It’s easy to understand why the likes of Justin Webb gets so excited about the Obama Presidency. The hard-left ideology that underlines Hopenchange resonates precisely with that running through those employed by the State Broadcaster. Despite a short period in power, Obama has managed to cuddle up to just every tyranny in the world. Naturally this excites the BBC, and so when Obama embraces Venezuelan thug Chavez – smiles all round. It’s incredible to compare the unrelentingly favourable coverage Obama gets from the BBC compared to the unrelenting hostility Bush got. The BBC’s troupe of in-house comedians still make jokes at the expense of Bush but when it comes to Obama, silence. So long as Obama is being nice to Iran
to Cuba, to Russia, to those poor oppressed Palestinians – all is well in the BBC garden. We observed the same during the Clinton era but Obama has already demonstrated his much more extreme leftism and that ensures he becomes the poster boy for those who dare to claim they are an impartial news gathering organisation.
Yes, quite. Obama is very naive, weak and stupid, just like the BBC !
Then again I don’t think we should demonise Obama – he might be the most left wing US president ever, but in UK terms that still only puts him somewhere between Cameron and Blair. Obama will ultimately fail at home because his big Govt/interventionist approach never succeeds, and will ultimately fail abroad because his hugging Chavez approach will in the end cut no slack with tyrants. But he seems a decent enough chap.
However in the simple world of the Beeboid the “Bush bad, Obama good” spectacles put on to analyse just about every issue shows their lack of depth and paucity of original thinking. This is why I resent the licence fee most of all.
He was a product of Chicago which says it all really. He still has not repealed the Communities Act that forces banks to lend to those who cannot repay. But then as a “community leader” he shilled for it.
BBC World Service carried an interview last night on the anti-scientific Bush theme. The interviewee was looking forward to the brave new world of opportunity that had opened up with the removal of the block on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
Not content with that success he had to go on to kick Bush for being inconsistent in having allowed the continuation of IVF which produced the wasted embryos – this was further proof of Bush’s stupidity it seems.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll keep saying it: the Obamessiah is an empty suit, surrounded by people whose prime abilities and qualifications are in media manipulation and political opponent-bashing.
He has spent his tenure printing money to be given to pet Democrat/Leftist projects, and, with his handy teleprompter packed in the trunk, touring the US and the rest of the world giving speeches (most of which consist of making groveling apologies for other people’s shortcomings, e.g. Bush).
That the BBC are blatantly biased in his favour is no surprise. That the majority of the MSM backs this up is also of limited shock. There are some notable exceptions, e.g. Chris Ayres who writes for The Times and has a neat line in put down for Obummer. But consider the reaction of the MSM to the recent negative comments made by Sarkosy – all comment is focussed on how petty this makes Sarkosy look etc etc, rather than pointing out that someone who, courtesy of having been in close proximity to The One, probably knows the reality.
That BBC World Service should be classified and regarded as a threat to UK national security with its pro extremist Islamist propaganda. Germanys Lord Haw Haw was a mere amateur compared to the BBC
This just shows that not only does the BBC not understand the entire point of the US policy against Cuba, but nor do Sec. of State Clinton, President Obamessiah, or any of the Leftoid media, or any Leftoids, full stop. And The Obamessiah is the first US President to constantly slam his predecessor in his speeches to foreign dignitaries. Classy. But it goes down a treat at Broadcasting House.
I’ve said it a hundred times already, but I’ll say it again. It wasn’t just about ending the Communist regime and getting rid of Castro. The main point was to keep him from spreading Communism all around the Caribbean and Latin America. In the end, that was mostly successful. The US also kept Cuba and the surrounding region from becoming a weapons base for our enemies. No mention of any of this by the BBC, of course, except for the obligatory reference to the Cuban Missile Crisis. The main emphasis, though, is that the embargo should have ended decades ago. The BBC clearly taking sides there.
