The Obama fever that infects the BBC was manifest in an item on the 10 News that I just watched which in essence compared The One to Abraham Lincoln. It”s amazing to watch this Beeb sycophancy, presented to us as news, from the same broadcaster which waged unrelenting hostility to the Bush presidency over the past eight years. Now that their man is about to get into the White House you can be sure that all reporting will be sanitised, ensuring that any objectivity goes out the window.
OBAMA IS LINCOLN
Bookmark the permalink.
The BBC are the first to point out ‘lessons from History’ and to recoil from what they call ‘populism’ and yet in respect of the ‘Cult of Obama’ the BBC appear to have suspended their critical faculties and fallen hook, line & sinker for this craze.
I have seen or heard no BBC questioning of Obamas positions.
Questions ought to be asked at a later stage as to why this was ever permitted.
Didn’t Lincoln get his brains blown out though?
Martin,
Yes and the BBC are quick to already flag up the conspiracy to kill The One.
I dont understand the Beebs coverage of President Elect Obama. They talk as though he has already served four good years of peace and prosperity,having turned round everything.
Did they mention Abe’s political affiliation? No? Huh. Must’ve forgotten.
Every US President has a plot to kill him. The last was shot was Ronald Reagan.
No doubt the BBC will try to make out that the ‘thick redneck white racists’ will be trying to pop the son of God.
I think they’ll have to adjust their story line a bit once they realize he is not going to close Guantanamo the day after the Inauguration or withdraw the troops from Iraq by the end of the week.
This shouldn’t be strange to British subjects. Isn’t Obama being reported the way the Royals once were? America now has a royal family. God save the king!
Lincoln married into a slave owning family and Obama’s ancestors were slave owners.
I presume that wasn’t the comparison the Bbc made? 🙂
Holy Je-bus…
Have you seen the trailer for the coming fawn-fest/balanced coverage of The One’s inauguration?
They are wetting their collective pants about this. All moody and black & white with pounding crescendos, the word ‘president’ (or at least I think that’s what it is) juxtaposed in several languages with ‘Obama’ (‘The Name of The One’).
The implication appears to be that he’s Prez’dent of the World, Ma… Prez’dent of the World…
Will somebody please wake me up when this is all over?
One things for certain, what we’re seeing is the set-up for the biggest fall from grace in the history of the world over the coming years, as one by one all the chickens come home to roost.
At some stage Obama will have to do something ‘nasty’ – like launch a war. All presidents are faced with such situations. How will the BBC respond then? And what if he doesn’t rein Israel in, the way the BBC is hoping he will?
They all liken themselves to Lincoln or is more than 8 years to long for the teenagers at the beeb? Gad zooks, in times of hardship the show must go on.
David – can we do a sweepstake on how many times historic is used on the one hour post speech? 27 my punt (bit low probs).
Of course this inauguration is historic. It’ll be the first time a U.S. President will have been sworn in without having conclusively proven his citizenship.
Lincoln’s greatest claim to fame was the enormously bloody American Civil War.
But at least Lincoln had a history.
Got a car named after him.
Has there been this amount of fanfare/coverage for any other US Presidential inaugration? No? So, isn’t it a bit pathetic that we have to have it all thrust on us (at great expense to us telly-tax payers) just because he is a bit off-white?
Giqits – why yessir, it’s historic, it’s a fresh start, err… aren’t Bank of America and Citigroup gonna fold on Monday, err… no it’s historic, a fresh… blah, blah.
I’d like to get an audit of BBC air miles and carbon footprint; if my priest tells me to give up drinking i’d prefer it if he was pissed.
Obama may indeed be a lot like Lincoln. Especially when it is considered that the “Civil War” had nothing to do with slavery, but the right of the Union to rule over member states. Hitler supported Lincoln in this don’t you know?
And in that light there is a possibility that Obama is going to take a major step towards merging the American Government with a Global Government that shall override Nations right to rule themselves. This will be justified on an “anti-racist” basis. Economic leverage shall be applied through the Carbon Credits/Global Warming paradigm.
Keep on an eye on the “Missile Shield” plan in Eastern Europe. Neutralising Russia’s nuclear deterrent would be probably the most aggressive act in Geopolitics since the Cuban Missile Crisis. Let’s see if it happens on Obama’s watch.
Abraham Lincoln was a Republican (as most of you know) and one of the greatest US Presidents of all time, as far as I’m concerned.
