A Hard Look at the President

Stop the presses! Someone copped the identity of Arthur Brisbane, Public Editor for The New York Times, and published under his name a surprisingly good column (A Hard Look at the President) asking The Times to play fair (which may be impossible) in its coverage of President Obama during the general election campaign. In his words:

The Times needs to offer an aggressive look at the president’s record, policy promises and campaign operation to answer the question: Who is the real Barack Obama?

Nowhere does he suggest that questions of Mr. Obama’s birth, or school transcripts or any other conspiratorial pursuits are appropriate for the Times or anyone else.  But, in one more display of the collapse of “journalism” at The Washington Post, the irrepressible Jonathan Bernstein, posting for the irrepressible Greg Sargent sees something “inane” in even asking questions of Mr. Obama. He finds in the article (Times public editor amplifies GOP talking points) a mysterious under plot that tells more about himself than it does Mr. Brisbane:

Conservatives presumably push the idea that we still don’t really know the “real” Barack Obama because they want to hint, without quite saying so, that Obama is somehow alien and un-American. They hint, or even explicitly claim, that if reelected, Obama will unleash a Kenyan socialist agenda on the nation that he kept secret until his second term, after which he won’t have to face voters again.

I have no idea why Brisbane falls for such an inane line. But the best clue to how Obama will behave if re-elected is to carefully examine what he has done in his first three plus years in the White House. That’s it.

Which Conservatives? He has no idea, because Mr. Brisbane doesn’t fall for such an “inane line.” Mr. Bernstein did.  Mr. Brisbane is crystal clear. He believes that The Times coverage has been overtly generous to Mr. Obama, has lacked journalistic skepticism, and is driven by personal adoration, not principle. Do ‘ya think?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Well, DUH!

That Republicans are better informed about politics is obvious to anyone who knows Democrats.

Two things are compelling in this survey (What the Public Knows about the Political Parties) by the Pew Research Center:

  1. More Republicans correctly identify Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the “father” of modern America as a Democrat than do Democrats who arguably worship him, and
  2. The left is in high-dudgeon over this poll, smearing Pew from pillar to post. This is the same Pew Research Center that is widely considered to be “center slightly left” but generally fair, much like the Gallup Organization.

The loony left spends countless hours at the academy crafting damnation of Conservatives and Republicans as an unworthy subspecies, veritable Troglodytes, if you will. And, for all of its effort, it audience doesn’t know the party of its patron saint.

Who did they call stupid?

Posted in In the "Mainstream", Liberalism | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Be thankful you’re not Colby King

If you were Colbert King, a black “journalist” at The Washington Post, a man who advertises himself as reasonable, you’d concern yourself with The New Black Panthers advocating, in fact, offering to finance the murder of George Zimmerman. You’d be concerned that neither President Obama nor Attorney General Attorney Holder have spoken out and condemned illegal vigilantism. You might argue that it does more harm than good to the black community to have it associated with thugs, bigots, racists and advocates of chaos, mayhem and social destruction. NO YOU WOULDN’T! Not if you’re Colby King.

Instead, you’d write a column (The King is no prince) attacking Republicans (racists) – Conservatives (racists) – Caucasians (racists) – low tax advocates (racists) – states rightists (racists) – Constitutionalists (racists) – property owners (racists) and you’d smear anyone who doesn’t slavishly support left-wing lunacy as racists.

Mr. King associates his opponents with the Bourbon Democrats:

Conservative Republicans undoubtedly will take umbrage at any suggestion they belong in the same camp as post-Civil War conservative Democrats who proudly favored white supremacy and life before Appomattox.

So, let’s see. Are today’s conservatives big champions of states’ rights, a smaller and weaker federal government, less taxes, and more individual liberty? Yes, they will agree. But those goals, they would insist, are not racial in nature; they reflect a philosophy and set of values.

Mr. King chooses to associate with the New Black Panthers, clear evidence that Bourbon isn’t his choice, rot-gut appeals to him.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Jim Webb: Man or Mouse?

Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, is now whining about the process in which he labored mightily only to produce mouse poop.  At a Bloomberg sponsored breakfast (Jim Webb: health-care law represents a leadership failure for Obama) the Senator cited President Obama’s lack of leadership for the abomination that is the Affordable Care Act, adding that there were, “five different congressional committees [that] voted out their version of health-care reform, and so you had 7,000 pages of contradictory information. Everybody got confused. … From that point forward, Obama’s had a difficult time selling himself as a decisive leader.” Well, duh.

He was confused and still voted for the law? If so he deserves the Dianne Feinstein Award offered annually for the dumbest vote by a senator who “voted for a bill but didn’t know it had ‘unintended’ consequences.”

But, he wasn’t “confused.” He is merely trying to salve his tattered reputation at home so that if the law is rejected by the Supreme Court his fingerprints will be blurred.

Webb noted that he voted for the bill and 12 Republican amendments that not only would have made it better, but that would have resulted in some bipartisan results.  Yet, even though each Republican proposal was rejected, Senator Webb nonetheless voted for a fatally flawed product, an act of cowardice or stupidity.

Perhaps he’s still dizzy from the whuppin’ Oliver North put on him in 1967 at the Naval Academy?!

Posted in In the "Mainstream", Liberalism, Obamacare, The Affordable Care Act | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Thank you Jim Taranto . . .

Bam Bites Dog

The political perils of personal attacks.

By JAMES TARANTO

One time Barack Obama went to an Indian restaurant and ordered the lassi. Was he ever disappointed when the waiter brought him a yogurt drink!

We’ll be here all week. But seriously, folks, we have a man-bites-dog story for you today.

First, some background. Last week Byron York of the Washington Examiner reported that “some Obama staffers are reportedly obsessing over a nearly 30-year-old story about [Mitt] Romney’s dog”:

In 1983, Romney took his family on vacation and, faced with a packed station wagon, put his Irish setter Seamus in a travel kennel strapped to the roof of the car. Romney constructed a special windshield in an effort to make the dog more comfortable, but Seamus ended up relieving himself on the roof, which reportedly caused much consternation among the Romney boys. Ever since the story got out–it was reported by the Boston Globe in 2007, during Romney’s first run for president–Romney opponents have used it in semiserious and sometimes fully serious ways to portray him as insensitive.

“I have heard, in focus groups, the dog story totally tanks Mitt Romney’s approval rating,” Chris Hayes said on his MSNBC show. The Washington Post reported last month that the Seamus story “is ballooning into a narrative of epic proportions”:

Late-night host David Letterman has been giving the dog near-nightly shout-outs. There are parody Web videos, “Dogs Aren’t Luggage” T-shirts and Facebook groups. (“Dogs Against Romney,” which protested outside last month’s Westminster dog show, has more than 38,000 Facebook fans.) The New Yorker featured a cartoon, with Rick Santorum riding in Romney’s rooftop dog carrier, on its cover last week. In the five years since the story was revealed, New York Times columnist Gail Collins has mentioned Seamus in at least 50 columns.

In January Obama adviser David Axelrod–not to be confused with Axelrod, the Flying A Dog–blew a dog whistle. He tweeted a photo of the president with Bo, the White House canine, in what appears to be the back seat of a limousine. Axelrod’s comment: “How loving owners transport their dogs.”

In a more serious vein, Lincoln Mitchell of Columbia University’s Harriman Institute writes at the Puffington Host: “For many voters, treating a dog this way is unimaginable and could only be done by somebody who has a problem empathizing with others.”

But then Jim Treacher, the Daily Caller’s resident wag, picked up his dog-eared copy of “Dreams From My Father,” Obama’s 1995 autobiography, and sniffed out this passage from the second chapter. If Axelrod’s tweet was a dog whistle, Treacher’s post is a dinner bell:

With Lolo [Obama’s stepfather], I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy). Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate: One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.

It reminds us of the conclusion of the sci-fi tale “A Boy and His Dog”: “It’s a cookbook.”

The jokes write themselves.

botwt0418

botwt0418

Twitter.com

#ObamaDogRecipes: Yorkshire terrier pudding, mutt chop, Pekingese duck, bichon frisee salad, beagle with cream cheese, pure bread.

“So, Mr. President, where shall we go to eat?” “I know a great Spot.”

If you want a friend in Washington, don’t eat him (credit to Jim Geraghty).

