Axelrod: Latest In Obama’s Culture of Corruption
Wednesday, August 19th, 2009Have you read Michelle Malkin’s book yet? If not, you should. And, in case you missed it, listen to my podcast interview with Michelle about her #1 New York Times best-selling book.
David Axelrod has long history, intertwined with Michelle Obama, of corrupt dealings through his consulting. Now, he’s handling those dirty dealings from the White House. Michelle says:
Hey, Bobby Gibbs: Tell us again. Who’s funded by the evil health care industry? And who’s motives should you be questioning now? According to Bloomberg, AKPD continues to work with Axelrod “on ’strategy and research’ for the Democratic National Committee.” Why no full disclosure until now? Why didn’t Axelrod recuse himself from his Obamcare lobbying TV appearances given the strong, interest-conflicted odor emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania?
There will be more of this and the press will continue to demonstrate a breath-taking lack of curiosity. Curiosity and questioning motives only works on Republicans, it seems.
#Righton Interview: Ed Morrissey of Hotair Interviewed Me At Right Online
Monday, August 17th, 2009Here’s the link. Ed Morrissey and I have a great time together. I look forward to when he comes on my show.
Camille Paglia Reveals More Than Flaws In President Obama’s Handling Of Healthcare
Wednesday, August 12th, 2009Is there such thing as a skeptical liberal? It seems not. Or they’re as rare as white tigers which is why the get displayed like exotic zoo animals.
That Camille Paglia is always so noteworthy simply reveals how the Left marches in ideological lock-step. There should be lots of thinking people on the Left pointing out shortcomings here and there, but no. So the always interesting Ms. Paglia says:
You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you’re happy with it, Obama keeps assuring us in soothing, lullaby tones. Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.
I just don’t get it. Why the insane rush to pass a bill, any bill, in three weeks? And why such an abject failure by the Obama administration to present the issues to the public in a rational, detailed, informational way? The U.S. is gigantic; many of our states are bigger than whole European nations. The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vampirically absorb whatever savings Obama thinks could be made. And the transition period would be a nightmare of red tape and mammoth screw-ups, which we can ill afford with a faltering economy.
Pardon me, but that’s rather obvious criticism and the only place we’re hearing it is on the Right. Why?
Do thinkers on the left have no intellectual integrity? Are they incapable of criticizing their own ideas? Have they no compunction to question?
That’s what is really interesting about Camille Paglia. She seems to be a rare breed of cat. That’s too bad.
Americans For Prosperity Answers Rachel Maddow
Thursday, August 6th, 2009The Left possesses stunning hypocrisy when it comes to being funded by policy groups. Phil Kerpen of Americans for Prosperity explains it all. Please watch. You won’t look at NBC in the same way again:
Network Executives Get No Pity
Monday, August 3rd, 2009Losing $40 million to host the Obama gab-fests? Turning into a big propaganda arm for the Leftist government? Selling your soul and your credibility to be pals with your ideological hero? Poor, poor television networks.
If the major networks go over the economic edge because their lips are forever locked on the President’s butt, may they all go down in a ball of flames together. That network executives said yes for fear of being out of favor with this administration speaks volumes about not only the President’s tactics but about their own ideological bent.
Like I said way back, he conducts press conferences like he’s daring any reporter to ask a tough question. They will comply or they will be cut off. He holds the power and the reporters better acknowledge it by obsequious behavior….or else. There is always a threat inferred or implied when dealing with Barack Obama.
In short, spare me the crocodile tears. The networks essentially told President Bush to Eff Off for eight years and coverage was anything but fair–it was nearly always hostile. Ironically, President Bush respected the networks’ profit needs. And now, Obama acts, surprise!, entitled to network time whenever he wants it. And the networks do not deny him. They dare not–as if they want deny him anyway. They desire to please the master, so they comply, willingly.
I’m Tired Of The Birther Nonsense But The MSM & Left Can’t Get Enough Of It
Friday, July 31st, 2009Why are so many in the media touting a stupid Kos poll*? Could it be…..Journolist?
*Hint: It’s not the Right leaning media promoting this theory. Oh wait, I remember, try to discredit critics of your policies by painting the opposition with the “crazy” brush.
If Bush Had An Economy This Horrible Would He Get This Headline?–UPDATED
Friday, July 31st, 2009From the New York Times, this headline: “U.S. Economy Shrank Less Than Expected in Quarter”.
Here is the content of the article: Things are so much better than expected, blah, blah, blah. Economists agree, blah, blah, blah. Advisers close to President Obama are cautiously optimistic blah, blah, blah, and tout the government policies, blah, blah, blah.
There, now you don’t have to read it.
Oh, and here is a sample of the headline, if the President’s name was George W. Bush: U.S. Depression II Continues As Economy Shrank Again In Last Quarter.
I suggest you come up with your own.
UPDATED: Woo Hoo!
Positive Press Coverage For Obama: It’s Good To Be The King
Monday, April 27th, 2009Howard Kurtz detail more media bias and the insider access afforded the elite few. And those few love President Obama, especially the New York Times:
The networks have given President Obama more coverage than George W. Bush and Bill Clinton combined in their first months — and more positive assessments to boot.
In a study to be released today, the Center for Media and Public Affairs and Chapman University found the nightly newscasts devoting nearly 28 hours to Obama’s presidency in the first 50 days. (Bush, by contrast, got nearly eight hours.) Fifty-eight percent of the evaluations of Obama were positive on the ABC, CBS and NBC broadcasts, compared with 33 percent positive in the comparable period of Bush’s tenure and 44 percent positive for Clinton. (Evaluations by officials from the administration or either political party were not counted.)
On Fox News, by contrast, only 13 percent of the assessments of Obama were positive on the first half of Bret Baier’s “Special Report,” which most resembles a newscast. The president got far better treatment in the New York Times, where 73 percent of the assessments in front-page pieces were positive.
It’s good to be the king. And the press isn’t even owned by the state.
Townhall Brent Bozell
Wednesday, February 11th, 2009Galluping Past Bad Polls
Will anyone hear about Obama’s bad polling numbers?
