama hides the fact that one of the things his administration squandered us the close to a billion dollars in dole out to Solyndra! Another thing to take note is due to the Obama administration's mismanagement, the GSA misspends taxpayer's money in outrages Las Vegas spending sprees. Do you hear anything fromt the liberal press about this things? Of course not. Everything is being hidden to the American people. All these lies and smoke screens being perpetrated by the Obama Administration and their liberal cohorts in the press are fooling the American people. It is time to get rid of Obama and this hideous Administration!
Somebody pulled a puppets string with a recording of incoherent babbling devoid of any facts. Gee I have never seen this before......................................................
I used to like the news. Watched every night. I stoped two years ago. We are on our own. The people don't have the eyes and ears anymore to watch who is running the store.
The curious thing with the Affordable Care Act that you overlook is that if you poll people as to whether they support the act, a plurality of people say no. However, if you poll them on individual components of the act, each one is extremely popular – typically over 65-70% in each case. This suggests that once you get past the slogan-yelling and actually explain what the law means to people, they like it.
This should be mentioned every time someone on CNN talks about how unpopular the law is.
You are exactly right. They have been told ObamaCare bad so much, it's become the Country mantra. But if you name off things in ObamaCare, yeah, they like that Pre-Existing Condition Plan, the 805 rule, keeping young adult children on their parents' health insurance plans.
The republicans are very good at shaping the conversation their way. I will admit the democrats seem to let people find their own facts. Thinking people will see if something is a good thing. The GOP tell their people what to be against or for.
Well this is true. Many of those things are be accomplished by law. You don't need to give insurance companies a trillion dollars to stop them from droping you or not taking you because of a condision. They just need to right a law. Cost nothing.
That's because free stuff always sounds good until you step back, look at the whole picture and realize what you've got to give up to get it.
A free car would be AWESOME, too! Sounds great! Now, what does it cost, and is that what we want out of our federal government?
Most have a problem with that part of the bill that is illegal and unconstitutional. And now that it costs twice what we were promised and will lead to major financial hardships on most americans, that part isn't very popular either. And the fact that the same people who don't have health care today, will be the same people who won't buy the insurance in the future until they are sick, is not very popular with almost everyone. You don't need 2000 pages of convoluted flow charts to pass an individual mandate. That could have been done on the back of an envelope.
Touting passing a law which will at least in part probably be found to be unconstitutional would be embarrassing. Come to think of it touting his accomplishments when everything he has tried to improve the economy has failed is embarrassing.
Why would Obama mention the worst piece of legislation promoted by a president since Jimmy Carter was President. Bad bills demand silance and Obama is an expert at covering up bad decisions ???? I want George Bush back, but will take Romney !!!!!
dayneJust an FYI the idea of chain gang's on the side of the road doing work yeah, we do that now in America.Where I grew up in (eastern) Washington it was common place to see sodomeby in the classic black-n-white striped suit mowing the city lawn, or painting a building.And you know what? I don't have a problem with that.
Wolf, you answered your own question: the majority of Americans do not like the Affordable Care Act. This majority, of course, are the same folks who will be funding the major chunk of this unaffordable entitlement.
The majority of Americans oppose the Affordable Health Care Act? Really? What are you basing your comment on? Republicans are not the majority in this country regardless what you think. Most Democrats support the Act, the major criticism from the Democrats that are not happy is that it does not do enough. But they do not oppose it. Most independents are undecided from every poll I have seen. Do you have any facts? Never mind, stupid question obviously.
I don't see Romney touting Romneycare either.
So CNN is in the tank for Romney now apparently. No surprise, they were in the tank for Bush and McCain. This is what CNN focuses on on a day with more significant Obama accomplishments- more terrorists captured. A great day to be an American, indeed. Unfortunately no matter how much campaigning CNN does for Romney, they can't stop the people. Just like McCain/Palin/Fox/CNN were defeated in 2008, Romney/Nugent/Fox/CNN will lose this year.
So because CNN's opinion column has one article not in Obama's favor then that means that the entire news organization has been "in the tank" for Republicans all they way back to the elections from four years ago? Really? And how old are you? Please get your head out of the kool-aid pitcher once in a while.... you might drown otherwise.
Not if they make people show an ID when they vote!
I agree with Wolf, this is an interesting omission. The Obama administration and the Democrats on the Hill spent a lot of time pushing health care reform and yet he doesn't see it as something he can use in his campaign. I think it will be a huge blow to Obama's campaign if the Supreme Court rules against it this close to the election. As someone who loves politics I look forward to seeing what will happen.
Don't let Dora fool you, she is a neocon and a fierce one at that, not an independent. Of course we all knew that. The only "unbiased" network of course is Fox, which bashes Democrats 24 X 7 while giving Republicans a free pass.
Wolf, keepin it impartial!
He's waiting on the Supreme Court decision before putting it in his ads. Simple as that.
Don't forget about all those green jobs.
