Monday, October 19, 2009

The White House War Against Opposition Media

Several months ago, on another site, I wrote an article on why I felt that the Obama administration is not socialist, it is fascist, an opinion for which I took some heat from some quarters. In follow-up discussions, I predicted that the next step would be for the President to try to control the media. I felt that the first step would be a bail-out of the newspaper industry, thereby granting the administration essential ownership of the paper media. I still believe that is a distinct possibility, but I was wrong about it being the first step. The first step has been to try to isolate, alienate, and obstruct FOX News.

Of course, the Obama administration made no secret of its antipathy to FOX News, but it has taken on a new dimension over the last month. In the first part of October, the Obama administration informed FOX News that no member of the administration would appear on any FOX News program. On October 11, the attempt to isolate FOX News became public when White House Communications Director, Anita Dunn, went on CNN and declared that the administration doesn't consider FOX News a legitimate news source.

This is the same Anita Dunn who stated that, during the campaign, the Obama campaign totally controlled the media and that they made sure that the media reported what Obama said and not why he was saying it. (This is also the same Anita Dunn who declared that one of her favorite political philosophers and one that she always turns to is mass murderer, Mao Tse Tung.)

Today, it was reported that the White House is now urging other networks to sever any ties with FOX News. As you may or may not know, it is common for news networks to share clips. That is how you see highlights of Meet the Press on FOX News or Sunday Morning with Chris Wallace on CNN. It also explains why you see the same Balloon Boy video on all the networks. For the White House to insist that other networks no longer have ties with FOX News, puts FOX News at a serious competitive disadvantage.

Why does the White House so dislike FOX News? Well, it could be that FOX News is exposing things going on in this administration that the other networks will not. Things like having a radical, communist, truther in the administration, or the ACORN prostitution scandals, or even that the White House Communications Director lists Mao Tse Tung as one of her two "favorite political philosophers." The fact is that the Obama administration does not like opposition viewpoints and is willing to play "hardball" politics in order to silence them. Karl Rove accurately likened this to Richard Nixon's enemy list. In other words, FOX News is the one news outlet that the administration cannot, in Anita Dunn's words, "control."

So now, the Obama administration has admitted that it controls the news media and if the media doesn't play according to the administration's rules, it will be isolated and punished. Is there no mainstream outlet that finds this offensive, or are they too afraid that they will be next?

Saturday, October 10, 2009

Roundup of blogs and news - 10/10/09

The big news of the week is that President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for . . . uh . . . being hopey-changey. What was lost in all this was the other prizes the President won.

John Podhoretz thinks that Obama was the logical choice for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Mark Steyn offers his own unique view of the Nobel Prize and Obama's vision.

Even the very liberal Richard Cohen is scratching his head.

And the Obama/Clinton State Department, classy as always.

The Wall Street Journal describes the Obama administration's war on medical specialists. This punishes some of the most highly trained and hardest-working physicians out there.

During the Clinton administration, the prosecution of Medicare "fraud" became a point of emphasis. The trouble is, the regulations (not laws) enacted by the Clinton administration did not allow for mistakes. There was only fraud or not fraud. This is what can happen with that type of mindset. (Oh, by the way, if someone is undercharged, that is Medicare fraud.)

The sleight of hand required to make the Baucus bill "deficit neutral". Remember, deficit neutral does not mean free. It has to be paid for. In this case, with higher taxes and fees, transferring costs to the states, and cutting Medicare reimbursement 25%, meaning that more docs won't accept Medicare and subsequent rationing.

Another, maybe easier to read, analysis of the Baucus plan.

A second stimulus bill means that the first one did not work. What makes us think a second will work any better? And, more important, how do we pay for it?

Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. Saudi Arabia wants financial aid if a UN climate control pact lessens fossil fuel dependence.



For those who think that global-warming is settled science, this is an interesting article.

Uh-oh! A reliably Democratic interest group might make the President look bad. Can't have that.



Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Barack Obama – Still Over His Head

A few weeks into his Presidency, President Obama had already had to throw Tom Daschle under the bus for tax problems, was taking heat for seating a tax-cheat, Timothy Geithner, as his treasury secretary, and several lesser luminaries he wanted for his administration had to back out because of tax problems. He had to break his own campaign promises about not allowing lobbyists roles in his administration by granting several waivers. He insulted one of our closest allies, Great Britain, by sending back a bust of Winston Churchill that had been a gift by the British government to the American President after 9/11, and had essentially snubbed British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, on an official diplomatic trip to the United States. In an article I wrote at that time, I opined that Obama was "way over his head", an opinion for which I was excoriated by a couple of people and that lead me to being called a racist because I was "obviously judging him on his appearance."