I still believe Obama will get found out quickly (as a charlatan) and will disappoint a lot of people who voted for him. Some of his proposed policies are already giving me the creeps. Good luck, Barack. You may need it (especially with Pelosi and Reid on your side!)
with the amount of hype that surround him, no one could possibly do anything else but fail. He is not a saint, or a god, he is a man schooled in the corrupt school of Chicago politics.
the way Pelosi et al are throwing their weight around and the ridiculous decision of bringing Clinton/s back into power he cannot be his own man. Now if you do not like him this doesn’t matter, but if you want him to do the best he can it is a tragedy. The trouble is, as other have said here, he hasn’t actually done anything of note to test himself and prepare himself for power. The presidency is the means to an end not the end…..with the power of spin people forget that, it is not about gestures, or news management, it is about doing things to improve the lives of all Americans and hopefully the rest of the world. Has he in it do improve the world or is he a hollow man, no doubt we’ll see soon enough
I’ve just read an article by Kevin Connolly on the BBC website which is a superb example of the stunningly unsophisticated and outdated left wing mindset which dominates the corporation.
Entitled “Black Washington Looks to Obama” its main intent and purpose is, as usual, to paint a picture of America as an inherently racist country in which blacks have stood no chance up until the election of Barack Obama, at which point of course everything changes.
No attempt whatsoever is made to point out that in fact America has been perhaps one of the least racist, least oppressive countries in the world for years, offering blacks more rights and opportunities than they enjoy almost anywhere else in the world (including Africa). In using the article to paint Obama as some kind of “light at the end of the tunnel” for African Americans, he (like the rest of the liberal ignorantsia) ignores the fact that Reagan did more to further the economic cause of blacks than perhaps any other president in history (including Clinton), or that blacks have been the beneficiaries of more leg-ups and affirmative action than any other minority group in America, which incidentally, is perhaps the most diverse society in the world.
There simply isn’t time to point out each and every red flag in this article, but I will mention one or two:
“He is a dignified, professorial figure these days, but he can remember the old times in rural Louisiana when he was put out of school three hours before the local white kids and sent to the local plantation fields to chop cotton – back-breaking work for a little boy in the boiling heat of the Southern summer.”
Any word on whether or not it was his parents who took him out of school to work, or the numbers of white kids across the South who also missed school to work on their parents farms, for instance? After slavery, child labor was common among both blacks and whites.
“Washington DC is sometimes called Chocolate City, and it is a curiously divided place.
The tiny governing elite – which tends to live and work in the glittering centre – is surrounded by seas of largely black streets.”
That’s his definition of “curious”? The fact that the capital city has a mixture of wealthy types and working class types? That is has neighborhoods which are dominated by one ethnicity? Name one capital city in the world in which this is not the case. Hell we don’t even need to confine it to capitals, we could point out such a “curious mix” in Manchester, Bristol or Leeds for instance.
“Mr Newson wonders if Barack Obama might be the man to bring together those two disparate identities sharing the same space.
After all, he commands the ruling elite now, and yet he can still talk comfortably with the black street. “
Hmmm, I wonder if any journalist at the Beeb ever said of Bush, “he commands the ruling elite.” And I love the way Connolly implies here that Obama will be the first U.S. President that has the ability to “talk to” blacks. The typically patronizing, left wing racism on display here is disgusting. The “black street”? Here Connolly does his best to lump all blacks into a homogeneous tribe which needs to be “talked to” in a certain way. It’s amazing what these lefties get away with.
“Not that Mr Newson believes the election of Mr Obama means an end to the African-American journey. To illustrate his point he told me this story about what happened when he and his wife took three of their grandchildren back to a four-star hotel in Louisiana a few years ago to show them the Old South in which they had grown up.
“My wife and the three grandkids went to the swimming pool and on two occasions when they got in, all the white folks who were swimming got out and left,” he told me.
“My wife even stayed in the water for nearly two hours to see if they would come back – and they didn’t.””
Naturally, stories like this are taken at face value by the pinko-journo – absolutely no consideration at all given to the possibility that the guy might have misread the situation, or was overly paranoid. Perhaps the “white people” in question were all part of the same group and they simply had to be somewhere. Perhaps they “didn’t come back” because they were off somewhere else doing what they were doing. Anyone with half a brain or a shred of intellectual integrity would refrain from using such a story to condemn an entire society, but for the dishonest lefties at the Beeb, it comes as naturally to them as breathing.
“As Mr Newson said, Barack Obama’s election is a moment of symbolism and he will have huge powers – but he cannot make people stay in swimming pools together. “
Absolutely no comment required. I feel sick.