Wolf is a lamb in sheep's clothing.
The irony of the Health Care bill is it's actually very good for Americans. I gaurantee the people complaining couldn't name you a single provision of what it offers. Finally, I agree single payer option was the way we needed to go, it's the only thing that really will curb cost and force insurers to stop raising insurance cost to simply meet corporate profit projections. It has little to do with the actual cost of the healthcare and far more to do with profit projections as well as lack of competition due to a non-national system.
In the late 70's and early 80's, The former USSR went bancKrupt after occupying AFGHANISTAN for nearly a decade. Not only we repeat the same mistake, but we added IRAK and TAX CUT for the RICH. To tell you that the US ECONOMY was BANCKRUPT president OBAMA took over is an UNDERSTATEMENT.
Those so called tax cuts for the rich that GW did helped ME! I am far far from rich. If it was not for a rich person, you would not be on the computer you used to write this crap or the internet that carried it.
Jobs created?? Can anyone in the media do their job? We have been losing jobs monthly for a solid three years and have a record number of people refusing to look anymore out of frustration and there supposedly has been 4.2m created. This is a joke.
Hey, What would you do. Go to work for $14.00 an hour or stay home on the tax payer dime for $11.00 an hour? Look at who votes for him and you will find your answer.
He also left out money printing.
is wolf really serious. does he not know this answer..
Wolf, you continue to disappoint me when it comes to being impartial in reporting political issues. After reading your blog today concerning Obama not "showing off" his health care accomplishments, you once again showed me how pro obama you are – i am disappointed as in the past I always felt that you were fair to both parities' candidates – obama would do well in hiring you as his spokes person! I am an independent voter that no longer feels that cnn gives unbiased news,
The bias is yours. An extreme conservative could say the exact same thing to point out sarcasticly that it's flawed, saying "Well, why isn't the President showing it off if it's such a big accomplishment?" There's no bias there.
I don't think Wolf is saying that he isn't "showing off", I think he is pointing out that if Obama and the Democrats spent so much time pushing this they should be mentioning it. Say you are an architect and you draw up the plans for a very publicized building. Then after the building is built you never mention it when making bids to build other buildings. Do you not think people would ask you why you weren't using something you spent so much time on to further your career?
Wolf IS being impartial. Maybe you should focus more on reading comprehension. Or maybe you don't understand the word "achievement". Whether it's viewed as a positive or a negative, the administration focusing so much attention on one large issue and getting it placed into law would be an achievement. Wolf refer's to the law as "the administration's No. 1 legislative achievement" and "his health care achievement". These are not biased terms. He did not call it the "best" or "greatest", he simply is commenting on size of the undertaking.
In short, maybe you should be more impartial in your interpretation of someone's commentary.
Nope not going to happen its my opinion and I am sticking to it.
And that's great and I can respect that, as long as your alternative isn't FOX. Wolf Blitzer may how bias, but he doesn't intentionally stuff you full of misinformation like Fox does. So if you want to go find unbiased reporting... well, good luck. Let me know where you find it. But please don't be another self-described independent voter who blasts CNN while FOX is blaring in the background.
Dora, are you serious? If anything, Blitzer is displaying an anti-Obama bias. He knows full well that the ACA is politically problematic for the Obama administration. "If he's so proud of it, why doesn't he tout it more?" is just more passive-aggressive snark from the Wolfster.
I think Wolf is saying that it seemingly would be an accomplishment in the eyes of those who agree with it. Of course, you dont, so that is why you are confused. With that said, Wolf may indeed favor Obama. He seems like an intelligent guy.
I think it's important to remember that it's a blog, meaning commentary or opinion, not a factual report. Mr. Blitzer has every right to bias entries in his blog –even if I disagree with him. 🙂
CNN hasn't been unbiased for years if it ever even was. CNN is a center-left news company and has been as long as I've read it. With the exception of maybe Jack Cafferty, all the reporters and opinion writers are left wing to varying degrees, Blitzer is no exception.
What? I got the exact opposite impression. He was belittling Obama for not touting the Affordable Health Care Act as if to say he was not proud of it and was distancing himself from the issue by not bringing it up.
I believe this is the point of his article. I took it as a tongue-in-cheek comment on why he can't actually tout the health reform legislation, because its still uncertain if it is even legal. Maybe I am reading this wrong.....but I didn't take this post as saying it was worth of touting, but he failed to do so.
Wolf, too bias. You did mention "Do not ask and Do not tell " he repeal. You are bias.
Wolf . . .
Because it was a back-room grand stand that robbed critical time and effort from our most pressing issue;
The US Economy.
and
Because it' really is a failure, in most respects, when one considers that this administration just added "another layer" rather than focusing on a fix of the bleeding and fraud infested medicaid and medicare systems which could have accomplished many, many objectives, including implementing the best features of the AHCA.
