One more clip: Obama refuses to criticize boycotts of Arizona

posted at 5:26 pm on May 27, 2010 by Allahpundit

Another one via Breitbart. He didn’t endorse the boycotts either, as you’ll see, so it’s a classic case of Obama voting “present.” But under the current economic circumstances, why do that? How’s this for an answer: “Let me be clear. I sympathize with opponents of Arizona’s law and agree that it’s the wrong way to handle illegal immigration. But boycotts are counterproductive at a moment when we’re trying to put America back to work. They’re bound to backfire by inspiring counter-boycotts and harming Arizona businesses owned by people who had nothing to do with passing the law and who might, in fact, oppose it themselves. We can’t afford this form of mutually assured destruction with unemployment near 10 percent.” That would have given both sides a little something politically and would have the not insignificant virtue of siding with the 82 percent of the population that thinks boycotts here are stupid.

But if he’s uncomfortable with that answer, how about at least giving an honest answer — that he does support boycotts of Arizona, per the fact that his own web organization has been busy defending them. Remember?

Last week, the city council of Austin, Texas passed a resolution to boycott Arizona over its new immigration-enforcement law. For those who don’t know much about Texas politics, Austin is as liberal as the rest of the state is conservative. However, in an embarrassing display of just how marginalized the Austin liberals have become, the local newspaper has run 20 letters from readers regarding the council’s boycott — all of them opposed to it.

While the Austin city council has likely not read the bill — and neither has the White House — Barack Obama’s political organizing group has decided to take action to defend Austin’s boycott. Will they actually read the bill? Are they scheduling protests? Not exactly. In an e-mail from Organizing for America that went out last night (and provided to us by a reader), OfA announces an Astroturf campaign to flood the newspaper with letters supporting the boycott…

Follow the link and take a peek at the screencap if you need your memory refreshed. Meanwhile, in related news, turns out that token National Guard force that Obama’s sending to the border will only police for guns and drugs. Exit quotation: “The clarification came after the Mexican government urged Washington not to use the additional troops to go after illegal immigrants.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

So he is the POTUS of only 56 states?

d1carter on May 27, 2010 at 5:27 PM

Present.

Daggett on May 27, 2010 at 5:29 PM

AP, don’t hold back on the posts from this news conference. We not see another one for quite a while.

d1carter on May 27, 2010 at 5:30 PM

I find this sorry excuse for a President? despicable. Everything that comes out of his mouth is lies and poison. Harsh, I admit, but he even uses his own Children to try and gain political points. Just sickens me to even see his face anymore.

sandee on May 27, 2010 at 5:31 PM

Gawd, this poseur is such a douche. Voting “present” is exactly right, AP. Bring on November.

Renwaa on May 27, 2010 at 5:32 PM

Obama is “Contradicktoring” this topic.

portlandon on May 27, 2010 at 5:32 PM

No. Refusal to criticize is tacit acceptance. Having no opinion on the matter means that you don’t care if Arizona is harmed by the boycotts.

Or that the boycotts are in direct violation of the Commerce Clause… right crr6?

Obama *supports* the boycotts.

Skywise on May 27, 2010 at 5:33 PM

Is it definitive that there really is a boycott or have the dems just claimed there is? Or is it just a weak economy where no one is buying anything ‘cept them rich fat wall street bankers who have money to burn.

Skandia Recluse on May 27, 2010 at 5:33 PM

AP, don’t hold back on the posts from this news conference. We not see another one for quite a while.
d1carter on May 27, 2010 at 5:30 PM

Kind of like solar eclipses. Sticking a pin hole in a cardboard box and looking from behind might work for his press conferences too.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on May 27, 2010 at 5:34 PM

This guy is such a loser. How could America have gotten it so wrong in 2008? I am embarrassed for our country.

karenhasfreedom on May 27, 2010 at 5:35 PM

BTW, the “Top Kill” is failing…

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28spill.html?hp

I expect “Mr. Reponsibility” will be right on top of this if it goes completely bad…

Skywise on May 27, 2010 at 5:37 PM

“We can’t afford this form of mutually assured destruction with unemployment *unexpectedly* near 10 percent.”

