We all know what happened yesterday in the United States Congress, and that the President signed a debt relief bill that nobody really likes. We all know how the BBC spun it, and they continue to spin it that way today. Mark Mardell, BBC North America editor and faithful White House nunzio to Britain, was beside himself with anger that his beloved Obamessiah was made to look bad in all this. Anyone who caught his appearances on the News Channel would have seen him spluttering with rage.
“He’s been forced off His agenda. Remember, He came to office promising hope and change, and talking about spending to stimulate the economy, and to change the way America was.
Instead, He’s been forced down a path of spending cuts. He didn’t want any of this. He’s won some minor victories along the way, stopped it from being worse for Him than it could otherwise have been.
But I think the Tea Party are the big winners, that they…they don’t necessarily feel that, but they have forced this onto the agenda and got a lot of what they wanted.”
– Mark Mardell, speaking on the BBC News Channel on August 2, 2011, at 6:04pm GMT
No, Mark. Reality forced this on the agenda. All the ratings agencies said we needed to cut spending. The Tea Party just forced Him to deal with it, rather than continue the fantasy that is bankrupting our country.
Fortunately for the faithful, once it was all over, the President gave a nice class war speech, expressing His determination to raise taxes on the rich, and to focus on jobs. His faith rekindled, Mardell came out swinging with a new blog post about it.
Is it about the next step for the country, where Congress must go now, or what the next phase of the debate will be? Is it about the reaction of the US public, the mood in the country on which Mardell is tasked to report and inform you? No, of course not. As always, everything in the US is seen through the prism of The Obamessiah. How does this affect Him? How will He respond? Who cares about anything other than how the President is doing now? Is that really proper reporting? Is that responsible journalism?
In case there’s any doubt about Mardell’s focus and agenda, it’s all there even in the headline:
US debt limit: Barack Obama comes out fighting
Deal done. Crisis averted, a feisty president has come out fighting.
He’s been humiliated and blown off course by the Republican victory, compelling him and his party to swallow deep spending cuts.
But he used his short Rose Garden speech to insist that tax rises had to be part of the eventual solution.
Despite what the class warriors tell you, it’s simply impossible to raise taxes enough to make a dent in the debt. Even letting the Bush tax cuts for the evil rich expire would be a milliliter in the ocean. But never mind all that reality. Mardell has an agenda.
That is exactly why the Tea Party are grumpy about what looks like a clear win for them.
Not quite. The real anger is because the deal is, as we’ve discussed before, a wash, even in the best-case scenario. The amount of spending cuts might not even match the amount we’re now allowing the debt ceiling to rise again. That’s why Michelle Bachmann voted against it, and why a lot of non-Leftoids are not pleased with the deal, even as the Leftoid media is rending their garments in despair.
You see, they all take it as a defeat for the Keynesian, Socialist agenda, and for the President, because they weren’t allowed to spend even more. This deal doesn’t stop any of the ObamaCare expenses that are about to crush small businesses. It doesn’t stop any of the President’s Stimulus cash to Government General Motors’ unions, it doesn’t stop the subsidies to green energy boondoggles. In case Mardell has forgotten – or simply doesn’t understand – the debt ceiling was raised by a lot. Not because we need that money to pay the bills already due, but because the President and the Democrats already have these massive spending plans in motion for the next two years which will not be stopped. Is this a viewpoint you haven’t heard on the BBC? Do tell.
Maybe – maybe – the committee set up by the requirements of this bill will have something to say about that before 2012. But who knows? Yes, that does mean that Mardell is partially correct when he says this:
They fear tricks further down the line, and that after the special committee reports in November they will have to choose between tax rises swingeing cuts to defence spending.
This is dishonest, though. Mardell spins this as the Tea Party’s “fear”. He chose the word “tricks” because it makes the President’s opponents look paranoid and resentful. This isn’t honest reporting: it’s propaganda. Here’s what Mardell doesn’t want you to know:
It’s not the irrational fear of paranoid, angry extremists. The Democrats were saying that’s what they were going to do even before the President signed the bill.
“We live to fight another day in trying to get some additional revenues into this equation,” said Senator Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat.
President Barack Obama has recommended taxing the profit share — or carried interest — earned by private equity managers, venture capitalists and others at ordinary income tax rates and not the lower capital gains rate. He also has called for ending tax benefits for oil and gas companies and for capping the itemized deductions of upper-income Americans.
If that’s not enough for you, White House mouthpiece Jay Carney said it straight out:
“The suggestion that it is impossible for the joint committee to raise tax revenue simply is not accurate, it’s false,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Monday.
Yet Mardell plays games and tries to make you think it’s only the paranoid suspicions of Tea Party types. He then says this:
Mr Obama said that money couldn’t be cut too abruptly and that spending on education and science had to continue. He argued for a “fair” and “balanced” approach: getting rid of tax breaks for the rich and gas and oil companies.
This sounds like something Ed Balls would say, doesn’t it? No wonder the Beeboids are so sympathetic.
This was a red rag to make the Republican bull rage… and it was intended as such. The more the Tea Party boil and steam, the more Obama’s own party will feel that it is not such a defeat after all.