Define "another layer"? If you are refering to the health care reform , it adds no government layers until the free market driven exchanges should save even more than the now 50 billion estimated by 2014 released currently by the CBO. If this is a layer of government that saves +50billion dollars and still allows me and 30 million more people care and added care.....Im for it.
What fraud? It has been repeatedly reported that fraud within the Medicare/Medicaid system is less than 3%. Of the fraud exposed, it is generally medical facilities that are perpetrating the fraud. Individuals do not defraud the system because they get no money. The payments go to medical facilities and shyster medical suppliers. If you have PROOF other wise. Why not post it instead of more rhetoric based on your assumptions? I want even bother to address the rest of the b.s. in your posting.
Blitz,
The second answer is more plausible. If Obama touts the Health Care Reform Initiative, what all on the "Right" call Obamacare, then he would look like a fool when the Supreme Five shoot down the "law", as you know they will. As far as the first point, that polls show most people don't like it, well, most people don't know that there is "NO PENALTY" for not buying the so call Mandate Insurance. The big bad Government will not garnish wages, or retirement income, nothing, check it out!
Not at first. At first, they will only take your tax refund. And when that doesn't generate enough income, they will come back with the rest. And it wont take an act of Congress to change 'collection rules'
But don't worry. The law's costs could very well stand. Just with no way to pay for it.
Exactly well stated!
No penalty? Where are you getting your information? Obviously not from the law itself...nor from OBama...or the left wingers in Congress that voted for it..
so please...document how EVERYONE who's read the law (which doesn't include most in Congress that voted for it) is wrong...but you are correct
Actually there is a tax if you do not have healthcare and can afford it or not enough based on the laws guidlines. Also if you pay the tax you still have to pay for any services.
Wow!!!! You know what the Supreme Court is going to decide before they do...Just one question for you oh Mighty Soothsayer.... Why are you not on the Supreme Court if you know so much?
He's looking "forward" to appointing two new Supreme Court Justices!
It won't make a difference as no conservative justices will be retiring. He could only replace liberal with liberal.
What a ridiculous post. Of course he's waiting until the Supreme Court makes a decision. What – you want him to go tout something that may be ruled "unconstitutional" by the Roberts Court? Why would he do that? They will get to health care as soon as they know where things stand. They are going to bop the GOP over the head with all the good things in the ACA – as soon as they know which parts still exist after this kangaroo court makes a decision.
What good things? Specifically? Please only list things that don't redistribute "wealth"...nor parts that are unconstitutional...nor parts that don't apply to Congress
It is a kangaroo court – I wonder if anyone is taking notice of the conflicts of interest or the brazen ideology that tinges the docket and opinions. I wonder how it is rectified, besides just waiting on a Justice to retire or die. I'm also curious at my least favorite Justice – Justice Thomas – who seldom issues an opinion and never speaks in court. I don't trust him one iota; I'm surprised the public doesn't make more noise about him. He and his wife are bad, devious people and he has, in my estimation, damaged the reputation of the Court.
Kangaroo court? Really? John Roberts is chief justice. ONE VOTE! So, if your idol the president wants it we should all bow and let it happen? Typical liberal tolerence for others points of view. You are all for it, IF fits your world view, but if it goes against it, the opposition must be crazy or evil. Grow up! In politics you win some you loose some.
It seems you missed out – the bill is all wound together. It was made that way intentionally, because the authors thought it was so great and didn't want it to be picked apart, but in doing so its out with all if found to be against constitutional scope.
I guess Mr Blitzer is financially well off, so he does not need to be a paid advisor for Obama's reelection campaign.
Glaring omission...I thought the ommission was that battered and deep fried dog was finger licking good. Of course he didn't mention Obamacare, it wasn't an ommission...it was his mission.
I believe that the article is pretty much self-explanatory. As proud and content as Obama may be about this particular achievement it would be too politically risky to put a lot of emphasis on it in the course of his re-election campaign until the supreme court has ruled on it.
Wolf:
Is that a serious question? Sure the polls are surprisingly against the Act. The simple truth is that the Act creates governmental largesse to unfathomable proportions; I'm pretty sure that has NOT gone unnoticed with most folks.
Healthcare reform is a necessity, but not in it's current form. What's so surprising?
What is soo surprising that your view of this is creating some large government institution. 1. To date all that has been implimented is coverage expansion as mandated to the insurance companies. 2. elimination of pre exisiting conditions. 3. A set up of exchanges which will creat competition the true Capitalistic way. 4. A mandated payment system which has many small business and progressive income provisions. Obama should have implimented Socialized medicine and been done with it, but that would have gotten nut jobs and ignorant folks to shoot each other. Obama is doing a fantastic job considering the circumstances he took office under.
Really? The simple truth? The simple truth is you do not know what you are talking about. What plls are overwhelmingly opposed to the Affordable Health Care Act? The simple truth is you have never bothered to read the Health Care Act just like 90% of Americans so you have no freaking idea what it contains and how many hundreds of thousands of lives it can potentially save.
