Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.
General BBC-related comment thread!
Bookmark the permalink.
Below is a cut and paste of my recent HYS comment which was rejected. Can anyone “wise me up” on what I did wrong?
DEBATE: Will Tory economic plans get your vote?
COMMENT: This kind of HYS debate seems to reinforce the impression that we can have either a Labour government or a Conservative government.
Why don’t we consider the alternatives?
LET’S BREAK UP THIS DUOPOLY AND GET SOME FRESH BLOOD INTO WESTMINSTER.
COMMENT STATUS: Rejected
I wondered if the use of capitals might have upset the moderator, although I’ve seen capitals used many times as they don’t allow HTML tags to create emphasis.
I’m kinda disappointed that this site isn’t covering the Gerald Toben case, I guess there must be a reason for that.
Holocaust denier gets MP backing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7652274.stm
For the first time in living memory the British courts are about to rule on whether being an asshole constitutes a criminal offence.
Apparently thats not pretty important.
Cassandra | 03.10.08 – 7:01 pm |
Cheer up lass, worse thngs happen at sea! Gordon will save the day, the BBC says so, so it must be true…
No one’s listening anyway :b
PacificRising | 04.10.08 – 10:57 am |
If you have a ‘history’ of ‘contraversial’ posts then you are probably blacklisted. Try posting a pro-BBC/Labour lick on another dHYS and see if that gets published. If it still gets dumped for no reason then you’ll know.
It’s what I did and hence dHYS is Prod-less.
The BBC is covering some leftist demo about so called child poverty.
Here’s a tip beeboid wankers. If you want to stop child poverty then stop funding fat chavs on Council Estates to breed.
Take the low paid out of paying income tax, rather than making them fill out thousands of forms to claim back money.
The Cattle Prod of Destiny: I’ve done this. I created two BBC accounts one with a Muslim sounding name and one with a white sounding name.
I did two posts exactly the same to the BBC Radio 5 website. The thrust of the Muslim post was Bush is a killer and America is evil.
It got posted.
I then posted a mesage with the same thrust but aimed at Mulsims. It got taken down.
Tha’ts all the proof you need. Try it yourself.
BBC’s ROBERT PESTON and his sources:-
[Extract, from ‘Evening Standard’]:
“BBC Business editor Robert Peston has been leading the pack with his stories on the nationalisation of Bradford & Bingley, the Lloyds TSB-HBOS merger and the run on Northern Rock. But where does he get his information? It’s well known that Peston is extremely close to the Gordon Brown camp, having written the favourable biography Brown’s Britain. Roland Rudd, the well-connected boss of Finsbury PR and a former FT colleague of Peston, has been suggested as a possible go-between — but Rudd has firmly squashed the idea.
“Now journalism professor Adrian Monck is pointing the finger directly at Number 10 — and Brown’s ultra-loyal gatekeeper Sue Nye. Monck, a former senior BSkyB and ITN news executive, writes on his well-informed blog that Peston’s reporting about B&B on Monday morning was so authoritative that it sounded as if it were “authorised”, although he gives no reason why he suspects Nye personally. Monck says of Peston: ‘At what point does a journalist with really cut-glass sources stop being a journalist and start being — well — a cypher?'”
“Sue Nye is in spotlight over Peston scoops”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23563256-details/Sue+Nye+is+in+spotlight+over+Peston+scoops/article.do
Any Answers radio 4 has managed to find the only person in the country that does not have a Brazilian accent approves of Mandelson and id willing to admit it in public.
What are the chances of that.