FIFY

Rude on May 27, 2010 at 5:37 PM

I find this sorry excuse for a President? despicable. Everything that comes out of his mouth is lies and poison. Harsh, I admit, but he even uses his own Children to try and gain political points. Just sickens me to even see his face anymore.

sandee on May 27, 2010 at 5:31 PM

Harsh? Heck, you’re way too easy on him …

thirteen28 on May 27, 2010 at 5:38 PM

The Obama administration demonstrated their contempt for anyone that doesn’t do, think, or support anything they want.

Texas for example. Months ago, he pulled a lot of funding, and contracts from the state. Isn’t that in, and of itself, a sort of boycott? I think so. Why? Because Texas is a red state, and Obama has shown nothing but contempt for anyone with an R by their name, or state, or affiliation.

Look at Nina Gastons, and her husband. I don’t know how political they truly are, but just an accusation has her under attack.

We have a bully in office, and I can’t believe some people are content with this. This utter lack of respect for the office now, is just so sad.

capejasmine on May 27, 2010 at 5:39 PM

I expect “Mr. Reponsibility” will be right on top of this if it goes completely bad…

Skywise on May 27, 2010 at 5:37 PM

He was taking credit for it appearing to work, earlier. Now how will he respond to this latest news?

capejasmine on May 27, 2010 at 5:40 PM

That would have given both sides a little something politically and would have the not insignificant virtue of siding with the 82 percent of the population that thinks boycotts here are stupid.

These 82% , they are US citizens, right ?
So why should this number matter to Hussain ?
Hussain knows that 100% of mehicans support the boycott of AZ..and he goes with the bigger number

macncheez on May 27, 2010 at 5:41 PM

So Obama thinks people will forget he supported and praised the Suns for their stupid jersies.
He LIES and no one will call him on it

RWGinger on May 27, 2010 at 5:42 PM

turns out that token National Guard force that Obama’s sending to the border will only police for guns and drugs

Let’s not stop sex trafficking.

the_nile on May 27, 2010 at 5:43 PM

But if he’s uncomfortable with that answer, how about at least giving an honest answer —

It’s not in his DNA. Seems like he lies because he really doesn’t know how to tell the truth – it comes naturally.

tru2tx on May 27, 2010 at 5:45 PM

This guy is hopeless. I mean, really, “hopeless.” What an irony.

rrpjr on May 27, 2010 at 5:47 PM

I can see why his grades in English are kept secret along with his other transcripts. Doesn’t “I don’t . . . not endorse boycotts” mean that he does endorse boycotts? You know, double negative? Oh, but at the beginning of the sentence he said he doesn’t endorse boycotts. A single sentence at war with itself — and with decent English.

Sowell Disciple on May 27, 2010 at 5:47 PM

“I don’t endorse boycotts or not endorse boycotts.”

“I sit on the Fence, because I can.”

upinak on May 27, 2010 at 5:53 PM

The guys a “community organizer”, he supports boycotts.

Caper29 on May 27, 2010 at 5:54 PM

This is the reason the Commerce Clause is in the Constitution.

It’s there to allow the Federal Government to step in in the case of a trade war between states/municipalities.

That’s what it’s for.

I guess they are so used to abusing the Commerce Clause in the quest to trample state and individual rights, they’ve forgotten what it’s actually for.

forest on May 27, 2010 at 5:58 PM

Chump in Chief: “Present”

JohnnyMojo on May 27, 2010 at 5:58 PM

At least he’s wearing a tie. I was beginning to think he was getting so comfortable he had thrown all his ties in the trash.

txsurveyor on May 27, 2010 at 5:59 PM

How’s this for an answer: “Let me be clear. I sympathize with opponents of Arizona’s law and agree that it’s the wrong way to handle illegal immigration. But boycotts are counterproductive at a moment when we’re trying to put America back to work. They’re bound to backfire by inspiring counter-boycotts and harming Arizona businesses owned by people who had nothing to do with passing the law and who might, in fact, oppose it themselves. We can’t afford this form of mutually assured destruction with unemployment near 10 percent.”