Chuck – we don't know what it contains – as do few of the people who voted for it, because a 2000 page bill was dumped on Congress with the expectation that people vote yes. As for what polls (I assume that's what plls is), most polls show the opinion of the health care plan being an approval rating between 35 and 40% from what I've seen. No matter how much YOU love it, MOST of america hates it.
ABBO 2012!
obamacare goes down 5 to 4 this july, hide and watch. when people realize just how bad things really are this summer and fall, so will this pathetic excuse for a president!!!
OBAMANOS!!!
noel – Of course the 5 Republicans will vote to strike down the law. They will say that it is unconstitutional, but it will be a political decision down party lines, not a judicial decision. It'll get overturned once Obama puts some reasonable people on the court.
Hold on to your hatred, Noel. It fits you.
Leon – so "reasonable" is what? anyone who is a Democrat – anyone who is not appointed by a Republican? You just made a statement implying the evil's of a party line vote, and then proceed to say how much better it is when you're party is the one calling he shots. One of the fastest contradictions I've seen in a while.
@ noel Time will tell, but I'll bet you 10,000 dollors President Obama gets re elected
Wolf, the AHCA likely did not affect a whole lot of middle class people yet. It most likely affected people who were already broke from past medical bills or young people (many of whom are unemployed, do not buy health insurance, or both). This is one of those laws like Social Security or Medicare that are generally not appreciated until they are needed. I've already noticed my company's health care costs start to come down with no decrease in quality, so I'm all for it.
Odd – I've noted the exact opposite. Most insurance companies have been raising their premiums. Also, for those with group rates it might be somewhat less noticable depending on the quality of your group, but as more unhealthy people with pre-existing conditions seek insurance, the tide will change. Those who don't have (or want) insurance will shoulder the healthcare costs for those who refuse to take care of their own health in a proactive manner.
I'm pretty sure Wolf's guess was right. It would be very embarrassing for Obama to start off his general election campaign pointing out how he ran roughshod over every rule of order and decency in Washington (which were lacking enough as it is) to push through the healthcare law, only to have it repealed because of it's rather obviously unconstitutional mandate.
He basically had the unmitigated gall NOT to just bend over and let the Republicans have everything they want. He's done nothing subversive regarding the constitution, though you might have that whole thing backwards, since you undoubtedly supported every evil move of Bush/Cheney, who WERE subverting the constitution. (Remember the "free speech zones" that were really little wire cages two miles from parade routes? Spin that, doc!) Why not just be honest? Why not just say "if a liberal president saves a baby from a burning building, my friends and I will find a way to make it sound like a selfish, evil act"? C'mon, man up. Admit it.
Only because a Democrat would only try to save someone unless it benefited them personally. All politicians are creatures of opportunity, not conscience – except for that Mayor from NJ – he might be the lone exception. Think we can get him as President? He has executive experience, unlike our current Clown-in-Chief.
Oh boy. Cool another expert on Constitutional Law. So tell us, why are you not on the Supreme Court? You seem to think you know more than judges that have not decided this issue yet. I'm guessing you call yourself a Republican.
Wolf, you as well as anyone know full well why the Dems aren't going to shout out about health care reform. It's simple. Those who care and need it know about it and are Democrat voters in the bag. Everyone else is certainly aware of it and the Republicans will get as much mileage out of the costs as possible. It will obviously be an issue from the Republicans, but the Democrats know they have the high ground. Forty million Americans had no coverage whatsoever before the reform and Mr. Romney knows the whole thing is a minefield for him. If he protests too loudly, the Democrats compare it to his own Massachusetts bill. It's still early in the campaign, but sounds like a winner for the Dems to me. Frankly, Romney is doomed on this and every other issue. Living and campaigning like Gumby (the clay/rubber character) to try and be all things to all people has taken its toll and it's time to pay the piper. In other words, he made his bed – time for him to sleep in it.
Bushes was bad but obummer is even worse.We need somebody who really cares about the little people.There basically is no middle class people left and our government has done everything possible to get rid of them.I still say if they take soc.security and keep raising medicare costs we need to cut all government pay 3/4% and cut their benefits the same as they do ours.They do not do anything anyway to earn it.VOTE ALL INCUMBANTS MUST GO NOW.Jim Thomas PHX.Az.
Glory Hallelujah! The new middle class used to be the lower class.
Not mentioning the health care act is unsurprising since it is awaiting the SCOTUS ruling. Time enough to draw attention to it later, depending on which way it goes. And those of us who support the Act did want universal, but it was unachievable. You do the possible.
...Improving US Economy, yeah right!! when apparently 86 million of Americans do not work or contribute to the gov coffers?, you can't have a thriving economic recovery with those kinds of numbers... and that's according to CNN's story last week... Obama didn't catch/kill Osama, the military did, the recession was over by the end of 2009, another CNN story also, and the auto "recovery" would have happened regardless as suggested by Romney since they had to go through restructured bankruptcy ANYWAY, so really, what has this guy done for the last 3 1/2 years? He's been campaigning since he got into office and blaming his predecessor for all the problems we now see, the guy is just and inept individual, way over his head on the presidential job, way way over his head.
