Team Obama Sends Out "New 2nd Term Booklet" Today

[Kathianne]

So, Obama 'won' the debate last night, but obviously not the war. Who's ever heard of a candidate, much less an incumbent putting together a 'new plan' 2 weeks before the election? The results of last evening must have been anticipated to get this out today:

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/10/23...not-significan

CNN: Obama's plan not "significantly new," just same old stuff repackaged

By J.P. Freire on 10.23.12 @ 10:55AM

<!-- INTEXT_ON --> Reporting the release of the new Obama agenda two weeks out from the election, CNN's Jessica Yellin came out visibly annoyed: "There's not anything significantly new in here, it's just all compiled in a nice booklet now."
Here's the video:



<object height="340" width="560">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Jky5Rzt8yJw?fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="340" width="560">

</object>
</p> What's remarkable here is that if the president's campaign were confident in the narrative coming out of the foreign policy debate, they wouldn't be changing the subject with a "new plan," or a new repackaging of an old plan. They'd be talking about Romney's inexperience and poor judgment and poor showing in the debate. They'd be talking up how Obama killed Bin Ladin, kept GM alive, and that you can't know the kind of crazy future Mitt Romney might herald.


This doesn't mean that they think they lost this debate. They just see it as a wash that can't move this campaign forward. But here's how that strikes me: For a sitting president to come away from a debate on foreign policy and have it show as a wash -- with all the things that Obama has claimed as his strengths in foreign policy, that seems to be a bit of a problem. The president should have won the foreign policy debate hands down. He didn't, and his campaign knows he didn't, so now they're moving on to a new topic.


... In fact, for these booklets to be so abundant, they had to have planned this ahead. Is it possible that they were so worried about how this might have gone that they prepared to change the subject just in case?
<object height="340" width="560">Why, one could even argue that it's a binder full of the same tired ideas.

</object>
Update: Now the Post weighs in. Rachel Weiner from The Fix refers to it as a "booklet" in her tweet. And the linked article says this:

There is little new in the plan Obama is touting today — much of it is a repackaging of proposals he has been offering on the campaign trail for months, such as plans to use half the savings from winding down wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for domestic infrastructure investment; create incentives for companies to bring jobs back to the U.S. (and end tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas); continue investing in “clean” energy; recruit 100,000 new math and science teachers.

Worth asking though: The writer says "much of it is a repacking of proposals..." What portion of it is not? What's in there we haven't already heard? (WaPo has finally updated their post to say "There are no new proposals in the plan Obama is touting.")

[aboutime]

NOTICE. Obama DID NOT WIN anything last night. Unless he was in competition for telling more lies than Romney. And Romney seemed to be pretty effective in allowing Obama to just act like REPEAT....sitting on the Fence with PETE. And PETE keeps falling off. Much like Obama does. Making a total ASS of himself, and everyone around him.

[aboutime]

That new booklet, should rightfully be labeled "OBAMA'S BOOK OF LIES".

[Kathianne]

The desperation literally reeks from this, another factor in momentum.

[aboutime]

The desperation literally reeks from this, another factor in momentum.

Kathianne. Desperation is a Kind way of putting it. Too bad we still have 14 more days they will use to DESTROY anyone who gets in their way, and none of them are smart enough to know WHY?

[Kathianne]

Kathianne. Desperation is a Kind way of putting it. Too bad we still have 14 more days they will use to DESTROY anyone who gets in their way, and none of them are smart enough to know WHY?

I hate to break it to you, but they haven't been able to 'destroy' anyone for awhile now, try as desperately as they may. Two weeks can be an eternity, but it would take something pretty weird to change it now and it won't be a booklet of policies the voters have already decided to reject.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So, Obama 'won' the debate last night, but obviously not the war. Who's ever heard of a candidate, much less an incumbent putting together a 'new plan' 2 weeks before the election? The results of last evening must have been anticipated to get this out today:

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/10/23...not-significan

CNN: Obama's plan not "significantly new," just same old stuff repackaged

By J.P. Freire on 10.23.12 @ 10:55AM

<!-- INTEXT_ON --> Reporting the release of the new Obama agenda two weeks out from the election, CNN's Jessica Yellin came out visibly annoyed: "There's not anything significantly new in here, it's just all compiled in a nice booklet now."
Here's the video:



<OBJECT width="560" height="340">


<EMBED height=340 type=application/x-shockwave-flash width=560 src=http://www.youtube.com/v/Jky5Rzt8yJw?fs=1 allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always">

</OBJECT>
What's remarkable here is that if the president's campaign were confident in the narrative coming out of the foreign policy debate, they wouldn't be changing the subject with a "new plan," or a new repackaging of an old plan. They'd be talking about Romney's inexperience and poor judgment and poor showing in the debate. They'd be talking up how Obama killed Bin Ladin, kept GM alive, and that you can't know the kind of crazy future Mitt Romney might herald.


This doesn't mean that they think they lost this debate. They just see it as a wash that can't move this campaign forward. But here's how that strikes me: For a sitting president to come away from a debate on foreign policy and have it show as a wash -- with all the things that Obama has claimed as his strengths in foreign policy, that seems to be a bit of a problem. The president should have won the foreign policy debate hands down. He didn't, and his campaign knows he didn't, so now they're moving on to a new topic.