Despite what the BBC wants you to think, in the big picture, the policy was successful. Cuba itself was allowed to fester, mostly because it’s not the US’s fault that Communist dictators prefer to keep their population living a bleak existence. As the song goes, “They’ll turn them all into beggars, ’cause they’re easier to please.”
There is very obviously nothing left of Castro’s regime except the uniforms and offices, so it’s easy to ease up and let it wind down from here. This isn’t proof that the US has failed for the last 40 years, but proof that it was mostly the right thing to do, and now we can let Communism in Cuba die. It wouldn’t have otherwise.
But the BBC Narrative is that it was the nasty US which prevented the Communist Utopia from flourishing. So of course Raul Castro is willing to discuss “everything”. He’s got nothing left. The BBC won’t tell you that, though. All you need to know is Cuba is a brilliant Communist survivor, and now the US is finally acknowledging that, and willing to open up.
As for Chavez, notice that the BBC doesn’t mention that Venezuela’s economy is going down the toilet because of his policies, and so he has to suck up the US. Instead, the BBC even quotes Chavez, going along with his pretense that it was Bush’s fault that there was friction between the US and Venezuela. If Chavez wasn’t a beloved Socialist, they’d be portraying it as him sucking up.
The BBC should be reporting on this in the true context of the economic situations of both countries. But that won’t fit the Narrative. What a load of garbage, brought to you by the BBC.
David Preiser
Quarantining Cuba was an eminently sensible policy. It did not 0prevent Cubans already in America from trying to give financial help to the poor people left there under a pretty brutal police state and the grinding poverty caused by its communist dictatorship. Grinding poverty in spite of a lot of freedom of trade with other countries and decades of Soviet support.
….
Have Fox News paid you yet for attending a Tea Party ? Maybe you can buy a green car with the cheque ? And how come people have received about 20 times more info on the Tea Parties from this site than from the 3-billion-a-year BBC ?
JohnA | 18.04.09 – 6:49 pm |
I was paid by FreedomWorks and bused to the event.
Oh, wait. That wasn’t me. And it wasn’t FreedomWorks who paid for it.
And even though it was just one bus, with only about 40 people, the BBC reported it, yet didn’t suggest any nefarious guiding hand.
Come see the bias inherent in the system.
Has there been a single word on the BBC to suggest that Obama’s foreign policy is spineless and could be highly dangerous – right round the globe ?
http://townhall.com/columnists/CarolineGlick/2009/04/13/surviving_in_a_post-american_world
JohnA | 18.04.09 – 7:40 pm |
Why would there be, John? It’s their (Al Beeb’s) “socialist one world” worldview. They must be jumping for joy now all their dreams are finally coming true (or so it seems).
Caroline Glick makes a good point. The U.S. is actually in danger of isolating itself from traditional allies and will end up in the company of the evil ones and the fruit loops. Obamas aides didnt even check what Chavezs “gift” was B.T.W How amatuerish is that?? Maybe Iranian boy (when they inevitably meet) will give Omuslim a copy of the Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion. Book of the month club anyone?
d-g
I agree Obama’s spinelessness is like a script written by James Naughtie or the pacifist John Humphrys. But my question was genuine – has ANYONE seen or heard anything from the BBC challenging Obama’s supine foreign policy, any suggestions that it could be dangerous ?
For example – he could snatch defeat from the jaws of Victory in Iraq, he is undermining Israel and generally kowtowing to militant Islamist states, and he has failed to get NATO to give more military help in Afghanistan. Taken together I reckon these risk greater threats to us right here in Britain. Defeating or weakening the US emboldens the Islamists – just as we saw under Clinton.
BBC view:
“Warm Americas welcome for Obama”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8006135.stm
A non-BBC view:
“The Handshake in Tobago that sent Shock Waves”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/20557
Chavez is truly scum.
Obumble meets Chav.
A double masturbatory moment for lefties everywhere. Be sure to order your DVD (US region setting only) now to enjoy the moment over and over again.