It would be reckless for the President to do so before the SC's ruling. No one is saying he cannot do it if the law is upheld.
Obama omitted health care achievement because his opponents are going to highlight it, just like they cry on every reform that is good for the common people, and not so for the big businesses. So why waste money?
He also forgot to mention the 5 TRILLION DOLLARS added to the national debt in 4 years...
Wolf, we will have plenty of time to mull it over once the SCOTUS is done. But in truth I doubt many people are in the mood to be swayed any more, no matter what they say. If un-constitutional, it's back to the drawing board, and back to being only a campaign promise and issue.
wolf, you sound like a hyena......keep repeating the same thing over and over again
The ACA is the most unpopular legislation in recent history...no wonder he doesn't bring it up... it's the "800 lb Gorilla" in the room...
Progressives (Socialists, Marxists, Communists...Enviromentalists) are a Disease, 2012 Continues the Cure!
You answered your own question.....why praise something that might get shot down by the Courts.
After 8 years of George W. Bush I found it hard to imagine that there could poblsisy be any one worse for Israel than George W. Bush was. To date, George W. Bush has been by far and away the most harmful to Israeli interests of any American President.While it does appear that Barack Obama has something aganist Israel and he is prepared "to act on it," it remains to be seen how much damage he can actually do. In the case of Mr. Bush, the Republican "base" probably tolerated anti-Israel measures that they would not have toloerated had they been instituted by a Democrat. Mr. Obama is unlikely to have the support of Republicans on most anti-Israel measures he might persue. Also, Mr. Obama faces a deterioating economic situation. This is going to require a great deal of his attention. These factors will cut into Obama's ability to pressure Israel.While it is true that Obama does not really need Repubicans right now, if the economy gets worse, as it likely will given the bone headed policies of the Democrats and Mr. Obama, the Democrats will likely be in serious trouble come election time in 2010. In other words, they may be to busy trying to hold onto the the House and Senate to focus to much on Israel.Finally, the American military is tremendously worn down from continued operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the "Global War on Terror" and the huge budget deficits will likely force steep cuts to the military budget. Given these factors a "military option" for Obama to bring Israel into compliance is all but impossible right now and it will be even less likely in future years. For the sake of America, I pray these factors will act to restrain the baser instincts of some in the American government. Unfortunately Obama has shown himself to be a fool in many of his actions. He may just be foolsih enough to try something stupid against Israel. In which case we would hope he has advisors who would steer him in a sensible direction or that Congress would restrain him.In the final analysis, America needs Israel far more than Israel needs America. America needs Israeli intellegence and it needs for Israel to act as a buffer between it and its Islamic enemies. Should Israel choose not to cooperate with America this would place the survival of America in an even more precarious position than it already is. I pray Mr. Obama and the American government come to their senses.
So Obama fails to mention his health care reform. Is it because it is based upon the one Romney developed in Massachussetts? Which begs the question, "why doesn't the GOP have its favorite toy tout it on the campaign trail?" The answer: it will bring to light the hypocrisy of the GOP. 3 years of complaining about the Health Care Reform Act and now they want to nominate the source of this unconstitutional act.
The pertinent dichotomy as far as the so-called "Affordable Care Act" is concerned is not conservative-liberal. The alternative medicine constituency is angry over the loss of local control and the interference of insurers with herbal medicine. Libertarians resent being told to buy a product and economists, like myself, resent being told to buy into a scam - health insurance - which is primarily responsible for the hyperinflation of medical fees. Community-minded people who are aware of the corrupting influence of health insurance are aghast that they will be required to support the further commercialization of medicine by paying health insurance premiums.
The ONLY group who likes the ACA is the one composed of health insurerers.
Single payer, based on a tax would be 100% legal and constitution. Why does The GOP think prvate insurance companies have a god-given right to force their way between a most patients and their doctors, make huge profits as a result and then be given government protection from being obsolescent .
Wolf the President mentions health care in almost every speech. He is npt obligated to talk about it the way you want him too. You want that give your own speech. at any rate the is no glaring omission. That's just factually incorrect as you yourself admit. This is not jopurnalism this is looking to create cheap controversy. Why don't you talk about the real glaring omission? Namely Romney's totally ignoring his bill while desperately pandering for applause by threatening to nullify his own bill. Now there's a story!! Somehow I bet we'll never hear that one from you though.
Obama’s glaring omission, OBAMACARE! Wolfe I wish you were his campaign manager and speech writer. There is an obvious reason why Obama, the constitutional professor, didn't mention his #1 accomplishment and that is because the constitutional professor shot his wad on an unconstitutional overreach for government control of the medical industry.
Oh come on, Blitz. You know exactly why he isn't mentioning it. It turns off half the electorate.
