Friday, June 26, 2009


Just got back from a conference and some were discussing prominent non-American politicians who were critical of climate change data. This article by the WSJ caught my eye.

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

Tuesday, June 09, 2009


I would like the media to ask tough questions of every politician. I am not sure Bush had it as bad as Obama when he entered office, but things weren't as rosy as the Clinton "go-go" 1990s. I do remember Democrats blaming Bush for a 2000 recession. I am sure some Republican will be doing an economic analysis comparing how Bush turned the economy around with what has happened under Obama. But I can't say Bush's deficits have been helpful.


There are an increasing number of articles indicating that the Obama administration's job stimulus numbers are pure illusions, but the mainstream media has not evaluated his numbers (as they did in the previous Bush administration). Forbes has a good article on this phenomenon--there is no way to know if a job has been saved or created. Recently the administration and news outlets were praising the drop in unemployment numbers, but as I recall during the Bush administration, these numbers would always be qualified with a statement such as "the numbers don't include those who have given up looking." So we have all these numbers floating around, but the bottom-line is that no one can say for sure if things are better or worse.

Dems say things are better, but Rush and Hannity are pointing out the problems. But the truth, for both supporters and opponents of the stimulus legislation, is that the exact effect of the stimulus and the precise number of jobs created or saved can never be known.

A WSJ article compares how the media dealt with Bush employment figures compared to its coverage of the Obama administration numbers.

From the American Heritage Foundation.


Obama refers to Jesus Christ more than George W. Bush did.

Obama’s invocation of the Christian Messiah is more overt than Americans heard in the public rhetoric of Bush in his time in the White House — even though Bush’s victories were powered in part by evangelical voters.“

I don’t recall a single example of Bush as president ever saying, ‘Jesus’ or ‘Christ,’” said Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Christian group Family Research Council. “This is different.”


Some Jews are very concerned about Obama's Cairo speech and his attitude toward Israel and Jews.

President Obama's Cairo speech was nothing short of an earthquake — a distortion of history, an insult to the Jewish people, and an abandonment of very real human-rights victims in the Arab and Muslim worlds. It is not surprising that Arabs and Muslims in a position to speak were enthusiastic. It is more surprising that American commentators are praising the speech for its political craftiness, rather than decrying its treachery of historic proportions.

With Mr. Obama's unbelievably ballyhooed address in Cairo Thursday to what he calls "the Muslim world" (hereafter known as "the Speech"), there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself. Consider the following indicators: (Read here)

Friday, June 05, 2009

Wednesday, June 03, 2009


Since the election it has been interesting to watch how Obama has treated his Islamic roots. During the election critics who used his middle name, "Hussein," were treated as racists. Yet at the inauguration he used his full name. Recently in Turkey he said that America was not a Christian nation. Now he is calling America "one of the largest countries in the Muslim world" according to a columnist in the Telegraph.

Petrified of the potential political fallout of being branded a Muslim, Candidate Obama - a practicing Christian - never used the name "Hussein" and its use was frowned upon as a forbidden code for the nutty accusation that he was some kind of Islamic Manchurian candidate.
No more. To say Barack Hussein Obama - BHO for short - now appears to be the height of political correctness.

As ABC's Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller astutely outline here, the Obama administration is embracing the new president's inner Muslim, as it were, with deputy national security adviser that Obama had "experienced Islam on three continents...growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim Americans [are] a key part of Illinois and Chicago".

Even LeMonde has weighed in on this.
Les Etats-Unis sont "l'un des plus grands pays musulmans de la planète", a souligné mardi 2 juin sur Canal+ le président américain, Barack Obama, qui doit prononcer jeudi au Caire un important discours de réconciliation en direction du monde musulman (voir l'interview de Barack Obama sur Canal+ ici).

Monday, June 01, 2009


Robert Samuelson, hardly a right-winger, has pointed out how subservient the media has been with Obama.

The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment; but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America.

A Pew study indicates: The study examined 1,261 stores by The Washington Post, The New York Times, ABC, CBS and NBC, Newsweek magazine and the "NewsHour" on PBS. Favorable stories (42 percent) were double the unfavorable (20 percent) , while the rest were "neutral" or "mixed." Obama's treatment contrasts sharply with coverage in the first two months of the presidencies of Bush (22 percent of stories favorable) and Clinton (27 percent).

James Lewis also has commented on this phenomena. The White House press corps is now completely supine, utterly shameless in its groveling cowardice. Stalin himself couldn't have wished for a more slobbering press corps. Rather than mailing them nice little Lipton tea bags, millions of sane Americans might consider sending air sickness bags to our Reigning Media.

I have noticed that the British Economist has raised far more critical questions about Obama's decisions than Time, Newsweek, CNN, and the Sunday talk shows have.


A journalist experiences it.