Further to:
‘BBC’s ROBERT PESTON and his sources’,[2:02 pm above],
the ‘Telegraph’ of 16 months ago had this on SUE NYE:
[Extract]:
“Sue Nye, 53:
“Pivotal figure in Mr Brown’s team, where she acts as the Chancellor’s ‘gate-keeper’. Married to Gavyn Davies, the former BBC chairman, she introduced Mr Brown to his wife Sarah. Credited with helping to smooth some of the Chancellor’s rough edges. Helps dilute the blokeish, football obsessed atmosphere of the inner circle. Fiercely loyal and once described those not on Mr Brown’s side as ‘radioactive’.” (‘Telegraph’).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1551320/Brown's-team-in-place-for-march-on-No.10.html
How one would like a paragraph inserted in the appropriate shadow minister’s next speech along the lines of…. “Numerous items in the media have drawn to my attention what they believe to be political bias being shown by the BBC in their coverage. This is against the principles of the Charter and, while we find it hard to believe that this is the case, to reassure the doubters, when elected, we propose to instigate a thorough inquiry under an “independant” (in the sense that the word indepedent is accepted nowadays of course – my italics) chairman to investigate this matter. This inquiry will obviously need to be retrospective to sometime before this announcement, but certainly several years. Any failure found being likely to have a major influence on the next Charter negotiations.”
Gerald Brown: As I’ve pointed out before the BBC will tell you in one of their standard replies to any complaint about bias that the BBC output is balanced.
But ask the BBC to PROVE that and they just ignore it. Because they can’t. The statement that the BBC’s output is balanced is an opinion only.
The BBC don’t carry out any auditing to prove this.
I’ve asked the BBC to tell me how much airtime has been given over a month to Lib Dems, Tories and Nu Liebour. They won’t answer, because they can’t.
How many Guardian journalists do they have on in a month across the BBC compared to those from say the Mail? They can’t answer because they don’t keep records.
So how can the BBC claim to be balanced if it actively doesn’t monitor it’s ouwn output for balance?
George R: It’s obvious listening to that prick Preston that his words are simply those of Gordon Broon being transmitted over the airwaves.
Just as Mark Easton peddles lies over crime and Marr parrots Nu Liebour spin.
Martin:
Cattle Prod Of Destiny:
I once confronted a young (and drunk) call screener for R5Live. I said I frustrated at not getting on the shows and asked if I needed be an Indian or Pakistani to get on a phone-in. I guess because he had his guard down because of the drink, he smirked and said, “If you were an Asian woman you’d be on a heartbeat”. I wish I’d had a tape recorder running. I don’t usually like “telling stories” (you have no way of varifying me) but I can promise that is true.
Now just imagine what I won’t say here!
Adrian Monck on:
“Robert Peston’s Sources”
[Extract]
“For Peston, the senior servant of a government-financed broadcaster” [presumably Mr. Monck means ‘licence-payer financed broadcaster’], “the balance between evaluating what he’s ‘learned’ and repeating what he’s told must be an uncomfortable one.”
http://adrianmonck.com/2008/09/robert-pestons-impeccable-sources/#more-1527
It could added that it must be especially difficult for such an editor to criticise Labour’s economic policy when he has written a book praising the Labour PM, and when it is known that his employer, the BBC, is pro-Labour anyway. No, there’s no ‘moral maze’ question for the BBC here. It’s political line is, as has been pointed out on this site: instinctively pro-Labour.
John Bosworth: Don’t worry. I listen to 5 lite quite a bit. They tend to have the same callers on every show.
You just know that with any debate about the Tories for example, they get the same callers on from places like Liverpool (they’d vote for a dog turd if it had a Labour rosette on) or Glasgow.
When they talk about the USA they have on people who are known Democrats but don’t identify them as such (Stryker Maguire and that bird from the Washington Post being typical examples)
But Charlie Wolf is always identified as a “Republican” on the very rare occasion he gets airtime on the BBC.
I have contacted the BBC before about similar issues. The reply would be Mandleson’s return is a labour party issue so we talk to labour people,
Fair enough if they did the same for the tories
ady:
“I’m kinda disappointed that this site isn’t covering the Gerald Toben case, I guess there must be a reason for that.”
The reason is that the BBC are being scrupulously neutral for once.
What is Worse than Scum?
First off in the questioning was that dreadful Nick Robinson, preening with his own self importance. He launches into a question about Brown’s personal relations with Mandelson and why he picked him for a job in the cabinet. Brown answers the question only to get Robinson put a detailed supplementary, on exactly the same issue.