It may be true that some people in Ohio and other places will not support the predident based on his race, but on balance more people vote for him than against him for that reason. Its no going to be a valid excuse come november if he loses. It will be because of his economic record.
John
Dartmouth, ma.
Because it would be even worse if they started bragging about it, pulling it more to the center of everyone's attention, just to have it voted against. Duh!
Can the media stop drooling and actually report the facts? For instance, what is the cost of bailing out the auto industry, and was it worth it since GM still went bankrupt? Was Obama solely responsible for Bin Laden's death? Did Obama follow Bush's withdraw from Iraq? Did the stimulus work as predicted to help the economy? How many jobs were lost under Obama? Did the health care bill cost more than anticipated? Quit trying to sugar coat the facts please!
I can't believe that animals are smarter than us humans when it comes to choosing a sex partner! I have NEVER seen two MALE dogs have sex(or cats, horses, cows and on and on)! It's not natural and against God's word! This world is coming to an end and OUR government and news media is helping speed it up!
I wonder just how deep this gay/lesbian thing goes in our government and news media! Is that, maybe why no one wants to take a stand! People in glass houses don't throw stones!
I really don't expect you or anyone else to respond to this.
Sorry, but the more I hear about Obama, the more I miss Bill. And Dubya.
I think the reason that he did not mentioned it, is because between now and november that will be all that the GOP and the right will be talking about. He will have ample time to debate it. I am still shock to hear when American says let their fellow american who does not have healt care die, why should I pay for them. It is a very frightening for me when I hear such arguments, makes me think what my neighbour is really thniking when he hears those things.
I work with a lot of people with pre-existing conditions; knees that need replacing, arthritis, so on. These same people cheered when it looked like the Supreme Court will over-rule the public mandate. I guess I won't be paying for them. Another lady near me has a boyfriend in construction that won't get health insurance. He'll likely get too drunk to crawl the roof one of these days in end up in the ER on my dime. Since nothing will change it will be interesting to see how this works out for the Boomers as they fall apart.
It is an ace in the hole that he doesn't need to tout right now. Let the Supreme Court ok the Affordable Care Act, then he can start to campaign how he would make it better and contrast it to how Romney would have scuttled the program and thus end all the benefits of it.
Why would he take credit for the most unpopular, partisan, unconstitutional bill to ever come through congress. Thankfully this bill will gone before we find out everything that is in it.
Perhaps if the media had worked at debunking all the lies told about the PPACA, INSTEAD of repeating them, the public, being better informed, would have a better opinion about the law. Start with the "half trillion stolen from Medicare" lie, the Lie of the Year!
This seems like a pretty silly piece. Why is Blitzer asking a question which he himself virtually answers in the piece. This is really a backhanded way of criticizing Obama for something, but what isn't very clear. Obama shouldn't have to be shy about touting his health care plan. It isn't as good as it could've been, but the best that could be done in view of the retrogressive Republicans who only wanted the country to suffer these last four years so they could win back the White House. Still, why should Obama tout the plan given the political antipathy towards it (as well as ignorance about it). That isn't politically smart. If Blitzer wants to write something, then talk about how the Republicans have tried to sabotage everything Obama for four years - and that's all they have tried to do. C'mon Wolf, you can do better than this effort.
Are you kidding me slim? For the first two years the democrats had control over the government and went on a spending beng as they did the last few years that Bush was in office. Their unresponsible spending and policies is what caused the crash in the first place. The people finally woke up and saw the distruction that the democrats were doing and voted in the republicans to stop it. Since the democrats still own the senate we have been locked up with them voting down anything the republicans try to do. You wonder why our country's recovery is so slow. There is only one answer. Democrats/liberals!
Are you a sock puppet with a pull string? During the last 6 months of the Bush fiasco, over 4 million people became unemployed. In the last month of Bush being president we lost an astounding 750,000 jobs. Since Obama was elected America has averaged adding over 100,000 jobs per month. Do not let facts stand in the way of your "rhetoric" based in ignorance. Try doing some research. By research, I am not referring to the Faux Comedy Hour either.
I have to agree that Pres. Obama has at least pointed the US in the right direction. The GOP just does not want to admit that they created the financial disaster, nor do they want to give Obama ANY credit for his accomplishments. They even found a way to criticize him for the killing of bin Laden. What a thankless job he has.
Ever since the Obama ad featuring Wolf came out, I notice his comments are increasingly more bias ; if he hated it just say so ; then go back to pretending to be unbias.
NOTHING to take credit for–
During the last campaigne I noticed you only asked BO if he could withstand the coming Republican attacks. Boy, what a reporter, didn't even ask how we were to vote buying schemes.
You are a pitifull reporter........well at least your legs don't tingle when he speaks....and reguard him as god-like.
Hey Wolf, how about taking time to explore Mitt Ronmey's total omission of his entire 4 years as governor of Massachusetts. How many jobs did he create? The state of the economy when he left office? etc
The problem with this "observation" by Blitzer is that the real test of the AHCA and how it resonates with the public won't take place until after it is in place for 5 years or so. It's easy for everyone to take potshots at something that hasn't had a chance to stand on it's own. They're just cheap shots and not worthy of a real journalist.