“America – and the South in particular – still have some changing to do. ”
Don’t hold back, Kevin. All that’s missing is the “Dueling Banjos” soundtrack in the background. What a shame this isn’t TV or radio.
“James Kilby is another African-American who will be watching the inaugural parade with particular pride.
In the Lyndon Johnson White House in the mid-1960s he was a young messenger boy – probably one of the few ways a black man could get into the building back then.”
Oh really Kevin? I could have sworn that there were, for instance, African American senators as early as 1870. How many non-white politicians were there in Europe at that time? But of course why bother doing such simple research when the results might distract the reader from exploding in indignation at the false idea of an America which had no black politicians as recently as the mid-60’s. It really is time for everyone to stop paying their license fee. End the Beeb. End it now.
“This is still a divided country and to some extent DC remains a divided capital, or at least a capital with a split identity.”
By that, he means that America remains a country in which not everyone holds the same opinion, just like every other country, city, town, village or street in the world. Dammit Connolly, I despise you. This is just disgustingly dishonest journalism. I note as well the underlying insinuation that African Americans are the only victims of racism in America or that whites are the only perpetrators.
No mention, for instance, of the fact that per capita, blacks commit hate crimes at the highest rate in the U.S. or that 85% of all inter-racial violence in America is committed by blacks against whites or that….
Oh, I give up.
Claims that this demonstrates bias are less well founded than you would claim.
Firstly, comparision between Obama and Lincoln is invited. Obama’s choice to follow specifically in Lincoln’s footsteps in the run up his inauguration and the risk of assassination that surrounded both men in the run up to their uptake of office, means that any news service would be negligent to ignore the fact that obama is making the effort to invoke Lincoln.
Both Obama and Lincoln are men, who in the run up to office will have been faced with the prospect of long and bloody wars. Certainly very different ones, but a war none the less.
Accusing the bbc of bias in this case makes no sense.
Both Obama and Lincoln are men, who in the run up to office will have been faced with the prospect of long and bloody wars. Certainly very different ones, but a war none the less.
Accusing the bbc of bias in this case makes no sense.
Ben | 18.01.09 – 7:28 am | #
Given that there is no evidence that Obama faces a larger threat of assassination than any other U.S. President in history, perhaps the “war” analogy would warrant a sounder comparison with Nixon than Lincoln?
“Martin:
Every US President has a plot to kill him. The last was shot was Ronald Reagan.
No doubt the BBC will try to make out that the ‘thick redneck white racists’ will be trying to pop the son of God.”
Mmm, because their is no racism and hate focused against Obama is there…
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=RVEkLYIs7Wc
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0&feature=related
and on and on and on.
The simple truth is, there are a lot of people who are so deep seatedly bigoted that having black president is unacceptable to them.
Yes, quiet simply, the republician party in the election made itself unelectable through choice of candidate and alliance with the dominionists.
Palin alone made Christipher Hitchens an obama supporter. That should tell you something about the quality of choice there was in the election. For people with more than a passing education and access to infomation, there was no choice at all. Obama had to win, because the idea of a woman who thought being able to ‘see’ russia from land on a clear day, counted as FP Credentials. That is up there with ‘dr’kent hovinds imaginary PHd.
Given that there is no evidence that Obama faces a larger threat of assassination than any other U.S. President in history, perhaps the “war” analogy would warrant a sounder comparison with Nixon than Lincoln?
Obama isn’t retracing Nixons steps. It is not the BBC which is drawing the comparison, it is Obama himself through his choices. The BBC has a responciblity to report that.
Also , given that the secret service appears to be taking additional precautions to ensure his safety, that would point towards a credible threat, or atleast a perception of threat amongst who are best equiped to detect it.
Ben You’re absolutely right: Obama is inviting the comparisons with Lincoln. He’s asked to use the bible Lincoln used to swear his oath too. So it would be bizarre if the BBC didn’t feature this theme in its coverage.
Mr Vance is wrong again. And typically selective: no discussion for instance of Justin Webb’s blog entries rcentely, which are a lot more generous to the Bush legacy than most commentators in this country.
The level of anti Americanism on this site is becoming alarming. Let us all celebrate the start of President Obama’s term of office.
Ben | 18.01.09 – 7:54 am | #
Perhaps you’d like to browse This list of attempted Presidential assassination attempts to date.
Or perhaps the threat of assassination is somehow worth more worry when the motive is “race” other than good old fashioned “not wanting President x to be President.”