……………..But, wrote BBC hackette Jo Coburn at the time, if Gordon Brown had thought he would be asked about the future cooperation between the two countries then he was sorely disappointed.” She drooled on:
All of us wanted to press him on the future of his leadership. Did he accept his strategy up until now had been wrong? What were his relations like with his foreign secretary, David Miliband, amid tales of political plotting?
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/10/what-is-worse-than-scum.html
One of the dumbest decisions of Brown in the cabinet cock-up job was to put energy and ‘climate change’ under the same deepartment. It puts the lunatic greens firmly in the driving seat of energy policy, and means – as blogs such as EU Referendum have so graphically pointed out – that we will face a major energy crisis within the next couple of years or so. Power cuts will become a daily reality for millions, along with continually escalating fuel prices.
So how does the BBC website greet this truly idiotic prospect? With a fawning piece of ‘journalism’ by the
dreadful Roger Harrabin, who not only lauds Brown for his brilliance, but also – without any sense of doubt – says the change is long overdue.
This is what the nutter actually says. You could not make it up:
“We have moved into a new energy world. The volatility of the global oil price has had a major impact on the world economy at the same time as we are obliged to make major cuts in CO2. It no longer makes sense to have one department responsible for energy demand and another for energy supply.”
This is how a senior UK government insider explained the widely praised decision on Friday to create a new Department for Energy and Climate.”
Chilling.
The ‘story’ is at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7651795.stm
BBC headline:
“PM pledges ‘nation over politics'”
(That’ll be the European Union nation?)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7652288.stm
“EU heads start bank crisis talks”
[Extract]:
“French President Nicolas Sarkozy, hosting the meeting, hopes the talks will forge a common European approach.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7648249.stm
ady | 04.10.08 – 12:19 pm |
For the first time in living memory the British courts are about to rule on whether being an asshole constitutes a criminal offence.
Apparently thats not pretty important.
Where’s the BBC bias? What’s that? There isn’t any and you’re just Jew-baiting?
Or are you really upset that the BBC displayed a disgusting bias by saying that Toben’s views are “unpleasant”? Did that bother you?
Troll. Better watch your step now – the mods might have sent your IP to the Haganah.
A lot of talk on here about what a Conservative Government’s policy towards the BBC might be. Insights perhaps here –
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/3096831/Tory-Party-Conference-Tories-tell-BBC-to-heal-Broken-Britain.html
Martin | 04.10.08 – 1:33 pm |
Tha’ts all the proof you need. Try it yourself.
Oh I have. No matter how racist ‘Mohammed Ahmed’, the infamous Jew-baiter, became the BBC still loved his posts. In fact I had to moderate myself as I ran the risk of appalling even Mr Hitler.!
If I had the time I’d do one of those racism experiments (you know, where you get students of different races to apply for jobs/flats etc and analyse who gets offered what. ) Sadly, I’m too busy running the world’s banks (badly) and influencing the media …
Back on topic, in the last year, until relatively recently, dHYS had been a lot more open than it used to be. Once I managed to get a new poster I’ve not had, much, trouble posting. Possibly moving IPs helped.
Recently, dHYS seems to be reducing the subjects and tailoring the argument. The ‘read only’ debates seem to have disappeared and the number of open llive debates has increased, slightly. And, unless it’s about to take a nose dive, the Mandy HYS has the first page of ‘readers recommended’ as all anti-Brown/Mandy. (that’s 15 comments with 404-189 recommendeds.)
So, it’s not all bad, just mostly!
whitewineliberal:
A lot of talk on here about what a Conservative Government’s policy towards the BBC might be. Insights perhaps here –
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/…en- Britain.html
“For the first time Mr Hunt said that he believes that rather than just putting on programmes that debate the issues and put a balanced argument the BBC needs to come up with new ways of tackling the problems.”
“He said: “The days when pub service broadcasters said we’ve helped by raising the debate and putting the debate on the political agenda and that’s enough – I think those days are over. Public service broadcasters can do a lot more.”
