[guest post by JD]

Let that sink in. Q4 GDP negative 0.1. Yet immigration is now his new focal point. Remember when he pivoted to jobs for the 82nd time, and wouldn’t rest until the economy was back on track?

Recovery summer. The economy has turned the corner. We are on the right track. The private sector is not hurting.

In other new, the Presidents Jobs Council, which hasn’t met in almost a year, will expire this week.

This is going to be a looooooooooong 4 years of Obama’s war on the American economy.

UPDATED

Shockingly and unexpectedly, Obama Administration blames Republicans for the negative 0.1%

WASHINGTON — White House Press Secretary Jay Carney blamed the unexpected drop in gross domestic product last quarter on congressional Republicans, saying they introduced uncertainty into the economy with fiscal cliff brinkmanship.
“There is more work to do and our economy is facing headwinds,” Carney said in response to a government report showing that the economy contracted by 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2012, “and that is Republicans in Congress.”
…
“It can’t be we’ll let sequester kick in because we insist tax loopholes remain in place for corporate jet-owners,” Carney said, laying the blame on Republicans and pressuring them to avoid another crisis over the next round of talks on the sequester.
“It’s not a game — it’s the American economy,” he said.

Every once in a while Carney tries to one-up his normal mendoucheity. There is so much in that little segment. Blaming this on a fiscal cliff that they wanted to drive off. Blaming the sequester that the Obama admin inserted and advocated. Blaming a continuing sluggish economy on political opposition. Using standard class warfare BS about corporate jets, and then having the temerity to whine that this is not a game, while treating it as exactly that for the last 4 years. It is double ironic to blame the sequester on Team R when it was Team O’s poison pill, and the House has sent bills to the Senate to make different cuts, that the Senate Dems refuse to consider. It would be comical if it wasn’t sad. And dishonest.

—JD

This is a follow-up to JD’s post from last night, with more detail, and naming names.

So a bereaved father made this statement advocating the ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines:

At the 15 minute mark, the father says:

I ask if there’s anybody in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question … why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips.

At this point, he pauses for effect, as if inviting people in the room to comment. When nobody says anything, he says: “And not one person can answer that question.” As if people’s silence proved he was right.

Then a few people say — not yell — things about the Second Amendment, some quoting the part about how the right to bear arms “shall not be infringed.” In this way, he was disallowed from arguing that the silence of people in the room signaled agreement with his position.

Then an official threatened to remove the people whose comments had been solicited, for the offense of responding to the father’s request for comment: “Please no comments while Mr. Heslin is speaking. Or we’ll clear the room. Mr. Heslin please continue.”

This was described as “heckling” by a number of people. You can watch the video above to confirm my description of the account, and reach your own conclusion about whether this constitutes “heckling.” Once you’ve reached your conclusion, you’ll probably want a list of people who described this as “heckling,” so you can factor this episode into your decisionmaking about whether to trust these people in the future.

Luckily, in a post that JD linked last night, Twitchy has compiled tweets from many of these people. I think they should be named. They include Eric Boehlert, Charles Johnson, David Frum, Andrew Kaczynski of BuzzFeed, John Marshall, Piers Morgan, Raw Story, Gawker, Slate, the Daily Beast, and HuffPo, among others.

Each used the word “heckled” to describe people a) giving comments that had been invited, and b) refusing to have their silence falsely portrayed as agreement with an opinion they rejected.

Allahpundit has the details on how Slate, Piers Morgan, and others retracted (Morgan acted the ass in his apology, as you would expect). Larry O’Donnell doubled down, pretending to ignore the fact that the father was calling for the BAN of these weapons, and that the father was falsely portraying silence as agreement.

Message to Eric Boehlert, Charles Johnson, David Frum, Andrew Kaczynski of BuzzFeed, John Marshall, Piers Morgan, Raw Story, Gawker, Slate, the Daily Beast, and HuffPo:

This is a good example of why we don’t trust you.

UPDATE: It’s a neat little Catch 22, isn’t it? If you speak out, even if invited to, you’re a jerk, because they are the parents of victims. If you are silent, you agree with them. Either you are for gun control or you’re an insensitive, terrible person. Now there’s a narrative Big Media can love.