“The simple truth is, there are a lot of people who are so deep seatedly bigoted that having black president is unacceptable to them.”
That doesn’t mean that the threat against Obama is greater than the threat against any other U.S. President in history. Of course being black, Barack Obama faces, statistically, 6 times the chance of being murdered as whites, but this threat comes from other blacks, not racist whites.
Then of course there is the fact that many American politicians have been assassinated too – but how many of them were black? There are plenty of black politicians to choose from. But can you name one prominent black politician from the past 25 years who has suffered an assassination attempt by a racist?
Additionally – if “deep seated white racism” is such a threat to blacks in positions of power, if white racists are so liable to be enraged by blacks who hold power over them, then how come we don’t see black headmasters, black police sergeants, black employers etc, assassinated? Let’s face it, the risk from “white racists” is grossly exaggerated and inflated in order to fuel the same old “racist white America” narrative that the left seemingly needs in order to get through the day.
“Yes, quiet simply, the republician party in the election made itself unelectable through choice of candidate and alliance with the dominionists.”
I will refer you to the result of the popular vote. Hardly a landslide, was it? Furthermore, Obama didn’t seem to do so badly with his alliance with corrupt Chicago criminals, unrepentant anti-American terrorists, socialists, Marxists, etc, etc….
Or perhaps that was more to do with the fact that a fawning liberal media refused point blank to raise these vital questions about their Messiah.
“Palin alone made Christipher Hitchens an obama supporter. That should tell you something about the quality of choice there was in the election.”
The decision of one man should “tell me something about the quality of choice” in the election? I put it to you that you’re not of sound mind. Furthermore, Hitchens is a self-confessed Marxist so probably had less of a problem aligning himself to another Marxist than most. Not only that, there were plenty of people whose support of McCain was strengthened by Palin.
“For people with more than a passing education and access to infomation, there was no choice at all.”
Yes of course, the usual pointless “Republicans are uneducated and stupid” insult. Grow up son. And it’s “access to information” is it? What “access” would this be? The almost complete lack of full disclosure from virtually every media outlet except Fox News?
Perhaps this video should give you some idea of how “informed” Obama voters were.
Continued:
“Obama had to win, because the idea of a woman who thought being able to ‘see’ russia from land on a clear day, counted as FP Credentials.”
Oh that’s definitely not a non-sequitur is it.
#END SARCASM#
Also, if you’re going to repeat the same old slack-jawed liberal bromides about Sarah Palin, in particular the much misquoted and taken out of context “seeing Russia from Alaska” quote, perhaps you ought to read the full version of the interview with the bits that the liberal ABC news deliberately edited out…
“Obama isn’t retracing Nixons steps. It is not the BBC which is drawing the comparison, it is Obama himself through his choices. The BBC has a responciblity to report that.”
But like David says, they don’t have to be so nauseatingly sycophantic about it – in contrast to how they’ve treated Bush since day 1, for instance.
But Mike, I’ve already asked you for your opinion as to why the BBC should suddenly become “pro-American” (as you put it) the minute a democrat president is to be sworn in. Coincidence I suppose?
(PS some time back I remember you going off all hurt, promising never to comment here again – what happened?)
Also , given that the secret service appears to be taking additional precautions to ensure his safety, that would point towards a credible threat, or atleast a perception of threat amongst who are best equiped to detect it.
Ben | 18.01.09 – 8:00 am | #
Or alternatively, that Obama himself has simply asked for additional security.
Let us all celebrate the start of President Obama’s term of office.
mikewineliberal | 18.01.09 – 8:26 am |
i’d rather have piles.
Robert – No change. I think the BBC has always been broadly pro.
Robert – No change. I think the BBC has always been broadly pro.
mikewineliberal | 18.01.09 – 9:03 am |
😆
‘ Or perhaps the threat of assassination is somehow worth more worry when the motive is “race” other than good old fashioned “not wanting President x to be President.” ‘
Actually yes, it is more of a worry. Why? Because the results of assassination on grounds of race or religion at this time in history would be far greater than assassination for other reasons.
Racism is a powerful motivator towards violence, much as religion is. It allows an us vs. them mindset to develope. It is easier to believe that it is okay to kill. See this video for explination of how this works. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsRa5riIYQ0
An assassination of Obama, would almost certainly result in massive social unrest in the united states, perhapes even civil war.
It is the combination of these factors that make it ‘worth more worry’.