“The problem is that in Westminster we know that a speech by a politician will have a fraction of the influence as a programme on the BBC. The BBC has huge huge influence and it could be a huge force for good. So I’d like to see their vision of how they can play that constructive role.”
“He is deliberately vague about what the BBC can do – something people could say about a lot of the Tory chat on so-called Broken Britain – but is clear the Corporation has to up its game. ”
So, the Conservative Party’s Shadow Culture Secretary, the poetically named Jeremy Hunt, seems to be completely oblivious to the BBC’s unending daily, monthly, and yearly output of cultural Marxist propaganda in pretty much everything it does apart from the pips and the weather, and that the BBC itself is a part of the problem in that it is helping to break what’s left of Britain in its derision of all civilised values and its censorship of any news which shows the Leftist project to be the total disaster that it is, and that it will never help any party calling itself Conservative, and that therefore the only solution is to withdraw public funding all together. This is just like trying to recruit ‘moderate Muslims’ to help oppose ‘the tiny minority of extremists who have hijacked Islam for their own ends.’
Oh, brother, who gave this clueless numpty his job?
For real. It would appear the Conservatives have not quite swallowed the argument on this site.
It wouldn’t make a great deal of sense for them to admit they had.
EU Ref tears into Nick Robinson:
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/10/what-is-worse-than-scum.html
**************************
Thus, when the prime minister calls a press conference in No 10 on the economic situation, with the chancellor of the exchequer standing beside him, and announces he is going to go to Paris, and tells the media that he intends to put forward his proposals “about how a stability programme can work for each country”, you might just have thought that some of the assembled journalists • or even one • might on our behalf be just a little interested in what those proposals were, what the reception might be and sundry other details.
But no! This our media we are talking about. First off in the questioning was that dreadful Nick Robinson, preening with his own self importance. He launches into a question about Brown’s personal relations with Mandelson and why he picked him for a job in the cabinet.
For once you can empathise with Brown. He looks at Robinson and says: “It’s incredible how big decisions about the economy are reduced to just a question about one or two personalities …”.
But that is what our hacks are reduced to. No longer able to deal with real politics, they immerse themselves in the trivia, the tat and the theatre.
*******************************
do read it all.
“The problem is that in Westminster we know that a speech by a politician will have a fraction of the influence as a programme on the BBC. The BBC has huge huge influence and it could be a huge force for good. So I’d like to see their vision of how they can play that constructive role.
Isn’t this a backhanded admission that there’s a problem and they can’t do anything about it? He’s clearly putting it out there that the BBC has tremendous influence over hearts and minds. And they’re not being “constructive” about it. What else is there to say?
As much as people wish it otherwise, the BBC is far too entrenched in society and the public’s minds for an opposition party to really make disbanding it a useful platform. If nothing else, who would want the collective energy of the worst offenders working overtime against them for the next 18 months or whatever until the next election? I just don’t see it happening.
The odd warning shot across the bow wouldn’t hurt, I suppose.
Northnorthwester,
The BBC does show bias even about the weather. It wont show temperatures in Fahrenheit. I bet more old folk who were only taught imperial measurements watch the weatherforecasts than young uns who dont need to know whether to wear thermals for the day.
The bBC, its business acumen and half the story.
No business rush to Irish banks
There has been no stampede on the part of UK businesses to transfer savings to Irish banks, a BBC poll suggests. In a survey carried out with the consultants Unicom, 91.6% of the 312 small businesses quizzed said that they would not consider moving deposits.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7652739.stm
Get that. According to a bBC poll there is no rush in the UK in which to send money across the water to Ireland because their government has a Much larger protection clause.
Meanwhile the FT had this to say on the very subject yesterday;
Exodus as UK savers shift to Irish safe haven
Published: October 3 2008 04:15 | Last updated: October 3 2008 04:15
Tens of thousands of savers are seeking to transfer their cash out of the UK and into Irish banks – including the Post Office accounts run by Bank of Ireland – to gain the unlimited deposit protection recently afforded them by the Irish government. The first three days of this week have seen three times the normal level of new accounts and inquiries about Irish banks, according to price comparison website moneysupermarket.com, with Irish institutions accounting for 25 per cent of all the savings-related traffic to the site. The number of inquiries was “into tens of thousands”, a spokesman for the site said.
