By the way, I saw a column in Canada Free Press about BO and the UK. Apparently, BO's grandfather was once a Brit prisoner. (The Real Reason the Queen Got Dissed: Bam Bam and the Mau Mau)
What's the latest in the BO-UK feud?
First, they are furious in the UK over Pres BO's new tax policies:
"President Obama bad mouthing "tax shelters" overseas was a blunder.
The common business practice in other countries that allows for the free flow of capital around the world may seem "unfair" to our president but others don't quite see it that way.
Take British banks, for instance.
Who would? How would we feel if some loud mouth "populist" started bashing US business interests?
Nile Gardiner, The Telegraph's US correspondent, went after Press Sec Gibbs today in Robert Gibbs should apologise to the British press for his sneering rant:
"The British press, especially the Telegraph, has been singled out because they frequently publish articles critical of the Obama administration and are not afraid to take on the status quo in Washington.
Increasingly, millions of Americans are turning to online UK news websites for cutting edge reports on American politics and U.S. foreign policy that the mainstream media refuses to cover in the States, especially if it is unflattering to the Obama White House."
I am not an expert on the UK press. However, Gardiner makes a valid point about the US media being in the tank for BO.
"Correct.
Urgent Agenda readers may recall that we've made that same point here over and over.
We turn to the British press for reporting we can't get in the politically correct press of our own country."
Why are the Brits turning on "hope and change"?
It could be Afghanistan.
Many in the UK bought into the nonsense that our allies stayed out of Afghanistan because they were angry with Pres Bush!
No Bush, no troops in Afghanistan.
It could be the stimulus plan and all of the protectionism coming out of the White House.
Let's be honest.
This is a White House that reads "pro-free trades speeches" in the teleprompter and then signs protectionist legislation.
Just ask Mexico and Canada.
It could be that Bush is now gone. They can't blame their domestic problems anymore on Bush or the Iraq War. Blaming Bush was an international past time!
Last, but not least, it could be that the UK media has decided to do their job and ask real questions.
When will the rest of the English speaking world join the UK media and get off the "We love BO at any cost" bus?
I don't know.
Nevertheless, I will check UK websites more frequently.
The UK journalists have decided to do their job and that's refreshing.
By the way, check out a couple of articles about BO that reflect a little reality too:
What makes Prof Samuelson's article so persuasive?
He is not a partisan.
He is simple concerned with the budget deficits that Pres BO is creating:
"The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time.
Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage?"
The answer is no.
Therefore, it's good to see that the Brits are staring to challenge "hope and change".
We saved the UK in World War II.
Perhaps, they can return the favor by saving US journalism from an unhealthy intoxication with "hope and change"!
No comments:
Post a Comment