It’s always risky offering a reductionist analysis, yet how can anyone with a modicum of objectivity not look at the fawning attention being devoted to Obama by the BBC (and, it must be said, the rest of the media intelligentsia) and not conclude that the prime reason for it is his skin colour?
Obama has no political record of note. He has offered no political programme that might not have been tendered by another Leftist Democrat (indeed less so than might have been offered by Hilary Clinton).
He is a cipher, a blank sheet, the ‘not George Bush’ candidate and it is on the basis alone ‘Hampstead thinkers’, Beltway sages and their fellow travellers have decided that he is worthy of this jejune second coming nonsense.
So who is the racist now?
A confession: I listen to & enjoy “Sounds of the Sixties” on BBC radio 2 on Saturday mornings. Good old Brian Matthew. But unfortunately I left the radio on after 10 a.m. & there were a couple of presenters (one strident female & a right-on male) who were also eulogising Barry Hussein (His Obamaness).
I’ve no idea who they were – must’ve been sitting in for the obnoxious J Ross – but at one point the woman said something like she actually envied the Americans as they had something so great to look forward to. The bloke was going on about all his American friends who were trying to get back for Tuesday, the great day. They were also rude about Bush – obligatory BBC stance these days.
I had to switch off in disgust. This is supposed to be what was laughingly referred to in the old days as a light entertainment show.
Jason: excellent posts as usual. I had read that Zogby Poll but seeing those interviews just drives home how biased the US MSM have been.
The bBC are not alone.
In passing, I must add that the BBC has compounded its endless acts of worship by conspiring not to investigate the very many questions surrounding Obama’s past.
Indeed, the World Service, just two days ago, was calculatedly perpetuating the lies about Obama’s academic status, promising Americans ‘the law professor in the Whitehouse’.
As if the USA hasn’t suffered enough from lawyers turned politician!
On Palin:
‘See russia’ is a powerful memetic agent, I used it because it convays the crux of the issue with the creationist, power abusing censor that is called Sarah Palin. Palin was no ready for high office, Palin was not ready to be a town mayor.
On hitchens:
Marx was a truely great interlectual, who’s work was profoundly important. There is nothing wrong with being a ‘marxist’ or having been influenced by marxism In fact, you could probably do worse than read marx.
Despite having been a marxist in his youth as many were, in adulthood hitchens has represented much of what is actually interlectually viable in the Right and done more to move my politics towards the right than any other figure i can think of. He is one of our great public speakers and public interlectuals and his choice to support Obama is indicative of why the vast majority of the intelligencia in both england and america are considerable more happy with a obama as president, regardless of there natural political leanings
Matthew d’Ancona raises a key question about Islam for the West (and Obama):
‘Telegraph’
“In this war, Islamists have found a shared strategy. We haven’t”
“David Miliband is misguided to claim” [and for the BBC to report, as it does,]”that the terrorist threat is disaggregated and heterogeneous.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/matthewd_ancona/4278595/In-this-war-Islamists-have-found-a-shared-strategy.-We-havent.html
“interlectual” – I love that.
After watching BBC1 for almost an hour this morning, I heartily join those who think that the BBC’s arse licking of Obama is excruciating. Not to mention some good ole’ sneering at Bush on the Andrew Marr show – fronted by Fiona Bruce this week.
And what the f*** did Glynis (Glynnis?) Kinnnock do in her life to get invited to ‘sit on the sofa’? Ah, to tell an enthralled nation that Neil has forgiven Joe Biden for plagiarizing his speech and that they are friends now and guess what, Neil and I are going to Obama’s bash!
Pass the sick bucket.
Ben you’re a powerful emetic agent.
DEJ: Ad Hominem arguement.
I see ANOTHER poll shows the Tory lead growing again (13%).
Can anyone point to a link on the BBC news website? Oh hang on the BBC don’t comment on single polls do they? Except when Brown is shown in a good light of course.
I like the Youtube video, of Obama and the 57 states he visited, plus he couldnt go to Haiwai or Alaska.
“Obama is not interested in the special relationship with Britain”. I read this somewhere within the last couple of days, it may even have been on this blog, sorry, I can’t remember. What will the BBC commentators say when the PM approaches the US about something, and The One tells him to go and get stu**ed, I wonder?
Sorry, this time anonymous was me.
Compare to Lincoln, perhaps;contrast with Bush certainly.
eg The mildly Afro-American writer Bonnie Greer asked by the BBC to enthuse over the succession said that of course Obama was brill, but the minorities would really be equal when an non-WASP of Bush’s low ability managed to succeed.