…and that it will harm legal and illegal immigrants the most…

Schadenfreude on May 27, 2010 at 6:00 PM

I can see why his grades in English are kept secret along with his other transcripts. Doesn’t “I don’t . . . not endorse boycotts” mean that he does endorse boycotts? You know, double negative? Oh, but at the beginning of the sentence he said he doesn’t endorse boycotts. A single sentence at war with itself — and with decent English.

Sowell Disciple on May 27, 2010 at 5:47 PM

I believe the term used to describe him was “well spoken”, along with clean and articulate.

JohnnyMojo on May 27, 2010 at 6:00 PM

Damn, even an 18 year old fresh out of basic will show more decisiveness and leadership than this POTUS man-child.

I think we should deploy 1200 National Guard troops to the Oval Office…

SPCOlympics on May 27, 2010 at 6:04 PM

“The clarification came after the Mexican government urged Washington not to use the additional troops to go after illegal immigrants.”

Interesting that Obowma cares more about what the Mexican government wants…

… and not the cries of millions of American Citizens.

It might just be me…

… but I see a very effective political ad against the Democrats this year.

Seven Percent Solution on May 27, 2010 at 6:05 PM

This buffoon is an open border fanatic. The only way the progressives will ever get to One party status is to allow millions to become citizens that are uneducated and easily manipulated economically with monies redistributed from working Americans. This is as un-American as it gets, but it is a political fact that is in place and growing stronger before our eyes.

volsense on May 27, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Anyone else notice that crr6 is not here….yet

macncheez on May 27, 2010 at 6:07 PM

It’s not in his DNA. Seems like he lies because he really doesn’t know how to tell the truth – it comes naturally.
tru2tx on May 27, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Hmmm – And the father of all lies is?… Just askin’

Oopsdaisy on May 27, 2010 at 6:08 PM

Of course, you’re making the assumption that Obama wants employment and economic activity to improve. I’m not finding much evidence of that, based on current policies. I could be wrong tho

azkag on May 27, 2010 at 6:11 PM

“Escape Hatch” /Christie

jp on May 27, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Considering his upbringing and ‘education’, has anyone ever floated the idea that he really doesn’t know when he’s lying??

BigWyo on May 27, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I actually spent time trying to decipher that sentence, as cited at NRO, before I gave up, concluding that someone made a typo. As it turns out, the quote was correct but there just isn’t any content at all within it.

year_of_the_dingo on May 27, 2010 at 6:14 PM

So, if the guard comes across a troupe of people crossing the border, they will frisk them for guns and drugs, and if they are clean, send them on their way?

Is that Obama’s plan?

azkag on May 27, 2010 at 6:22 PM

Has he read it?

rjoco1 on May 27, 2010 at 6:24 PM

How could America have gotten it so wrong in 2008? I am embarrassed for our country.

karenhasfreedom on May 27, 2010 at 5:35 PM

1. Media didn’t do its job. If they had, he would never have even been the nominee. Instead, the media airheads sold their souls to get him elected, so they could create their own version of their predecessors’ Camelot.

2. 33% of Americans of voting age, mainly Republicans, stayed home from the polls-many of them because their irrational hatred of McCain blinded them to the dangers of a possible O’bama pResidency.

And many more of them stayed home “to teach the Republican Party a lesson.” That worked out really well, didn’t it?

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Yes, I remember that Organizing for America effort.

So, does Obama think we are just stupid and won’t remember it?

Or is he just blatantly lying, knowing perfectly well that most people won’t know about the Organizing for America effort, except people who are on his side anyway, and of course they don’t care if he lies?