Wrong. I’ve already explained above why the Tea Party people think this wasn’t such a smashing success. Oh, yes: neither did Moody’s who downgraded the US to a “negative outlook” anyway. How much of a fantastic deal is this, then? It ain’t. Unless the BBC wants to tell us now that Moody’s and S&P are Tea Party extremist ideologues too.
We’re upset because of reality, not because the President’s latest bit of rhetoric has blinded us with anger. What a joke. Mardell understands so little. All praise goes to Him.
The president then promised to put job creation first, saying cutting spending was not the only thing that mattered, and called on Congress to reach agreement after the summer on extending middle-class tax cuts, something Congress wouldn’t put in this agreement.
Mardell swallows the President’s promise on jobs whole. Ah, the power of faith. Does this promise sound familiar? It should, as the President said that job creation was going to be His No. 1 focus in His State of the Union speech in 2010.
But I realize that, for every success story, there are other stories, of men and women who wake up with the anguish of not knowing where their next paycheck will come from, who send out resumes week after week and hear nothing in response.
That is why jobs must be our No. 1 focus in 2010, and that’s why I’m calling for a new jobs bill tonight.
How’d that work out, BBC?
*sound of crickets chirping*
The rest of it is Mardell telling you all not to worry, the President “bounced back”, and will come back fighting and strong. Again, not news, not information. Just propaganda on behalf of the leader of a foreign country.
I have made a fool of myself, but you drove me to it. I ought to have been commended by you, for I am not in the least inferior to the “super-apostles,” even though I am nothing. I persevered in demonstrating among you the marks of a true apostle, including signs, wonders and miracles.
Oops, that bit isn’t from Mardell, although it ought to be. Remember back before the mid-term election, when he was traveling the country with his Hope poster, looking for signs of the faithful? Actually, the quote is Paul expressing his concern for the faith of the Corinthians (2 Corinthians XII: 11-12).
Deal done. Crisis averted, a feisty president has come out fighting. 😀
Fantastic. It’s a parody. It’s the West Wing.
All the world’s markets have concurred with Moody’s etc.
To quote fatty Mardell
“It was the right response politically. However, no one doubts that when he’s fired up and ready to go the president can make a fine speech.”
that’s how he got into office isn’t it ? That’s just about all he can do. It almost sounds as if fatty is subconciously alluding to that to be honest.
Mardell admits this is just a speech, yet he’s still inspired to the point of making such a ludicrous post about it.
If there’s a way to post the audio clip of his performance from yesterday, I’ll add it so everyone can hear the pure emotion in his voice.
Ah, those good old Depression favourites, making bone doggles (woggles in UK English) for Boy Scouts, and dancing competitions. We already have the latter with the BBC’s Strictly Come Dancing, but I can’t think of a woggle equivalent. Can anybody help me out?
Hows about vajazzling glitter ?
@Buggy. Vajazzling is such a great word. Exactly what it says on the tin. The idea works for me, especially of the Goverment pays women to glitter-up. Yes, government sponsored distraction.
David, can you expand when you say BBC news on channel 2 ?
Presumably not BBC2, they don’t have news bulletin programmes do they ?
That must mean Radio2 ? Sorry if I’m being a bit dim – it happens quite a lot :0)
Sorry, it’s supposed to be BBC News Channel (as in News24) August 2. My anger messed me up.
It can’t be Radio 2 as it isn’t fatty reporting,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b012rt32/
If you find it on Iplayer though, just forward on to the part you want and press the link to this button below the main window – click copy link, then you have it on your clip board for pasting.
(appologies if you know all this already)
If you think the coverage of the US Debt Crisis is bad, just wait until they start blaming the credit-ratings agencies for the bond-yields of Italy and Spain – for whom a bail-out would drain the EU of it’s EFSF and then-some!
“No, Mark. Reality forced this on the agenda. All the ratings agencies said we needed to cut spending. The Tea Party just forced Him to deal with it, rather than continue the fantasy that is bankrupting our country.”
DP, that, basically, is what Mardell put. Mardell’s habitual tilt to Obama seems apparent, but compared to some of his other reports and blogs this really is small fry – barely a sizzle.
No, hippie, Mardell is claiming that this wasn’t necessary, and that only the Tea Party pushed The Obamessiah off the correct course of action. He’s denying what every single ratings agency and financial analyst has been saying. He’s denying that there’s a need to cut spending and is instead giving the Tea Party-backed Republicans credit only for getting what he believes is what they wanted. Reality forced the country to acknowledge the need for cuts, not the Tea Party.
As Charles Krauthammer keeps pointing out, Obama is a busted flush on the economy, he’s fired off all the bullets he had and nothing worked, now Obama can’t throw even more trillions of borrowed Chinese dollars to create a temporary surge in the economy in time for the next election.
Obama will lose in 2012, the US economy is flat lining and he’s lost the argument. It won’t stop the media from still sniffing his backside though, but the American people have had enough of Obama’s bloated welfare ridden socialist experiment.
