Peggy Noonan's most recent column in the WSJ got me thinking about a couple of things. I read it on March 8th and while I don't think it is a particularly good example of Noonan’s best work, two things caught my eye.

Noonan writes "ObamaCare is being cited as a reason employers are laying people off and not hiring, according to a report from the Federal Reserve."

First, I have not seen this mentioned anywhere else in the media. I'd be interested in reading more since so many people on the left seem to dismiss the point that Republicans often make about how the ACA (i.e. Obamacare) has stifled business growth.

Secondly, she writes of BHO's current charm offensive/outreach to Republicans. She makes the point that while this wooing is going on, Organizing for America (OFA) is sending out "A blast email [using] these words: "Devastating," "obstructionism," "destructive," "this is real." It claimed 100,000 "teaching jobs" will be cut, along with "70,000 spots for preschoolers in Head Start, $43 million for food programs for seniors, $35 million for local fire department," and nutritional assistance for "over half a million women and their families." All this because of loopholes 'for millionaires and billionaires' who want their 'yachts and corporate jets.'"

I've never had occasion to go to the Organizing for Action web site but knew it was Obama's way to push his agenda, post campaign. So, what the hell I thought, I'll check it out and see what's there.

What I found (here), under the section on the Economy was the recipe for "Cutting the Deficit in a Balanced Way" was this (bolding is mine):

1. Cut spending and ask the wealthy to do their fair share to finish the job of $4 trillion in balanced deficit reduction.
2. Make our tax code more simple, fair and competitive by eliminating tax loopholes for the wealthy and big corporations.
3. Strengthen entitlements by cutting subsidies to prescription drug companies and      asking more of wealthy seniors.

That's the three simple bullet points, each targeting the "wealthy" for reducing the deficit along with the vilification of the rich in the e-mail Noonan received.

This is not some wing nut organization on the fringes. According to Wikipedia, OFA "is a nonprofit social welfare organization and community organizing project in the United States, heavily affiliated with the Democratic Party. It is the successor of U.S. president Barack Obama's 2012 re-election campaign and of Organizing for America, which itself succeeded Obama's 2008 campaign. Founded after President Obama's re-election, the group seeks to mobilize supporters in favor of Obama's legislative priorities. OFA is registered as a 501(c)(4) organization, which allows it to advocate for legislation but prohibits it from specifically supporting political candidates."

And people wonder why the Republicans are digging in and saying "no" to more revenue? OFA details it's agenda for class warfare quite clearly. And OFA reeks of Obama; there's seemingly no distance from OFA and the POTUS based off of what I see on this site.

The fact that OFA is supposed to be prohibited from specifically supporting political candidates and the reality of the site in that it appears to seamlessly align itself with President Obama should give us all pause. And I'm sure this is not relegated just to Obama and his supporters but is endemic throughout the political spectrum and Obama just happens to be very savvy in using the existing system.

This would seem to be an easy call: We must work to change the laws so that this kind of "social welfare" organization 501(c)(4) has a tighter definition. I think Obama would be better off if he was not as closely aligned to this particular organization as all it does is confirm the worst fears of the political opposition.

This strikes me as a laughable contortion of the laws and should be something we could all agree on.