Let’s be clear where the BBC stands. Obama has done a great job, he has healed some of the wounds created by the evil Bush, oh, and he’s saved the US from another great depression. The rest is detail, or so the BBC would have us believe. Naturally, the reverse is true and so the BBC has to spin even harder to sustain the Obama-delusion. Take THIS report from Stephanie “Two Eds” Flanders. The shock horror news is that “some” parts of the US economy are “slowing down” rather than “moving towards a quicker recovery”. The good news is that “recoveries are never linear, you get setbacks”. Stephanie pretends the US economy has moved out of recession (it hasn’t) but is now going through a soft patch. In this way she seeks to obscure the central fact that Obama has done more than anyone to delay the recovery through his massive injections of QE and the truth is that his “stimulus” hasn’t stimulated anything.

Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to WAVING, NOT DROWNING?

  1. Backwoodsman says:

    To report on the US for the bbc, all you need is a superiority complex and a visceral hatred of values of the sort of ordinary American who supports the T party. Simple.


  2. NotaSheep says:

    Actually you are wrong David, Obama’s policies have stimulated something – inflation.


  3. Roland Deschain says:

    Haven’t had a chance to listen to the report yet.  Did she ask if he has a Plan B?


  4. Natsman says:

    I have a plan B.  It’s the same as my Plan A.  Stay in France.


  5. RGH says:

    Washington’s fiscal stimulus – including the government dumping nearly $1 trillion into such unproductive pursuits as “new energy” projects and state employee labor union contracts – has generated massive budget deficits and given banks no incentive to play its key job-creation role by lending to small businesses.
    Instead, the stimulus has provided temporary jobs with the government – and those jobs are now disappearing as Washington’s money runs out.
    Monetary stimulus has been more damaging. It has caused a worldwide commodities and energy bubble – which is single-handedly damaging the U.S. economy by making it more and more expensive for consumers to fill up their tanks. It is also likely to have contributed to the growing job-market malaise – and with good reason.

    Obama has no answers….he can’t think outside his community box.


  6. cjhartnett says:

    Some threesome that!


  7. Frederick Bloggs says:

    I wonder if she is related to that famous religious conservative Ned Flanders.



  8. John Anderson says:

    With only a few exceptions,  all the US political commentators I have seen or read are saying that Obama’s pathetic handling of the economy and his refusal to face up to the debt/deficit problems are going to drown him in 2012.

    Somehow we don’t get that flavour from BBC commentators.  I wonder why ?


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      They know.  That’s why they’re doing things like this, reassuring everyone that recovery is just around the corner.  Also, since the economy isn’t His fault – ever! – they can play it as the President being put in an unfair position.  This is their excuse for not having to be honest.

      If He loses the election because of the economy (and racism, if necessary), that won’t be His fault, and they’ll never have to admit that their beloved Obamessiah was an unmitigated disaster.


  9. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Flanders praising the prospects of the US economy is like the kiss of death in the Godfather.  With her track record of ideology-based fairy tale predictions, if she says we’re going to be alright, that can only mean we’re about to do a Greek tragedy.    
    We just got warned on our credit rating because The Obamessiah has done nothing about making sure we can pay for Social Securit and Medicare.  He’s refused to reduce spending, refused to create the responsible fiscal plan that every single financial institution not named Paul Krugman says we need.  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – the actual catalyst for the financial crash, not “Greedy Bankers”™ – are screwed and He’s going to bail them out with trillions we dont have.  His regulatory attacks on small businesses while attempting to wrest more money from “millionaires” has meant that nobody is hiring because they simply don’t know what the new regulations are going to cost them.  Our debt is at a record high, unemployment and food stamp usage are at Great Depression levels.  We’re having to dance around an astronomical debt ceiling because the President’s schemes have led to this.    
    Oh, and the last remaining financial maven in His Administration to whom Flanders is ideologically twinned has abandoned ship like the rat he is.  Did  Flanders or Naughtie mention that?  No.  All they can do is keep things focused on inflation, which just isn’t scary enough because most people have no clue about the surrounding circumstances and what it really means. 
    Is anyone here better informed about where the US is, what has led us here, and where we’re going with the current Administration’s schemes?  Aside from being reassured that NOTHING IS HIS FAULT, I mean.  Naughtie fudges the unemployment figures to make them appear lower than the really are, and Flanders sees green shoots all over the place, just like during Gordon Brown’s imaginary recovery.  Plosser knows where we’re at, but just doesn’t have the courage to slam the Administration’s schemes on the BBC, and gives us the old “we always knew it would take a long time” routing.  
    “Transitory factors” my arse! 