We’ve had enough, yes, but don’t count the media and violent activists out just yet. There is still a significant amount of people who are emotionally, viscerally opposed to letting any Republican win. There’s also the fact that the far-Left believed that they had “taken the country back”, and had achieved supreme power and could at last achieve the country they’d alwasy dreamed of. Threaten to take that away, and it will be uglier than any rabid dog trying to hold onto his bone.
Martin, if he’s going to lose whose he going to lose to?
One incalculable advantage he has on his side is that the MSM is a propaganda machine for the Democratic Party, which is a game changer and some. For a Republican candidate to defeat a Democrat requires the following:-
a) A very charismatic and able Republican candidate
b) A lacklustre Democrat candidate.
Obama might not be good at Government but he’s great at politics and on people’s wavelength on an emotional level.
Who is there on the Republican side that can defeat him?
I’ve heard little of Hermain Cain but he does seem the best of the current runners, but it has to be Congressman Colonel Allen West who would inspire the base and America to realise its potential. He’s elected office experience is comparable to Obama’s when he ran. It’s late in the day though for Western Civilisation’s great black hope to throw his hat in the ring.
I fear we’re going to get 4 more years of Obama because I dont really see Michelle Bachman, if she gets chosen, connecting with the American people and surpassing the obstacle of 24/7 blackpropaganda and hate against her from the MSM.
I would go with the good Col- an inspiring figure who I would vote for, and I am not even American!
Even the leftie media are starting to turn on Obama – the President With No Clothes.
http://www.breitbart.tv/huffington-nobody-believes-obamas-top-priority-is-jobs-its-getting-re-elected/
It’s only temporary. They’ll support Him 100% come 2012 because they won’t support anyone other than a Democrat. Sure, there will be admissions of reluctance and disappointment, but they’ll all support Him again anyway.
Obie and his army of Obamasessives seem to have really misread the American public [the real one not the lurvie media one!] from day one.
The public may have given Clinton leeway to make mistakes and jokey up the office of the president ,but that was his luck! now the American public might want a change back to a more formal serious type of leadership one who cares about the job and the position it holds in the American mindset instead of jerking around playing politics !
Maybe lardell meant “President comes out smarting”?? that predictive text can be a killer!
If Pres Bush had done something like this, how would BBC-Democrat have reported it?
“Barack Obama turns 50th birthday into campaign fundraiser”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14401335
For a while I thought Barry O had four legs, then I realised the back two were Mark Mardell. Like some Human centipede horror flick MM swallows anything from Barrys rear orifice.
Mind you, like the human centipede movie , just the thought of the BBC US politics output makes me want to vomit
Who knows, perhaps when the grasping, rapacious BBC is forced to rely on public subscription and customer choice it will find correspondents who do actualy understand the real world.
Sorry, how many people did they send to Glastonbury to tell us how awesome it was? 459?
QED.
And how many were employed at the NOTW
200.
The biggest English language newspapers in the world only employed 20% of the BBC Glasto numbers.
Makes you think!
makes you think what a sick corrupt and bloated organ the beeb has become
I guess it’s a good thing Mardell is no longer the BBC Europe editor, or he’d be contradicting every single financial expert the News Channel has had on to say that the Eurozone needs more austerity measures in order to stop the meltdown. Mardell thinks spending cuts are unnecessary and borrowing more is correct for the US, while – based on some logic unknown to me – Europe needs to cut spending. Why aren’t all the talking heads saying Europe needs “more revenues”, and the only European countries have cut spending is because it was forced on them by far-right ideologues who hate the President? Total disconnect from reality, yet you’re expected to trust him on how to understand the US.
Yes, BBC, we can say that the US economy is stalling. Yes, small businesses are hiring….”kind of”, as Michelle Fleury just put it….less. Why? Because they’re being crushed by a dead service sector, a dead retail sector, and a dead lending sector, and are about to be crushed even more by draconian regulation and costs from ObamaCare. If you have no customers, and hiring somebody is going to cost you even more than ever, you’re not going to hire someone. This isn’t rocket science: it’s something they teach in high school.
Now it’s time to say that the stimulus spending of other people’s money for the last two years hasn’t worked. We should not say that we need to have yet another f@#$ing round of it, contrary to Fleury’s musing. When will the BBC ever have someone on to tell you that any appearance of growth in the last 18 months has been an artificial bubble, propped up by temporary government spending? Once again their intellectual failure on this issue allows them to champion the concept of “sustainability” when it comes to green energy but deny it exists when it comes to economics.
And more than three-quarters of the public gets their news from these people? Damn.
Mardell feels sorry for the President, and made a little gloomy blog post about it. And it looks like someone reminded him to dial back the White House propaganda a notch. Only a notch, though. But he steps back from the brink of sycophancy in two different sentences, which surely must be some kind of record for him.
The president has said, yet again, that his relentless focus will be on jobs….
So now it’s “yet again”, eh, Mark? You weren’t so honest about it yesterday. What happened? Did the veil lift ever so slightly? Or did someone point it out to him?
Politically, as well as economically, Mr Obama does look as if he is still pondering the question, rather than providing the answers.
Why, yes it does. Where have you been for the last two and a half years?