Bank of Ireland confirmed that it was seeing an increase in new accounts, and the Post Office – whose Instant Saver, Fiveyear Saver and Growth bonds are operated by Bank of Ireland – said it has seen customer demand accelerate this week.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/902530c4-90d1-11dd-8abb-0000779fd18c.html
and before anybody points put the difference between savers and businesses as per those reports. Tell me, how do you know?
The bBC, its business acumen and half the story.
David Preiser (USA): “If nothing else, who would want the collective energy of the worst offenders working overtime against them for the next 18 months or whatever until the next election?” I am sorry to break this to you, but that is exactly what the BBC will be doing anyway. If you think you have witnessed bias up until now, “you ain’t seen nothing yet”
Without comment by BBC:
1.)Malik, Labour MP on move to be Minister at Ministry of Justice: “As a Muslim…”
2.)Mandelson:”When you’re working for Britain, of course, you’re working for the rest of Europe”
(BBC News TV).
No Conservative politician in his right mind would, at this stage in the electoral cycle, state the obvious about the BBC’s leftist bias.
Nor about what the next Conservative government may be going do about it.
The sensible thing to do is to leave them guessing…
Is “boost” a British euphemism for “inspire” or “encourage”? In the US, it can mean “steal”. I can’t tell what the headline of this article means, especially considering the way the article itself is written:
Obama seeks to boost new voters
But that bit concerns only the first third of the article. The rest is very cute indeed. It seems that the BBC now gets preliminary copies of The Obamessiah’s speeches. Perhaps this is in the same vein as Robert Peston’s “I have learned.”
This is really the next level of foolishness. After describing his latest campaign activities, which reads like a sports article about the local club’s recent moves, it’s a nice propaganda piece.
According to remarks released in advance, he will tell voters that Mr McCain’s plan will encourage younger, healthier workers to buy cheaper health insurance outside the workplace, causing many employers to abandon their schemes.
He will say: “Study after study has shown, that under the McCain plan, at least 20 million Americans will lose the insurance they rely on from their workplace.”
For balance, the ridiculous BBC hack who produced this went not to someone from, you know, the McCain campaign, but instead called “A spokesman (note the lack of the definite article) of the Republican National Committee.”
Then they go through such contortions to portray McCain’s not-exactly-conservative position to The Obamessiah’s not-exactly-socialized-medicine position to what can only be called a Pythonesque:
Mr McCain has proposed tax credits to help more people pay for health insurance, while Mr Obama wants to bring about universal coverage by providing subsidies to make it more affordable.
Before anyone wastes a brain cell working that one out, the very next line is:
Opinion polls suggest healthcare is an important issue for voters.
So is sanity, BBC.
Just in passing, it should be put on the record that this week’s Any Questions on R4 conformed to the usual dreary pattern of bias.
In fact, as the only conservative voice there was the uber-wet Alan Duncan, you might even think it dipped to a new low, with five Lefties on the show (Dimbleby making up the numbers in his usual patronising manner.)
The most entertaining aspect was the foolish John Edgar, the only non-amateur politician on the panel, who was so foamingly partisan that he outdid the actual ZaNu representative!
The audience, of course, was drawn from the local NUS bar.
facebook sets up euro hq in dublin
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2008/1003/1222959305107.html
i guess they dont buy into wanting to be under the rule of Gordon Brown’s socialist nirvana.
BBC report:
“Greens welcome new climate dept”
( That’s it then: the BBC has decided that’s all we need to know)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7650669.stm
And BBC ignores all this:
http://climatescience.blogspot.com/
archduke:
“facebook sets up euro hq in dublin.
i guess they dont buy into wanting to be under the rule of Gordon Brown’s socialist nirvana.”
Or any of the other 30 or so countries in Europe.
Just watching the first episode of “Little Britain USA.”
Though I lament the Beeb’s inherent Leftism, I confess a sneaking liking for Matt Lucas and David Walliams.
