† Is Obama Already A Lame Duck?: Wesley Pruden, editor emeritus of The Washington Times, calls President Barack Hussein Obama’s latest round of stump speeches to convince voters that, despite negative economic indicators to the contrary, everything is just peachy keen “a magical mystery tour to prove that he is, too, still the messiah.” He adds:

 

The president has yet to get his mind around the fact that most Americans have decided that he betrayed their trust, that their only hope for change begins in November. …

 

Mr. Obama can't fix what's wrong with him with a recitation of what he's done for America - the health care reform, the stimulus, the Wall Street regulatory bill - because most Americans don't like what he's done to America and have taken his measure and decided that he just can't get it.

 

Voters aren’t the only ones who feel betrayed. House Dems are grumbling that the White House did not push the Senate to pass climate change legislation after they put their political careers on the line to pass a bill capping carbon emissions last summer, The Washington Post reports:

 

The White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had assured reluctant members that the Senate would take up the measure. Although Senate passage wasn't a sure thing, House Democrats hoped to go back home to voters with a great story to tell - about reducing dependence on foreign oil, slowing climate change and creating jobs.

 

That didn't happen. Senate leaders, sensing political danger, repeatedly put off energy legislation, and the White House didn't lean on them very hard to make it a priority. In the aftermath of the gulf oil spill, the Senate is set to take up a stripped-down bill next week, but the controversial carbon-emissions cap is conspicuously missing.

 

This has left some House Democrats feeling badly served by their leaders. Although lawmakers are reluctant to say so publicly, their aides and campaign advisers privately complain that the speaker and the president left Democrats exposed on an unpopular issue that has little hope of being signed into law.

 

Some Democrats liken the situation to that of the 1993 "Btu" tax. The House passed the tax, but the Senate never took it up. Many House Democrats felt hung out on a limb in the 1994 elections, when Republicans reclaimed control of Congress for the first time in 40 years.

 

“Democrats in Congress feel underappreciated for having cast tough votes … [and] feel exposed for supporting unpopular policies they consider poorly explained and badly defended by the administration,” notes Karl Rove, former deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed: 

 

[T]here's a belief around Capitol Hill that the White House is already pointing the finger at them for the coming fall's losses. That's in keeping with a pattern: After all, Team Obama publicly trashed its gubernatorial candidate in Virginia last fall and its Massachusetts senatorial hopeful last winter, weeks before their elections.

 

Congressional Democrats also worry the president is insufficiently concerned about the November election. Maybe the White House believes Democrats have seats to give, that its agenda may be more achievable with fewer moderate Democrats, or that Mr. Obama can win re-election in 2012 more easily with a Republican Congress to blame.

 

Finally, congressional Democrats are frustrated the president doesn't do more to help them. The problem here is that he can't. … Mr. Obama's presence will hurt more than help in many swing races. Even his fund raising isn't going as well as expected. A recent presidential fund-raising event in Missouri had to discount tickets to fill otherwise empty chairs.

 

The White House's appearance of institutional and personal arrogance has left congressional Democrats divided and discontent going into the midterms. It weakens Democratic efforts not only this year, but well into the future. Having once fostered the impression that it's every Democrat for himself, the president will find it hard to undo the damage when his own name is on the ballot.

 

Mr. Obama is already learning from his own party the meaning of payback.

 

Put another way, Hell hath no fury greater than Nancy Pelosi scorned.

 

† The Uniter: Part III: In a Wall Street Journal op-ed political analysts Patrick Caddell and Douglas Schoen, both veterans of the civil rights movement in the South when it mattered the most, respectively, make the case that “[r]ather than being a unifier, Mr. Obama has divided America on the basis of race, class and partisanship” and that “his cynical approach to governance has encouraged his allies to pursue a similar strategy of racially divisive politics on his behalf”:

 

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Mr. Obama's campaign emphasized repeatedly that his minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was being unfairly stereotyped because of racially incendiary sound bites that allegedly did not reflect the totality of his views. In the Gates incident and others, Mr. Obama has resorted to similar forms of stereotyping.

 

Even the former head of the Civil Rights Commission, Mary Frances Berry, acknowledged that the Obama administration has taken to polarizing America around the issue of race as a means of diverting attention away from other issues, saying: "the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. … Having one's opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness."