Would you, if certain elected officials who hadn't read the 2700 page document forced it down the throat of 1/2 of the population's throat that didn't want it and still get elected/?
"I still wonder why the president and his top aides have not been more forceful in taking credit for the health care law." You'll have to ask him/them . . . After you vote for him!
America will NEVER get another chance for another healthcare reform to give universal healthcare to everyone if Obamacare fails.
I will vote for Obama but hang my Obama sticker 2012 sticker upside down on my car due to the fat cats in politics and the venomous wolves in the media.
Wolf its because America isn't near as important as an election. Are you asking why the incumbent doesn't take credit for a political liability on an election year? Venomous.
He's playing politics; he'll wait until the Supreme Court rules and then figure out how to spin it so it best benefits him and his reelection.
I would like to read an article someday about why Obama *shouldn't* be re-elected.
Wolf, what you refer to as an accomplishment others refer to as evolutionary. Such as, the end to the Iraq war, the auto bailout was not due to Obama's financial genius either and the Healthcare bill is not a operational success. A bill was passed, rammed down the throat of America. That's it. You should be more independent in your thought process.
Even though it has been dubbed "Obamacare" by people in the press – like Blitzer – the truth is this law was drafted and passed by Congress. If anything, it should be called 'Baucuscare" since it is Senator Baucus who declared that any hint of a public option was "off the table."
Obama's original health care proposal was not very close to what Congress eventually enacted.
Perhaps, Wolf, you could use an American civics lesson? You know, Executive, Legislative, Judicial branches? Congress makes laws, not the president.
The ad didn't mention it because the SC is still out on this one and in all liklihood may overturn part of it as unconstitutional. President Obama does not want to be on the wrong side of that in his campaign ads. Most of what he mentions in the ad has a level of deceit in it (as do all political ads) so he is just trying to pander to those that don't do their homework. The created "jobs" stat is bogus but will be claimed by many to be true because it comes from the Democratic Party as campaign gospel.
I believe Obama and staff are waiting for the axe to fall from the Supreme Court. I then think it will be talked about extensively on what will then be not accessible for the many uninsured, especially minors. They should all participate in a bipartisan compromise, or face the axe themselves.
Maybe there was just too much to be proud of to fit into the add, as you can see President Obama has done an outstanding job so far.Many may forget but, our economy was on the brink of a collapse, and for sometime I wondered if we colud really get out of the depression that the Bush Administration got us into
Obama's Affordable Health Care Act is not unpopular with the American public. It's the lies that the Republicans told them it was that's unpopular. Death Panels, will gut medicare (which they want to do anyway), cause humongous tax increases (nonsense), etc.
I understand why the mandate is unpopular, but I also understand why it is necessary. You can't require the insurance companies to not deny anyone coverage for pre-existing conditions, unless you also require that nearly everyone gets health insurance. Otherwise, people will just wait until they are sick, buy health insurance, and the insurance companies would go bankrupt. It doesn't work. Without the mandate, the only other thing that would work (excluding single-payer of course) is a public option. We would have had one except for the far right noise machine.
I fully expect the Supreme Court will overturn the mandate. They have a record of rubber-stamping the Republican agenda, and I expect it to continue. Roberts should be ashamed for presiding over such a court.
*Hugganoak* You 've got that right!! If his health care was such a big negative issue...why isn't Mitt using it as a talking point. Most of the pople speaking negatively about it don't know what they are talking about. Even if it is so called deamed "Unconstitutional" at least he tried to do something. You can't please everyone.
The insurance companies have bought all of the anti affordable health care spew because they cannot stand the 15% cap on charges. Their poor CEO's would have to settle for a couple of million in pay per year instead of 10 million.
Maybe Obama isn't listening to you jokers in the media for a script on how to get re-elected. The healthcare program will come up.
Mr. Blitzer.. YOUR so quick to chastise President Obama for not talking loud and up front about his health care act... At least he did mention it. Why don't you go after the republicans for the out right lie they are showing about how he sent jobs (making street lights) to china, building an auto out of the united states, building a power plant in mexico. NO you would rather try to make the President look bad any way you can... I wish they would put ANYBODY in your time slot and you could go to fox noise where you belong...
Ditto have a great day
"Many court watchers believe the justices will rule against the president, based on what they heard during the oral arguments". Wolf, I do not think the oral arguments made any difference. You know the vote is going to be 5 to 4 to overturn the law. In fact, I venture to say that 5 of those justices were not even listening to the arguments.
Keep pushing the lies. 4.2 million jobs created yet real unemployment is 22.3% ( source is shadowstats ) All this despite more people being available for work and less working than way back in 1981! Those are some tall lies Mr. President.
It's an election year. All activity is poll-driven. Polls say Obamacare is unpopular (for whatever reason). Therefore, the President will not mention it.