Happiness is a warm puppy, with a side of fries.

Obama’s favorite fast-food joint? Checkers (Patrick Daly).

I wouldn’t vote for that guy for dogcatcher.

Did you hear about the insomniac polyphagiac president? He lies awake at night wondering if there is a dog.

Romney aide Erich Fehrnstrom got into the act last night, retweeting Axelrod’s Obama-Bo snapshot from January with the comment: “In retrospect, a chilling photo.” That may be the wrong adjective, since it doesn’t appear to have been taken in a refrigerated truck. Obama really spoils that dog.

Almost as funny as the jokes at Obama’s expense have been the discomfited responses of Obama supporters who’ve been dining out for months on the Seamus story. “Had only just noticed new rightwing Obama is weirdo Muslim dog eater meme. Thk you twitter,” tweeted TalkingPointsMemo’s Josh Marshall last night. It doesn’t seem to have occurred to Marshall that as dogs are haram, this should put to rest the Muslim rumors.

Posted in In the "Mainstream", Liberalism | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Robert J. Samuelson is generally sensible

Robert J. Samuelson is generally well-informed and sensible, which is odd given that he writes for The Washington Post and the insufferable Newsweek. But, in embracing the “Buffet Rule” shamelessly advanced by President Obama and his acolytes (The ‘Buffett Rule’ does damage to a good cause) Mr. Samuelson displays an alarming ignorance.

First to give credit where due, Samuelson does note that the President is using the issue of taxing the rich as a distraction from real national finance problems; that the rich do pay substantial taxes; and imposition would do little to raise any truly significant revenues or in any way limit government over-spending.

But, where he fails is in the notion that Mr. Buffett pays substantially all of his taxes at the 15% rate reserved for capital gains and dividends.  In fact, Mr. Buffett receives his income from distributions made after the corporation has recognizes profits and paid tax at the 35% corporate rate. Because Mr. Buffett is a substantial shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway his effect tax rate is about 43%! Ironically, if Mr. Buffett were to take a large salary and the corporation didn’t pay dividends, he be taxed at a lower effective rate! And, he could live extravagantly borrowing against his shares forever and pay NO income taxes at all.

Posted in In the "Mainstream", Liberalism | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

His shorts in a knot

Jonathan Capehart, The Washington Post’s very own Queen of Hearts, has his shorts knotted up (which he no doubt enjoys) over “aging rocker” Ted Nugent’s “vile” comments (Where’s Romney’s outrage . . .)  suggesting that the President, the Vice President, … Continue reading

More Galleries | Leave a comment

Walter Williams, spot on

Professor Walter E. Williams has a clever way of distilling complex arguments into things even the uneducated (those who went to school in America) can understand. In Good Economists, and yes, there are a few, Professor Williams makes a point that should be so simple even President Obama could embrace it; Many of the things we believe to be good for some are immeasurable or irrational and many, while good for some, are bad for others.

Perhaps most charming about Professor Williams is that he doesn’t allow his outsized ego to block his path to simple solutions.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Washington Post’s endless assault continues . . .

Richard Cohen is not a particularly bright fellow, and certainly isn’t likeable – snarky comes to mind – but, he’s about as good as the “Progressives” at The Washington Post can muster in their endless assault on good sense.  Today, Cohen accuses Mitt Romney (Mitt Romney, a man of falsehoods) of being an accomplished liar while noting that, ” . . . President Obama, too, is a liar,” apparently just not as facile as Mr. Romney.

If the Liberals’ argument is that their guy lies but not as well, it’s going to be a bruising campaign for Mr. Obama, the man-child who lies about virtually every facet of his life, personal and professional.

 

Posted in In the "Mainstream", Liberalism | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Thomas Sowell is a National Treasure

Brilliant scholar Thomas Sowell effortlessly challenges and dismisses “conventional wisdom.”  It is always a treat imagining how his mind works and how he manipulates vast volumes of data, distilling it into a potent potion.  In his column (Mixing and Matching) he skewers progressives’ arrogance, always great good fun, even if it is much like taking low hanging fruit.

Posted in In the "Mainstream", Liberalism | Tagged , | Leave a comment