Governing against the people's will has cost Obama heavily

There is a fundamental problem with the way President Obama has governed.

Since taking office, he has systematically put forth policies the American people do not want. The net result is a crisis of confidence and legitimacy in the American political system and our institutions.

The president is now at record low levels of approval—close to 40 percent overall, and in the mid- to low 30s among swing voters.

The GOP now holds a six- to seven-point advantage in the generic vote for Congress—which, come November, almost certainly will give the Republicans control of the House and make control of the Senate a real possibility as well.

Put simply, we are looking at an unprecedented electoral blowout because the administration has made a systematic set of bad decisions that have had an adverse impact on public opinion.

Indeed, those closest to the president have made clear that he is pursuing policies that do not have the support of the American people.

A majority of voters now believe that Obama has failed on each of the 12 issues tested on the August 2010 Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, particularly the federal budget deficit, reducing government spending, changing business as usual in Washington, and the economy.

And in an extraordinary survey of 1,100 likely voters that has gotten little attention or publicity, the president’s own pollster, Joel Benenson, has shown clearly and demonstratively that the administration’s policies and general approach to governance not only have failed, but also have not addressed the American people’s fundamental concerns.

The Benenson survey shows that the administration’s approach is fundamentally at variance with the one voters desire. Voters favor tax cuts over government investment by a clear majority and are looking for candidates and parties that champion fiscal discipline, limited government, deficit reduction, a free market, pro-growth agenda, and comprehensive plans to create employment opportunities, enable entrepreneurship, and aid business creation.

Indeed, when asked which approach to strengthening the economy they prefer, 54 percent of the respondents in the Third Way/Benenson poll preferred cutting taxes for businesses to help jump-start private sector job creation and economic growth, while 32 percent said they prefer making new government investments.

A majority of voters now believe that Obama has failed on the federal budget deficit, reducing government spending, changing business as usual in Washington, and the economy.

Just 14 percent of respondents said the government is doing a good job handling problems such as inflation and unemployment, compared with 41 percent who say it’s doing a poor job. Meanwhile, 43 percent of the respondents said the Democrats in Congress support a failed economic agenda, while 34 percent said the same of the Republicans.

Confidence in the president and congressional leadership’s economic policies are the lowest they have been since the start of the Obama administration.

A majority of respondents in the Third Way/Benenson poll said the steps taken by the president and Congress on the economy over the past 18 months have hurt the national economy and made it weaker.

There is a widespread perception that the health-care legislation is going to increase rather than reduce costs and has put government in a position that does not emphasize deficit reduction and reining in spending.

• Peter Beinart: Grow a Pair, DemocratsSixty percent of all voters now favor repeal of the health-care bill, and more voters say they are likely to oppose a lawmaker who backed the president’s health-care initiative than those who say they would support such a candidate.

The crisis in confidence has led to economic dislocation at an unparalleled, unprecedented rate. Since April, 1,155,000 unemployed people dropped out of the active labor force and were not counted as unemployed. Had they been counted, the unemployment rate would have been 10.2 percent in July, rather than 9.5 percent.

Consumer confidence is plummeting as a result. The latest Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan survey of consumers found that consumer confidence dropped in July to its lowest level in nine months.

When the leftist media has to choose between dead workers and endangered birds the birds get coverage

Media: What does it say when 11 men who perish on an exploding oil platform, or 30 poor souls who die in a 1,000-year Tennessee flood, get less coverage than two oil-soaked birds? It says news is driven from the left.

It is to the credit of the one media outlet that reported the paparazzi-like scrums of reporters trailing rescue workers as they tried to clean off one oil-soaked gannet caught in the oil spill off Louisiana waters after a rig exploded in the Gulf on April 20. Not only did the U.S. and European media obsess breathlessly about the bird, and later about a brown pelican that followed, they seemed to be panting for more.

That's because birds are convenient tools for driving the radical green agenda to halt all oil drilling. TV media and the national papers pounded the bird story because it served a political purpose.

It's getting obvious that that's the pattern: A parallel example is in the media coverage of combat deaths in Afghanistan. During the Bush years, the media reported deaths of soldiers daily because it advanced an anti-war agenda. With President Obama now at the helm, they've dropped coverage.

A look at the Los Angeles Times' oil spill coverage, for one, shows birds featured daily in its blog and paper while the 11 oil platform workers have barely registered. On the blog, the news of the deaths wasn't acknowledged until May 5, eight days after the workers' employer identified them in a memorial Web site.

Is this important? Yes. Regardless of the worries about the birds, the workers' deaths are more tragic and have more implications for society. But as people, they hardly serve an agenda.

The bird obsession looks even worse when one looks north to the flooding that's engulfed two-thirds of Tennessee and its neighbors in a natural environmental disaster. On May 1, the region suffered its biggest floods in 500 years. Nashville was almost underwater. The death toll continues to climb. The regional economy will take a $1.5 billion hit.

The Associated Press has done some excellent team coverage of these events, but it hasn't been featured much in national news, nor in major newspapers. Tennessee's floods made a single-column story on the last page of section of the May 6 L.A. Times.

It's a shame to see these stories buried. The news reflects the values of the media outlets, and unfortunately, a radical agenda drives it. That's not reflective of what matters in the real America out there, however, and goes to show a disconnect between what's important to readers and what matters to the left.