 

The president had a unique opportunity to focus on overarching issues of importance to whites and blacks. He has failed to address the critical challenges. He has not used his bully pulpit to emphasize the importance of racial unity and the common interest of poor whites and blacks who need training, job opportunities, and the possibility of realizing the American Dream. He hasn't done enough to address youth unemployment - which in the white community is 23.2% and in the black community is 39.9%.

 

Mr. Obama has also cynically divided the country on class lines. He has taken to playing the populist card time and time again. He bashes Wall Street and insurance companies whenever convenient to advance his programs, yet he has been eager to accept campaign contributions and negotiate with these very same banks and corporations behind closed doors in order to advance his political agenda.

 

"We will pay a price for this type of politics," warn Caddell and Schoen.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (fourth item, A To Z Approach On Illegal Immigration In AZ): U.S. District Judge Susan R. Bolton gave the Obama administration a partial victory in its lawsuit to stop AZ’s anti-immigration law from taking effect tomorrow as scheduled. She issued an injunction that blocks enforcement of several provisions of SB 1070 until the legal issues are aired in court because “the United States is likely to succeed on the merits in showing that [they] are preempted by federal law. The provisions include:

 

‡ Requiring that an officer make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person is unlawfully present in the United States, and requiring verification of the immigration status of any person arrested prior to releasing that person;

‡ Creating a crime for the failure to apply for or carry alien registration papers;

‡ Creating a crime for an unauthorized alien to solicit, apply for, or perform work; and

‡ Authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense that makes the person removable from the United States

 

Bolton’s reasoning:

 

‡ Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked;

‡ The United States argues that the influx of requests for immigration status determination directed to the federal government or federally-qualified officials would “impermissibly shift the allocation of federal resources away from federal priorities; and

‡ Certain categories of people with transitional status and foreign visitors from countries that are part of the Visa Waiver Program will not have readily available documentation of their uthorization to remain in the United States, thus potentially subjecting them to arrest or detention, in addition to the burden of “the possibility of inquisitorial practices and police surveillance.”

 

These provisions of the law will take effect because Bolton did not think the feds could prevail using the preemption argument:

 

‡ Creating a separate crime for a person in violation of a criminal offense to transport or harbor an unlawfully present alien or encourage or induce an unlawfully present alien to come to or live in Arizona; and

‡ Amending the provisions for the removal or impoundment of a vehicle to permit impoundment of vehicles used in the transporting or harboring of unlawfully present aliens

 

Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) vows to appeal the ruling, The Washington Post reports:

 

"Obviously it's a little bump in the road," she told reporters in Phoenix. We knew regardless of what happened today, of course, one side or the other was going to appeal, so this begins the process. … They haven't heard really the merits of the bill. This is just an injunction, a temporary injunction." …

 

She added: "The Court by no means disregards Arizona's interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money. Even though Arizona's interests may be consistent with those of the federal government, it is not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce preempted laws."

 

Writing on Politico blog “The Arena,” FOX News analyst Jim Pinkerton warns Dems that U.S. v. Arizona will become this generation’s Roe v. Wade:

 

The voters figure out that their views have been trampled and start voting out the politicians who defend judicial trampling. Inch by inch, the law reverts back toward where it was before the judicial decision.

 

And yet Roe happened in the pre-Rush Limbaugh era. Anti-elite backlashes happen much quicker now, and are even more powerful, thanks to new media. Think Dubai Ports Deal. Think Khaled Sheik Mohammed trial location. Think mosque at Ground Zero. The Obama Justice Department has lit yet another fuse.

 

Polling data bears this out. A recent poll by The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that 59 percent of people nationwide approve of the new anti-immigration law in AZ that the Obama administration has succeeded in partially quashing, and 61 percent of voters in a recent Rasmussen survey said they would like to see a similar law passed in their state – results that have been fairly steady since Gov. Jan Brewer signed SB 1070 into law.

 

In challenging the law on the grounds that enforcement of immigration law is in the federal government’s purview, Attorney General Eric Holder unwittingly shined a bright light on “sanctuary cities” such as New York and Houston, which have usurped federal law by declaring it null and void within their borders. A majority of voters think that if Holder wants to sue someone, he should sue the mayor of one of these cities. A new Rasmussen Reports survey of voters finds that 54 percent think the Department of Justice should sue sanctuary cities – almost the same percentage (56 percent) opposing the suit against AZ and Gov. Brewer – and 61 percent would like the federal government to cut off funds to them.

