Why is it every time Obama says anything about private business he has to make a disparaging remark about profits? Yesterday in his news conference he was asked about  the private vs. public plans and the only good reason he good give for the public plan was that there would be no PROFIT in the public plan. He has repeatedly talked about redistributionist policies either directly or indirectly since his “Joe the Plumber” moment by using words like “fair” to describe his overly progressive tax policy, or “greedy” when talking about those pesky Chrysler bondholders.

My belief is that he has exactly the same thought process as Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers, but only diguises it better. Collectively they feel that the American free enterprise system is unfair and that those “greedy” business people take advantage of the poor, uneducated; not that it is the freest system in the world allowing those same perceived disadvantaged people the ability to accomplish and become anything they want.

I noticed in Rasmussen today that 45% polled think the rest of the stimulus should be cancelled, 51% favor an accross the board tax cut, and 53% believe government spending is bad for the economy, see:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Specter’s vote for this in a weird and strange way gives the GOP  a platform moving forward; by him voting for it and then jumping ship for the Donkey’s allows the GOP (I know Collins and Snowe also voted for it, but they are not up for re-election in this cycle therefore not the lightning rods Specter will be) to take the high ground and have every Republican in the ’10 election be against the stimulus, government spending, and for tax cuts to help the economy.

The discontent on these issues doesn’t seem to be waivering and if anything only getting stronger, thereby putting Democratic congressmen and senators who voted for the stimulus behind the proverbial 8 ball. The other un-intended but possible consequence is that in the health care debate is going to be skewed, because Democrats reading the tea leaves are afraid too much government interference will be hung around their neck.

On Rasmussen today, for the first time, the Daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows there are as many who Strongly Disapprove as those who Strongly Approve of Obama. Additionally the more generic approve/disapprove number is at a low of 54/46%. Reading between the lines of the polls it appears that Obama’s “cult of celebrity” is beginnig to wear thin. The reason that we know this is that on almost all issues that Rasmussen has polled, the Obama position is the least favorable, while his personal numbers have remained positive.

Once the new wears off, as it appears it’s beginning to, look for his polling numbers to start reflecting the numbers on positions he takes.

For those in the left blogosphere/media who want to claim Rasmussen as a right of center polling company, just remember he was almost dead on in his polling for the “08 election cycle. See the full article at:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

As I read Redstate, Hotair, Drudge….. watch Fox, CNBC and even MSNBC I’ve come to the conclusion that the finacial change Obama’s been talking about is hitting it’s apex and could very likely begin to fall. The growing and unmistakeable drumbeat regarding his redistributionist policies are starting to mount against him from all directions. Additionally, don’t be suprised if even some staunch supporters in the financial world begin to abandon him.

The order in which I’ve seen the opposition mount is:

• TEA Parties – They were all about taxes and spending, no matter how the MSM wants to spin them. What I came away with is that Liberals protest any and everything. It takes a lot to get 500,000+ conservatives to take off work (which have jobs, unlike many libs) and protest something.
• California Tax Propositions – When a liberal state has decided it has had enough it is not only sending a message to Sacramento, but also Washington. It wasn’t just about taxes, it was also about spending.
• Chinese Debt Warning – The Chinese government has been sending strong messages that they are not going to finance our growing debt. This leads to….
• Higher Bond Yeilds – Which leads to a devalueing of the dollar. The market place is starting to weigh in on on the debt we are incurring, which in turns means that the debt payments/national debt will  increase at a higher than currently projected pace.
• Loss of Wall Street Supporters – Recently saw Jack Welch (former head of GE) state on CNBC that he knows a growing contingent of Wall Street types who were supporters but now question what Obama is doing to contract law and private enterprise. I wouldn’t be surprised if Jeffery Imelt, the current CEO of GE, an Obama supporter’s days are numbered if he continues down a path of strong support. Welch and other large shareholders will eventually start to question what Imelt is doing.
• “Reckless” – The new book by Senator Byron Dorgan (D) North Dakota is the first shot accross the bow by a Democrat. The book is a populist discussion about the failure of Clinton’s deregultion policy and blaming Bush for letting it happen. Additionally it is complete dissing of the current liberal tax and spend philosophy. The basic tenant of the book is that Americans don’t have the appetite to fund the government through taxes at a level to sustain the spending levels wanted by the Obama crowd.

I’m sure there are other examples which I miss, but the take away from this is that in a recession where American’s are cutting back, saving more money in their personal lives, they do not/will not accept that government only wants to grow and take more of their money.

American’s are the most generous people in the world, they just want their money to go to those who are truly needy, not those needed for votes.