This bald-faced lying thing – so often, too – I’m just not used to it.

Alana on May 27, 2010 at 6:28 PM

Still campaigning for office….

albill on May 27, 2010 at 6:29 PM

That Barry can sure put the shine on a fecal dollop!”

GarandFan on May 27, 2010 at 6:33 PM

I challenge conservatives! NO ONE STRADDLES A FENCE BETTER THAN BARRY! Oh, he’s soooooooo DECISIVE!

GarandFan on May 27, 2010 at 6:37 PM

Daddy, can I be a Marxist agitator when I grow up?

JammieWearingFool on May 27, 2010 at 6:38 PM

Thanks again, 52%ers, for putting this worthless POS in the White House.

AZCoyote on May 27, 2010 at 6:53 PM

Let’s boycott Chicago for giving us this empty suit Marxist POS.

crashland on May 27, 2010 at 6:56 PM

Jesus Christ, he really can’t ever stop being a leftist, can he. He can’t even be a populist on an issue where over 80% of the country thinks one choice (i.e. that boycotts here are stupid) is the correct one.

Vyce on May 27, 2010 at 6:56 PM

“I don’t endorse boycotts or not endorse boycotts.”

“I don’t endorse rape or not endorse rape.”

“I don’t endorse murder or not endorse murder.”

Tav on May 27, 2010 at 7:06 PM

Reminds me of the great line from Best of Show; “We both like to not talk, or talk. We could not talk or talk forever, and still find things to not talk about.”

I wonder if Obama likes soup.

LASue on May 27, 2010 at 7:37 PM

He’s President of the United States.

Metro on May 27, 2010 at 8:09 PM

Where is he at? A new Orleans cathouse.

Hummer53 on May 27, 2010 at 9:03 PM

Damn, man. Look at those stills from his presser.

What an arrogant jerk.

docob on May 27, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Be very afraid folks. This is the twerp who will be calling the shots when our country is really faced with a crisis of 9/11 magnitude. Pray for our country, this man is not presidential material and the media should be held accountable for their treasonous pre election sell outs.

wepeople on May 27, 2010 at 10:08 PM

He’s agnostic about the boycott.

Kissmygrits on May 27, 2010 at 11:40 PM

Hey, let’s elect a guy who’s never done anything or run anything. What could go wrong?

Mojave Mark on May 28, 2010 at 12:04 AM

Resolute, his position unequivocal, the most transparent and truthful President ever, Obama has spoken:
 
“I don’t endorse boycotts or not endorse boycotts.”
 
And in case you don’t understand plain English, that would be he doesn’t stand for standing against something OR not stand against not standing against something.
 
Wait, no, it’s that he doesn’t stand for the boycotts of anything, but doesn’t stand against boycotting anything.
 
No, that sounds all wrong… Obama doesn’t not agree with boycotts, but agrees we shouldn’t boycott anyth
 
or rather, Obama doesn’t stand for boycotts, but doesn’t boycott standing.
 
No, no, he doesn’t stand for anything, but will do anything to stand… But not by way of a boycott.
 
Okay, scrap all that. The double negative, “not endorse boycotts” has really messed this one up. I’m starting to think that’s it’s a typo from AP, or there was a smudge on the teleprompter or something.
 
Suffice it to say, that I agree with whatever he said, however he said it, and it’s unequivocal, transparent, and it doesn’t matter because Obama’s the smartest guy in the room, damnit!

seismedia on May 28, 2010 at 5:50 AM

Jimmy Carter has had the ultimate reprieve. He’s not the worst President anymore, not by a long shot.

adamsmith on May 28, 2010 at 7:25 AM

Boycot stupid, stupid leader.

MSGTAS on May 28, 2010 at 11:10 AM

His refusal to challenge the boycott shows his lack of qualifications for the job. Another traitorous act by Obama.

proconstitution on May 28, 2010 at 2:21 PM