 

Editorial Note: The Stiletto recently observed (fifth item) that flights to Phoenix are routinely crammed, boycotts notwithstanding. Now FOX News corroborates what her she has seen with her own eyes on her frequent trips to the West Coast:

 

"Fundamentally, the boycotts have been unsuccessful," said Barry Broome, president of the Greater Phoenix Economic Council.

 

The data from hotel industry research firm STR showed that for the state of Arizona, hotel occupancy was up 5.7 percent in May and up 8.3 percent in June compared with the same time a year ago.

 

In Phoenix, occupancy was up 10.6 percent in June; in Scottsdale, it was up 10.7 percent for the same period. Revenue also was up, with Arizona hotels raking in $148 million last month -- up more than 11 percent from a year ago.

 

Broome said the state also has been able to attract new businesses to locate in Arizona despite bad publicity. He said his group plans to announce 2,000 to 3,000 new jobs thanks to investment from California, where Arizona boycotts are in place in several major cities, over the next few months.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (third item, Toyota President’s Congressional Testimony Canned, Panned): Another day, another class action suit against Toyota – this time, alleging that the beleaguered automaker : failed to inform consumers that the headlights on recent-model Priuses can sporadically turn on and off, creating a safety hazard,” The National Law Journal reports:

 

The suit, which was filed in May 2009, is one of three class actions pending against Toyota over defective Prius headlights. A second action, filed on Feb. 16, has been joined with the first. A third case, filed in August 2009, is pending in Los Angeles County, Calif., Superior Court.

 

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of a proposed class of consumers who purchased the optional high-intensity discharge, or HID, headlight system for their 2006 through 2010 Priuses. The standard Prius is equipped with halogen headlights.

 

Although Toyota has not acknowledged the headlight failures, more than 1,000 consumers have filed complaints with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, according to the amended complaint, which was filed in December 2009. The agency opened a preliminary investigation but declined to order a recall, according to the amended complaint.

 

The suit alleges that dealerships, upon learning of the problem, either have done nothing or replaced the headlight systems with "equally defective parts" at costs of up to $1,800. …

 

The suit seeks restitution for a nationwide class under California's Unfair Competition Law and its Consumers Legal Remedies Act.

 

[In a motion to dismiss] Toyota's lawyers questioned the risks posed by headlight failures.

 

"Headlight failure, while posing a potential safety risk if such failure involves both headlights simultaneously at night, does not present an unreasonably dangerous condition because headlight failure is a known and inevitable risk that every vehicle operator accepts when operating any vehicle with any type of headlight at night," they wrote. (Italics in the original.)

 

So based on this, instead of advertising its cars with such slogans as “Today Tomorrow Toyota” and “The best built cars in the world,” Toyota should switch to slogans like: “Sunup To Sundown Toyota” and “Be Glad You Got There In One Piece!” 

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (third item, Breasts Are Not Udders): Another health risk that wouldn’t occur if mothers who wanted to bottle feed weren’t browbeaten into breastfeeding: hospital mix-ups in which neonates are breastfed by women who are not their mothers. The Washington Post reports on the most recent incidence:

 

The day after her first child was born in January at Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington County, Suzanne Libby discovered that he was missing from the hospital nursery. Searching frantically, she found Spencer in his hospital bassinet - in another woman's room. Standing next to him was a hospital aide, a stricken look on her face.

 

The relief that Libby felt at finding her son was later replaced by fresh anxiety: The woman, it turned out, had breast-fed her newborn. …

 

It's impossible to know how often breast-feeding mix-ups happen, because many states do not require hospitals to report them unless there is serious harm.

 

But Ruth Lawrence, a breast-feeding expert at the American Academy of Pediatrics, says that she hears about them occasionally.

 

At least eight other mix-ups have occurred in recent years, including two at other Washington area hospitals where babies were given to the wrong mothers but not breast-fed.

 

Although some experts say the potential for harm to infants is minimal, federal authorities say the possible exposure to HIV or other infectious diseases should be treated just like an accidental exposure to other body fluids.

 

Apparently when a nurse shoves a swaddled infant into the arms of a sleep-deprived woman in the middle of the night, she might not realize that the lips clamping down on her nipple do not belong to her bundle of joy, but someone else’s.

Correction: The "Lame Duck" item was amended to clarify that the final sentence is quoted from Caddell and Schoen.