Now, several months later, I see absolutely no reason to change my opinion. In the interim, Obama signed a hurriedly passed "stimulus" bill, breaking at least a couple more campaign promises on the way, that has failed to stimulate anything except the national debt and Democratic interest groups. He consistently sides with dictators and tyrants while insulting allies and ignoring democratic popular movements. Under his watch, North Korea continues to test missiles and atomic bombs and Iran, a regime that has vowed to destroy Israel AND the United States, openly defies international opinion to develop the atomic bomb. Under the Obama administration, the government now owns a large chunk of the domestic auto industry and, flouting existing protocol, the unions received favorable status over preferred shareholders to gain ownership of much of the remainder. Now, it looks like Chrysler and GM will be bankrupt again in about a year. Unemployment continues to climb and there is no end in sight. No matter what you think about the President's health care reform, he has shown himself particularly inept in getting it through Congress or creating a demand for it in the public. Now, the latest embarrassment was to fly to Copenhagen, tell the Olympic committee that they should award Chicago the Olympics primarily because he wants them.

It is time to realize that Barack Obama is the perfect embodiment of the Peter Principle - that a person rises to the level of their incompetence. He is an attractive man who reads a teleprompter well, but who is, at best, a mediocre politician. This should come as no surprise to us. While the left, and particularly the fringe media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc.), fretted over Sarah Palin's inexperience for the Vice-Presidency, only being the governor of a state, they completely disregarded the lack of any real-life experience possessed by Obama.

This is a man who has never run a business in his life. His job prior to entering politics was as a community organizer, trying to see how much government money he could wrangle for his own special interest group. He was tagged early by the Chicago political machine (and no one runs machine politics like Chicago) as a potential star. He won his first election to the Illinois State Legislature after his three opponents were kicked off the ballot for technicalities in their ballot petitions - things like people printing their names rather than writing them, valid signatures but unregistered collectors, etc - which left him running unopposed. In his election for US Senate, his Democratic opponent withdrew after his "sealed" divorce papers were leaked to the press. In the general election, Republican Jack Ryan also withdrew after his "sealed" divorce papers were leaked, causing a scandal. What are the chances? Obama then made short work of carpetbagger, Alan Keyes, from Maryland.

In his short, less than one term, Senate career, Obama was totally unexceptional other than being named the Most Liberal Senator by National Journal Magazine in 2007. His big break onto the national scene was in delivering the keynote address to the Democratic National Convention in 2004, thus demonstrating his prowess in reading a teleprompter. Obama was being groomed for the Presidency following a Hillary Clinton administration, in 2012 or 2016 but, apparently, the Democratic National Committee forgot to send him the memo.

There is no doubt that Obama is a brilliant campaigner. As Rush Limbaugh said, "He says nothing better than anyone." And it is true. On the campaign trail, a candidate can say whatever they like. You don't like lobbyists? There will be none in my administration. Want Guantanamo closed? It will be within a year. We will withdraw from Iraq within a year. Afghanistan is the good war - I will concentrate on winning there. I will change the tone in Washington. I am a uniter, not a divider. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Unfortunately, when the election is over, you have to actually govern and this is where Obama has been exposed. He has no real world experience outside of politics and his para-political community-organizing gig. He doesn't have even a rudimentary grasp of history or economics. For all of Obama's vaunted intelligence, I have yet to see evidence of it. He hasn't deviated one iota from the far left socialistic/fascistic playbook since coming into office. He doesn't seem to understand that the average American doesn't hold with the liberal philosophy he has been entrenched with all his life. He spouts platitudes about social justice that any sophomore sociology major at his former alma maters, Harvard and Columbia, would instantly recognize and nod his head, but that the average rancher in Kansas or construction worker in Georgia, people with real-world experience, would recognize as insanity. Instead, Obama regularly ridicules his opponents and accuses them of ill will whenever he is opposed. Instead of using his bully pulpit to persuade and inspire, he uses it to lecture, browbeat and declare from on high what is and what is not "acceptable." He wants "conversation and ideas" but, if those ideas don't agree with his viewpoint, he decries them as "partisan politics as usual."

