What does it mean for President Obama that he can't even get the Democrat-controlled Senate to pass his jobs bill?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Here's just one more sign that President Obama is in deep trouble headed into a re-election year:
The Democrat-controlled senate has failed to pass the president's job bill, his top legislative priority.
The senate voted 50-to-49 against the $447 billion package - falling far short of the 60 votes needed to pass.
President Obama has been barnstorming the country to promote this thing, but it didn't make a difference:
Not a single Republican voted for the jobs bill. And, even worse - two Democrats up for re-election in conservative states also voted against it.
President Obama insists this isn't the end of the road for the jobs bill. He's vowing to break the massive initiative down into several separate bills and have Congress vote on them one at a time. Some of the more popular elements include a payroll tax cut and the extension of unemployment benefits.
But it's far from certain that the bitterly divided congress will pass any of this stuff headed into the 2012 elections. Republicans call the whole thing a political stunt. They say the jobs bill is nothing more than another failed stimulus plan.
Meanwhile, Democrats up for re-election will have to decide whether or not to stand by the president. Experts tell Reuters that at least a few dozen Democrats might duck President Obama in 2012 since unpopular presidents traditionally hurt their party in Congress.
It's early - and that number may go up or down depending on a couple of other numbers: Mr. Obama's approval rating, now in the low 40s, and the nation's unemployment rate - which has been stuck at over 9%.
Here’s my question to you: What does it mean for President Obama that he can't even get the Democrat-controlled Senate to pass his jobs bill?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Time for Attorney General Holder to resign over Fast and Furious gun scandal?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
It was curious timing for the administration to announce the details of that Iranian terror plot yesterday. The news conveniently took the focus off the growing scandal surrounding Attorney General Eric Holder and the federal gun-running operation, Fast and Furious.
President Obama was reportedly briefed on this supposed terror plot back in June – but the feds chose yesterday to go public with it. When Attorney General Eric Holder was asked about being subpoenaed over Fast and Furious, he abruptly ended his news conference on the terror plot.
But terror plot or not, this story isn't going away.
Congressional investigators have issued a subpoena. They want to get their hands on communications from top Justice Department officials including Attorney General Eric Holder.
The head of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Republican Darrell Issa of California, says "it's time to know the whole truth."
Issa says holder has made "numerous statements" about the program that have "proven to be untrue." Translation: Holder's lying.
Fast and Furious allowed illegal guns to "walk" from Arizona gun stores into Mexico.
The idea was to track sellers and buyers of guns to the Mexican drug cartels. But, it all went wrong when weapons found at Mexican and American murder scenes were traced back to the program. In fact, two of the guns linked to Fast and Furious were found at the scene of the murder of a border patrol agent.
Holder testified in may that he only found out about the program a few weeks before then. But Republicans point to Justice Department documents that show Holder knew about it much, much earlier.
Here’s my question to you: Is it time for Attorney General Eric Holder to resign over the Fast and Furious gun scandal?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments