Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

on presidential media access

November 30, 2016

The reaction of the press to the campaign and election of Donald Trump is still one of the most culturally prominent issues of the season. The diversification of programming available is one reason for that distinctions among people in the society are becoming more apparent. The polarization between political views in the country may well have been strengthened by the decision of much of the press to take sides with the Progressive policy advocates; in the absence of widely disseminated information that all parties could accept as a starting place for discussion, lack of understanding and distrust deepened.

One important way this has played out is in the reporting on the transition to the Trump administration. Because of social media and the internet, more and more people can quickly and easily compare the way the press reports on Trump with how they reported on Obama, and the contrast is striking, which further weakens their reliability. The reaction to Trump’s YouTube address on his transition and on Thanksgiving is an example, where his use of social media is reported as a problem in contrast to it being strategic when Obama used it.

Between 2007 and 2016, much of the press considered this a story of evolving technology and communication. But what used to be an interesting challenge that had media “scrambling to stay in the game” against an innovative, young president is now a grave threat. Somewhere in between is probably the correct assessment, and swinging between admiration and fear depending on the president doesn’t create better coverage or earn more trust from readers.

Mary Katherine Ham

Advertisements

on the legacy of President Obama

November 26, 2016

The transition to a new administration is currently the most prominent fascination of reporting and commentators, but alongside that there is another prominent topic during this time, the legacy of President Obama. It’s been interesting to observe the very different evaluations of the same facts about the world, whether domestic or foreign, that have been affected to various degrees by President Obama’s policies.

Conrad Black offers his (negative) assessment here. In the column he engages with the positive assessment of David Remnick, which he describes with some very vivid comparisons:

The grief-stricken elegies of Abraham Lincoln, even unto Henry Ward Beecher, the toadying chronicles of the great liberal hallelujah chorus for Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the mawkish potboilers mass-produced by the Kennedy entourage could be ransacked in vain to find a rival to the body of Mr. Remnick’s works of ultra-secular canonization in laudation of Barack Obama.

That’s a marvelous sentence.

on Obama’s spiritual transcendence

June 16, 2016

I wonder if Mr. Morford retains his belief that this President has been different from the rest. Something has occurred in our society over the past 20 years that has made genuine assessment of political figures very difficult. It would be hard to challenge and critique the policies and actions of someone you regard as spiritually advanced relative to the rest of the human race.

Quote of the day

June 13, 2016

Michael Graham in the Washington Examiner:

You may say Trump’s comments are crazy, but how is “ban all Muslims” any more crazy than “Muslims have no connection whatsoever to terrorism?” It’s not. And if you give voters the choice of two crazies, they’ll take “the one less likely to get me killed at an Orlando nightclub.”

quote of the day

May 17, 2016

“So if you’re getting an itchy feeling between your shoulderblades when you contemplate your child’s hyper-sexualized reading list and gender-bending sex education curriculum, you need not fear that you have turned into a repressed, homophobic Victorian. Instead, there’s an excellent chance that you are someone with a deep respect for individual freedom who resents the Leftists’ efforts to co-opt your child’s body as a necessary sacrifice to the State.”

Read the whole thing:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/sex_and_state_power.html#ixzz48vzczMVf
h/t Ace of Spades

Can you blame her?

February 13, 2015

I’m impressed by anyone who could take sitting stolidly during a speech by President Obama without a bit of drinking beforehand. It’s not like they can play drinking games during the speech like everyone else.

Ginsburg: ‘I Wasn’t 100 Percent Sober’ For State Of The Union Address

The United States in the world

January 3, 2013

It’s a good thing we’ve replaced the cowboy George Bush and his Darth Vader vice president, Dick Cheney, so that the United States can again be liked by the rest of the world. We wouldn’t want the rest of the world to think we’re out there arresting people who aren’t U.S. citizens, who have never been to the U.S., and who haven’t attacked any U.S. citizens or assets.

What’s that you say? A federal court in New York has done just that?

I miss George W. Bush.

Campbell Brown on President Obama and respect for women

May 20, 2012

This is quite a challenge to what has become typical rhetoric from the administration and its allies. The implications are interesting, and profound.

Personal responsibility or government largesse

October 16, 2008

One of the main differences between the left and the right is illustrated by the assumptions behind this statement from Senator Obama last night, explaining his “spread the wealth” comment to the prospective plumbing-business owner:

Now, the conversation I had with Joe the plumber, what I essentially said to him was, “Five years ago, when you were in a position to buy your business, you needed a tax cut then.”

And what I want to do is to make sure that the plumber, the nurse, the firefighter, the teacher, the young entrepreneur who doesn’t yet have money, I want to give them a tax break now. And that requires us to make some important choices. <CNN Transcript>

In the view of Senator Obama and the left, he was able to become successful because of tax benefits bestowed by the government. I suspect he would disagree.

The conservative case for Obama

October 14, 2008

according to Christopher Buckleyseems to be based on the following points: 1) he doesn’t like Sarah Palin, and 2) he doesn’t like the negative campaign the McCain ticket has engaged in. So even though Buckley believes John McCain is still conservative and is the type of person the country needs as a leader, he’s not going to vote for him because, um, he doesn’t want to associate himself with people like Sarah Palin and people who care about the character and judgement of a major party candidate.

But wait a minute, that’s just the explanation for why he’s not voting for McCain (or Palin, more probably). The conservative case for Obama is that he’s cool, went to Harvard, and wrote two books. Buckley grants the Harvard degree is unlikely to mean anything, and he doesn’t really explain the “first class temperament” criteria. The way he’s tossed people under the bus this year and unleashed his acolytes on anyone who dares exercise their first amendment rights in the process of criticizing him seems somewhat intemperate to me. But of course, I went to a state university and think Sarah Palin is tough and smart, so clearly I’m no judge of character.

Buckley relies on the temperament and intellect criteria as the basis for his hope that throughout his campaign Obama has been saying things he doesn’t really believe, or if he does believe them, once he sits down in the Oval Office and sees the world from that vantage point he’ll realize the nonsense that he’s been saying during the campaign, that he’s acted out during his political career, and will govern as a thrifty, pro-business, small government president.

I think I see why deep down Christopher Buckley realized no one gives a fig. More here from Ace.