Our President is now in perpetual campaign mode, certain that his charm and erudition can overcome objections to his far-left policies. Unfortunately, while you may be able to get away with promising unicorns that fart rainbows in campaigns, when it comes to governing, people become a little more discerning. That is why, no matter how many times he promises it, people know that you can’t dramatically expand the government health care rolls while simultaneously decreasing the deficit and increasing accessibility to health care providers. People understand that the President is blowing smoke up their skirts and that is why the public support for Obama’s health care reform is tanking, not because of lies and misleading statements from Obama’s opponents. Just try to convince someone that the way to increase efficiency of anything is to have more government involvement and you’ll understand why Obama is having a difficult time selling his program.

All of this might be comical if it wasn’t so serious. Our economy continues stagnate while unemployment rates continue to climb. Indecision on Afghanistan may very well cost us the war or, at the least, more American lives. Iran is on the cusp of becoming a nuclear power and Russia is, once again, flexing her muscles.

A more humble man might regroup, learn some lessons from his failures, and come back as a strong and decisive leader. Of course, humility and Obama do not even belong in the same sentence. If there is anyone who has a high opinion of himself, it is Barack Obama. George Will says, “Presidents often come to be characterized by particular adjectives: "honest" Abe Lincoln, "Grover the Good" Cleveland, "energetic" Theodore Roosevelt, "idealistic" Woodrow Wilson, "Silent Cal" Coolidge, "confident" FDR, "likable" Ike Eisenhower. Less happily, there were "Tricky Dick" Nixon and "Slick Willie" Clinton. Unhappy will be a president whose defining adjective is "vain."

We were promised a President who was post-racial, post-partisan and who would change “politics as usual.” What we got was an ungracious, egotistical, highly partisan, radically left-wing President who is way over his head.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Roundup of blogs and news - 10/01/09

If abortion isn't going to be covered by the Health Care Bill, why do Democrats keep voting down amendments to specifically prohibit it? According to Sen. Baucus, "This is a health-care bill. This is not an abortion bill."

What good does it do to prohibit government funded health care if we are prohibited from asking them for ID? This is why Joe Wilson was right.

Hollywood is full of degenerates. Whoopi Goldberg is an absolute idiot. It is a good thing that she is a child advocate.

Racism Revival: How to be a 21st Century Bigot, by Sonja Schmidt.

Ann Althouse asks, "Why slam those of us with great health benefits? We worked for it. We earned it. And we're the middle-class people Obama said he wasn't going to hurt.

Speaking of raising taxes on the middle class (and everyone else), can you say, "VAT"?

The President doesn't seem to want to be the leader of a world superpower. Ruben Navarrette, at Real Clear Politics, gives his take.

Daniel Henninger explores this same topic. When we hold out our hand to dictators, what does that say to those brave dissidents of those regimes.

Remember all those countries who were going to like us once we got rid of the Bush braggadocio? Well, now they don't like us because we're weak. Who would have ever thought France would be asking us to man up?

Let's try some strong sanctions and see if they work.

Victor Davis Hanson argues that many of our international problems would go away if we would develop our existing energy sources.

Rep. Alan Grayson (D - Moron) elevates the level of discourse on the floor of the House of Representatives. Where is the outcry for a resolution of condemnation? Anyone? At least he didn't accuse anyone of lying.

Don't you feel bad for Michelle and Oprah's sacrifice by taking a trip to Copenhagen? But no sacrifice is too much if it's for the children. (And just how will the Olympics inspire kids to become the next Oprah Winfrey?)

Multi-millionaire, Michael Moore, claims, "Capitalism never did anything for me." Again, why does anyone take this hypocrite seriously?

Stephen Spruiell at NRO takes on our favorite anti-capitalist.

The newly non-politicized Department of Justice is being awfully slow in releasing information about dismissing the case against those New Black Panther Party.

George Will describes how difficult it is to create a sense of crisis about global warming when temperatures haven't risen for 11 years.

In 2009, 47% of Americans will pay $0 income tax. That means that half the people deciding on how we spend money as a nation will be spending the money earned by the other half. I think that everyone who votes should have to pay taxes. Otherwise, there is no disincentive for reckless spending.