    • Jane Tracy says:

      If you look at Stephanie Floundering Flanders’s track record of forecasts you can see the clear position. This is that whatever she says will happen will not. Later she will claim like she has on the UK housing market that she forecast it correctly. The site House Price Crash went to a lot of effort to find evidence of the flounderer predicting this but even they couldnt find any…

      So praise from Stephanie Flanders is a poisoned chalice. File it with her claim that Greece and Ireland would get nowhere near default.. Or her claim last October that there were no signs of inflation in the UK..


      • My Site (click to edit) says:

        If you look at Stephanie Floundering Flanders’s track record of forecasts’

        Were she an ‘expert’ in her ‘field’ there could be ructions in Nirvana as fellow BBC employees can be a little intolerant, not to say vocal, on such a CV. Only recently…

        *Just to be clear that’s no success rate at all.”

        That’s a colleague quoting another person. Don’t know who as they didn’t mention. Let’s go with ‘sources say’, as that seems adequate enough for a headline these days in some quarters.


      • Grant says:

        You are right. Stephanie Flanders is utterly and totally useless, in other words a typical Beeboid.


        • Cassandra King says:

          Is she the beeboid twat caught wearing an Obama campaign hat as she reported on the election?


          • Grant says:

            I think that was gorgeous, pouting Anita Anand from the Daily Politics, but, at the end of the day, what difference does it make, they are all clones ?


  10. DP111 says:

    Palin Derangement Syndrome

    The US MSM goes all out against Sarah Palin

    As the Daily Caller puts it:

    NYT, WaPo give up even pretending to be news organizations.

    And Allahpundit comments:

    An unusual example of media efficiency. There’s a huge new supply available of her e-mails as governor and an eternally huge demand among Palin-hating liberals for new dirt on her. If you’re a cash-strapped editor, why not match one to the other and let the market do your work for you? Palin derangement is like the wind, or the sun: All the media has to do is harness it to provide a limitless supply of productivity.

    And she’s not even a candidate!

    What could be better proof that liberals are sick people who live on hate?
    What an irony, that the very election that put Bush’s successor in the White House and removed that supreme liberal hate object from the center of national politics, elevated an even greater liberal hate object in Bush’s place.
    And consider this. Over the last week Palin’s Paul Revere comment has been the subject of extended debate, with people taking one side, others taking the other side, the first side coming back with counter arguments, and so on–all about a single unimportant historical comment by a person who is not even a candidate. If Palin with an insignificant passing remark when she’s not even a candidate could suck this much oxygen out of our political system, try to imagine the insanity (you can’t–it’s unimaginable) that would be engendered by a Palin presidency.



    • Grant says:

      The Left really are frightened of Sarah Palin  !


    • DB says:

      And I see Andrew Sullivan’s fag hag Katty Kay has been at it again on Twitter. She really really doesn’t like Palin, does she?

      I’ve noticed from reading disparaging comments like hers on BBC Twitter feeds, and from hearing countless mocking remarks made on air, that one group with particular hatred for Palin is female BBC journalists from privileged backgrounds (not just daughters of Middle East diplomats like Kay, but many other privately-educated gals whose thin veneer of “impartiality” can’t conceal their snobbish liberal elitism.)

      There was an interesting James Taranto article in the WSJ in January about liberal women’s Palinphobia. He quoted one New York woman, a liberal herself, who didn’t follow the trend:  

      “I am amazed at how people still abhor her. I personally do not. I don’t feel she would be a good choice to run this country, but she does not deserve the horrific treatment she gets. I can tell you, being privy to the endless, incendiary rants this past week about her, coming from hordes of liberal women–age demo 25 to 45–they rip her to pieces, they blame her for everything, and the jealousy/resentment factor is so clear and primal. I’ve never seen anything like it.”

      Their men, says Taranto, are little better:

      What about male Palin-hatred? It seems to us that it is of decidedly secondary importance. Liberal men put down Palin as a cheap way to score points with the women in their lives, or they use her as an outlet for more-general misogynistic impulses that would otherwise be socially unacceptable to express.


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        Just more bias from this vicious elitist.  Someone should make a collection of her biased tweets and send it to Helen Boaden, along with £100 for the inevitable online training course.