... In fact, for these booklets to be so abundant, they had to have planned this ahead. Is it possible that they were so worried about how this might have gone that they prepared to change the subject just in case?
<OBJECT width="560" height="340">Why, one could even argue that it's a binder full of the same tired ideas.

</OBJECT>
Update: Now the Post weighs in. Rachel Weiner from The Fix refers to it as a "booklet" in her tweet. And the linked article says this:

There is little new in the plan Obama is touting today — much of it is a repackaging of proposals he has been offering on the campaign trail for months, such as plans to use half the savings from winding down wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for domestic infrastructure investment; create incentives for companies to bring jobs back to the U.S. (and end tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas); continue investing in “clean” energy; recruit 100,000 new math and science teachers.

Worth asking though: The writer says "much of it is a repacking of proposals..." What portion of it is not? What's in there we haven't already heard? (WaPo has finally updated their post to say "There are no new proposals in the plan Obama is touting.")

Obama did not win last night's debate. He also revealed how childishly petty he was with all the interrupting Romney that he did. Im guessing that Romney CHOSE NOT THE DESTROY HIM ON FOREIGN POLICY BECAUSE ROMNEY DID NOT WANT BAMBOY TO GET THE SYMPATHY VOTE FROM THE IDIOTS THAT ARE UNDECIDED AT THIS LATE DATE.
A sure sign they knew they were in trouble and it was only going to get worse was when they were begging people to vote early. Before more about obama's weakness become known.-Tyr

[aboutime]

I hate to break it to you, but they haven't been able to 'destroy' anyone for awhile now, try as desperately as they may. Two weeks can be an eternity, but it would take something pretty weird to change it now and it won't be a booklet of policies the voters have already decided to reject.

I do hope you are right about that. But Desperate people do desperate things. And the Democrats are not beyond trying everything. Look at the examples we have been reading about. Examples of Obama, Democrat crazies who are promising...If Obama loses. They will create riots, and some...have even threatened to kill in the name of Black Racist claims.

Of course. If they do that. All of America will see exactly what many have been warning them about since Obama was elected.

[red states rule]

That new booklet, should rightfully be labeled "OBAMA'S BOOK OF LIES".

[red states rule]

The desperation literally reeks from this, another factor in momentum.

Those of us who still have a job are the ones who should be desperate. Another 4 years of Obama will transform America into the United Nations of America with about 70% of the population on government assistance programs. The rest of the nation will be taxed even more and our debt to double or even triple thanks to Obamanomics.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The rest of the nation will be taxed even more and our debt to double or even triple thanks to Obamanomics.

^^^^ Thats tha plan...Only "they" plan on it being even worse, far worse... They= being obama's handlers..-Tyr

[red states rule]

[aboutime]

Here is Obama's plan for his second term. And it just happens to be the same as his first.

This is what Obama is doing to the American people...even those who vote for him.

condumm.jpg Safely, by doing this.....SafeSex.gif

[Kathianne]

Lowry on Politico ?!

Mind you, Rich Lowry doesn't need to send an op-ed anywhere, he's editor of National Review. This op-ed is for Politico readers:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82851.html

Obama's pathetic picture book

By RICH LOWRY | 10/25/12 4:30 AM EDT

As an artifact of the diminishment of President Barack Obama, it is hard to top his newly released pamphlet, “A Plan for Jobs & Middle-Class Security.”


The plan purports, first, to be a plan, and second, to outline a second-term agenda distinct from his first-term agenda. It fails on both counts. It cobbles together his current policies with some ill-defined new bullet points to barely cover 20 pages largely devoted to nice pictures of the president.


Make no mistake: What the Obama agenda lacks in substance, it makes up in graphic design. The pamphlet has as much gloss and as many soft-focus photos as a copy of Playboy. The seriously besotted Obama fan might have to assure friends, “No, really — I only read the Obama second-term plan for the policy details.”
Why would the president wait until 14 days before the election, after the conventions and the debates, to release his plan? And then print 3.5 million copies of it, making the plan a publishing phenomenon to rival “Dreams from My Father”?


It’s the panicked realization that his campaign’s attempted destruction of Mitt Romney hasn’t worked and isn’t enough to win. The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll this week found that 62 percent of people want major changes in a prospective Obama second term. Four percent — that’s almost down to Obama administration officials and immediate family — want more of the same.


So the president needed someone to get on QuarkXPress to paste together “a new plan” and then run down to FedEx Kinko’s — pronto. But he couldn’t hit print during debate season, lest he give his opponent another target. Surely Romney would have loved to cite the risible document as Exhibit A for Obama’s status-quo presidency...

Rich Lowry is editor of National Review.

[aboutime]

Lowry on Politico ?!

Mind you, Rich Lowry doesn't need to send an op-ed anywhere, he's editor of National Review. This op-ed is for Politico readers:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82851.html

Kathianne. One word says all any of us need to hear, or read. And that word is: PATHETIC.