Er, but why oh why the gross canned laughter? And it surely WAS canned.
And so, one of the Beeb’s most celebrated, most trendy shows is revealed to be a product of gross fakism.
Jees, isn’t there a sodding single solitery aspect of the Beeb’s output that isn’t a product of deception?
Remember when, after the Labour conference, the polls had Labour up to just 9 or 10 points behind the Tories? Well, we’ve had two polls in three days since the Tory conference; the first showed a 12 point gap, and the 2nd a 14 point one, with the Tories going up a full four points. Not to mention a marginals poll which predicts the Tories get a majority of 78 against Labour target seats alone. None on the BBC, of course.
here’s something you wont hear mentioned on the BBC because of their “we only report polls with a positive message for socialists” policy
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/article38758.ece
BBC News 24 going through tomorrows newspapers.
Yasmin Alibhai – Brown and Shahid Malik are reviewing the press.
According to Yasmin ‘OJ Simpson’ didn’t get a fair trail. To which the presenter aluded in the direction
“Is it becasue he is black”
With Malik adding
“It was unfinshed business”
Good to see that the BBC still hates the US of A and gets 2 muslims to do just that.
Excellent post from Bishop Hill digging the dirt on Roger Harrabin, and the BBC’s attempt to cover it up:
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2008/9/30/the-amazing-disappearing-roger-harrabin.html
TonyN at Harmless Sky also has a few posts in the same vein:
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/
bbc “reporters” on bbc news 24
“during the holy month of ramadan” by one beeboid
“during the holy month of ramadan” by a voiceover beeboid…
holy for who? that it is an ISLAMIC holy month is never mentioned.
i look forward to the bbc mentioning the “holy” week of Christmas and the “holy” week of Easter.
fat chance of that happening.
There may soon be a tiny mention on the BBC of The Obamessiah’s connection to unrepentant domestic terrorist leader Bill Ayers.
I buy the NY Times only Thursday through Saturday, and only because those are the only issues which contain a crossword puzzle worth doing. So, I saw this little apologia in today’s paper. It was on page one, upper left, above the fold, so that means it’s kind of important. Not important enough for them to print it on Monday or anything, but at least it’s not buried.
But it’s a bogus defense. This explanation why is as good as anything I would say.
People have been screaming about this for months, yet this is the first time the NY Times has dared mention it. Rather than being honest about the kind of far-Left educational and social engineering programs they worked on together, the Times pretends they looked deeply into it, found no story, and dressed it up with encomiums from friends for the defense.
(NB defenders of the indefensible: Just because this is from a right-wing source doesn’t mean you can dismiss it without reading it or checking the facts. Any denials will require backup facts of their own.)
Since the Beeboids who cover the US take their lead from the Leftoid US media, this is a sign to them that it’s finally a legitimate story. I’m not alone in having commented here that the BBC has never touched it. This is one of the main reasons why people don’t want to vote for The Obamessiah. All the media in the tank for him have kept a lid on this, instead telling you all that we’re too racist. It’s not about the color of his skin, but about his bad politics and lack of good experience.
The BBC will now feel free to mention Ayers, dismiss it as case closed, and go back to business as usual. One Beeboid might even bring it up a right-wing smear tactic, easily smacked down. The BBC will not tell you anything about how radical Ayers’s educational schemes are. To them, these would seem quite unremarkable, and not worth reporting.
If the BBC parrots the NY Times opinion, they’ll have given themselves away.
Zimbabwe anyone?
Here’s another reason why I’m concerned about the kind of people who would be empowered by an Obamessiah Presidency:
Welcome To Camp Obama
The unsolicited pitch goes like this: “Camp Obama attendees will receive real world organizing experience that will have a direct impact on this election. Graduates of Camp Obama will go on to become Deputy Field Organizers who will lead this campaign to victory in crucial battleground states around the country.”
The letter continues, “By participating in Camp Obama you’ll get the kind of experience that Barack got as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, where he learned that real change happens from the bottom up.”