God bless our president !!
Actually, Wolf, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks about Affordable Health Care. Not the people, but 9 judges will decide if it exists any more. That decision will determine the Democrats' next move, which will be to get a true one-payer system that eventually would control healthcare costs and make coverage universal. I think the president is waiting for that result before moving on it. It's a Republican idea, but now that Obama has successfully started a move in that diection, the new right-wing GOP hates it. Just like they oppose everything he is associated with.
So can Obama be sued for false advertising now? His ad is false given he had not a thing at all to do with getting out troops out of Iraq. Bush set that up with Al-Maliki in the SOFA Agreement that was signed November 17, 2008, and ratified November 27, 2008. Bush got the troops out of Iraq, not Obama, he had not a thing to do with it.
Why doesn't he take credit, because Bush did it.
I think that you answered your own questions Wolf. Obama and the Democrats are now trying to distance themselves from Obamacare--because they know that the majority in the country does not support it, and they know that the Supreme Court Justices are going to rule against it next month!! And, you are also right--this is going to definitely be very embarrassing for Obama and the Democrats. It is also going to be embarrassing for Obama and the Democrats when the Supreme Court Justices rule that Arizona has every right to enforce the federal immigration laws in their state-their decision also to come in June/July.
I see your true colors. Need fresh bait, lol O will survive I guarantee it.
I think that Wolff has this one nailed. Obama and all of the Dems are running from the healthcare law as fast as their feet can carry them. The elections of 2010 spoke volumes about how much the people liked the law and the President in a speech shortly after the defeats in 2010 of pivoting to getting jobs created. The House responded to the President's plea and to his jobs program bill that he sent up to the hill and passed 40 bills that were sent to the Senate. Harry Reid (D) is still sitting on those bills. My question is why is Harry still sitting on those bills since they are from the President's own bill and are the things that both Dems and Reps can agree on?
Gee I wonder if that is part of the President's plan; to run on a "do nothing" congress?
Wolf - passing a bunch of health care rules was easy, particuolalry when you have a majority in both houses of congress. Figuring out how to pay for them is harder. I suspect that if Obama begins to poke the Obamacare bear someone is going to say, "You spent a trillion dollars with this - where is that coming from? Who is going to pay for it?" Absent that, his accomplishment is diminished to ramrodding through a bill which is pervasive to our people and our economy which a majority of the people don;t like. That's not an accomplishment of a talented leader, it's grandstanding by a politician.
I'd say he might be waiting to hear the decision from our illustrious Supreme Court – then the campaign can make a decision as to how to play it. Politics – you gotta love it. No matter, I still believe in and support our President 100 percent.
On a side note, I wonder if the Supreme Court is cognizant of what they unleashed with Citizens United and the havoc it has wreaked upon the political process. I remember a certain State of the Union when this was mentioned by the President and Justice Alito was incensed. Well now . . . .
Wolf writes: "I still wonder why the president and his top aides have not been more forceful in taking credit for the health care law."
Still wonder?? Why would they take credit for a bill that was controversial from the start. It took many months to finally get it jammed through with almost no support from the republicans and with almost no one having read it. Remember Nancy Pelosi saying "We will have to pass the bill so you can see whats in it" It cuts Medicare by 500 billion but sspends it somewhere else while still calling it a reduction in spending. It will cost many time what the President and Dems promised an our costs are going up to cover the mandates to insurance companies.
News Flash Wolf, the Dems could never have passed single payer national ins even with the huge majorities they had in Congress so they put this system in place hoping to slip it under the radar and hope for the best. Its unpopular with independants who can see it for what it is. The Obama Admin is probably hoping the Supreme Court knocks it down. Then he can run against them without trying to defend the horrible bill that Pelosi and Sen Reid got passed.
He probably isn't saying much about the health care because it's a reminder that like all the other bragging rights its not something that he can claim having done under his own merit. One credit to President Obama's record is blaming other presidents and administrations for his failures and taking credit for capitalizing upon their accomplishments.
Are you serious?! The reason he's not mentioning it CLEARLY is because it's such a polarizing issue. Even a good number on the left disagree with it, saying it doesn't go far enough. Although a huge win for the White House, why would you focus more attention on an issue that divides Americans more than any other?
Dear President Obama,
Please hire Mr. Blitzer as your campaign manager.
Yours truly,
A life-long conservative
It seems obvious why he's not touting the law- it's unpopular and Obama is following the wind behind the voters. Funny how people often accuse Romney of bending with the popular views of the moment. I see Obama doing the exact same thing if not more so at times. To me the biggest problem with the health care law is the process used to pass it. "Vote for it then we'll find out what all is in it." Really? Is that how a Republic should operate? I think not! Do any of us fully understand the entire law even now? I doubt it!
If Obama has a 60 second ad regarding his accomplishments than its 59 seconds too long. Obama didn't reform health care he created a new entitlement program.
old news