While the letter neglects to identify the source of that “experience,” a slide on a camp blog linked to the Obama Web site offers a clue. Underneath a “Welcome to Camp Obama” banner, a trainer at Obama headquarters in Chicago is seen speaking next to a wipe board with the words “Saul Alinsky” scrawled across it.
Alinsky is the late Chicago socialist and street agitator who is considered the father of community organizing.
Creeped out yet? But remember, boys and girls: if he loses in November, it’s ‘cos he is black.
Anon and David Preiser (USA):
I guess one can say that this group is not part of the official Obama campaign though any future dangers lie not in “official” campaigns but in all kinds of fringe groups feeling themselves empowered to create mischief by an Obama victory.
It needs Obama himself to speak out loudly, telling the world he wants no part of this kind of stuff. Nods and winks won’t do.
What worries me is the reaction to an Obama win by our “friends” in the rest of the world. They will think (I know this) that the era of Obamalot implies that he is on “their” side (Europe, the Muslim World, the Far East, Africa) and not on the side of the country which he will lead.
Obama needs to address this now – he is not “a citizen of the world” but the guardian of the USA. He must state clearly to the world that he owes his loyalty to Ohio and not Oman.
By the way, has this video, or the one of the children singing Korean style, been mentioned on the domestic BBC channels?
Reading CNN and other liberal American media outlets these days is a lot like reading the BBC website. Look at this article about Palin and her condemnation of Obama’s connections with Bill Ayers – it could have easily been penned by any BBC hack:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/04/palin.obama/index.html
“Several other publications, including the Washington Post, Time magazine, the Chicago Sun-Times, The New Yorker and The New Republic, have debunked the idea that Obama and Ayers had a close relationship.”
And several other publications, which the liberal media refuse to mention, have proven his links with Ayers – for instance the Wall St Journal. The liberal media have not debunked his ties with Ayers at all – they’ve simply whitewashed them.
““We’re going to get a little tougher,” a senior Republican operative said, requesting anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss strategy. “We’ve got to question this guy’s associations. Very soon. There’s no question that we have to change the subject here.””
Just like the BBC – when they want to tell outright lies and concoct fabricated quotes, simply say that they’re from “sources that requested anonymity”. Does anyone realize believe that a Republican operative told a newspaper that “we have to change the subject here”? It’s so obviously a lie…
The Obama campaign is lying through its front teeth when it attempts to whitewash the friendship between Obama and Ayers, who kick started his career by holding a party at his house, for chrissakes. The two have obviously been in cahoots since then. In fact some now are beginning to suspect that Ayers even wrote Obama’s phony memoirs.
I know this is CNN and not the BBC but right now the entire left wing Obamedia is starting to disgust me more than it ever has before. Journalism is dead.
Christopher Booker on the disastrous appointment of Ed Miliband to a new department of green moonshine and energy (lauded by the BBC, as I pointed out in an earlier posting):
“It is hard to overestimate the disastrous implications of Gordon Brown’s appointment of Ed Miliband as minister for “energy and climate change”.
Our former energy minister, John Hutton, was the one member of the Government who took on board the reality of our looming energy crisis, the certainty that within a few years, unless we build at least a dozen new nuclear and coal-fired power stations, our economy will grind to a halt.
Until then, ministers had been carried into cloud cuckoo land by green propaganda and unrealisable dreams of generating our electricity from “renewables”.
Mr Hutton recognised that a proper energy policy was so vital that it must take priority even over “renewables targets” set by the EU.
With his lone voice of sanity gone and Mr Miliband in charge – as green, climate change obsessed and Europhile as they come – the prospect of our lights going out seems unavoidable.”
BBC audiences make me despair for democracy
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/blog/2008/10/05/bbc_audiences_make_me_despair_for_democracy
I am usually dismissive of pol/media elite chatterati getting snooty about ‘the public’, but here is one who at least makes the important distinction that he is talking about a ‘BBC Audience’. Possibly a different collection of folk? Now, how is that possible?
Not sure about the value of buying the bloke’s book in helping me ‘do something’ (which I would dearly love to do), but he raises interesting questions.