I’m sure that you have read David’s post below on the treatment afforded Mitt Romney by the BBC. I see that  the BBC wanted to have the final word on the overseas visit by the GOP candidate by declaring “Romney wraps up overseas tour amid tensions with media..”  Do have a read, I particularly liked the way they keep a sting to the last sentence. Let’s face it – the BBC are in the Obama camp and have been for years now. No matter what he does do (or doesn’t) he’s still their hero so WHOEVER the GOP put up was going to get the cold treatment from the State Broadcaster. Mark Mardell has put bias on a whole new level with his regular drooling over President Hubris. Romney has stood up for Israel and Poland, two Nations that Obama was quick to cold shoulder and in doing so he attracts the predicable opprobrium of the BBC.

Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

    This article represents another of the worst aspects of BBC ‘journalism’: when there isn’t a real story to report, just write about what the media are saying amongst themselves.
    We could choose whether to read or listen to the other media, but sadly, we have to pay for this BBC drivel.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Well said. If the BBC wanted to be honest and accurate, that headline should have read:

      “Romney wraps up overseas tour amid tensions with Left-wing, JournoList-infested, Democrat-supporting media”

      As if voters will be worried that the luvvies at the NY Times and WaPo don’t like Romney.


  2. Alex says:

    I ‘wonder’ why the BBC love the Obamessiah so? For the multicultural life of me, I can’t work it out… then again, I used to think that oral sex simply meant talking about it!


  3. Ben says:

    LOL. To be honest though, I think Romney is worse than Palin.


    • London Calling says:

      “Romney worse than Palin” Phew. How so, Ben? Or is an opinion enough. I think they are both better than Obama. Honestly. But then when it comes to ice cream, I prefer Vanilla to Chocolate.


      • Ben says:

        “Romney worse than Palin” Phew. How so, Ben?

        Simple. Romney is a war-monger who believes in big government. He also has implemented the disastrous Romneycare in Massachusetts which is really a variation of Obamacare and equally unaffordable.

        Sarah Palin is a small government politician, and although she has an eccentric side to her beliefs I believe these are mostly harmless.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      I agree with Ben. Palin would be a better President than Romney. Or is that not what he meant…..


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        Oops my mistake. That is what Ben meant. My apologies to you, Ben. I wonder if you would agree with Palin on Israel, though.


  4. the sheep says:

    We need Romneys tough stance more than ever. While the weak Obama limps along the axis of evil grow stronger by the day, if Iran get the bomb we are in big trouble, everywhere.


  5. Louis Robinson says:

    ____________ is a warmonger
    Any name linked to the Republican will do.
    Your choices, Ben, are any Republican candidate for President since 1945. You see, Ben. its the same game over and over again, it’s a tired boring line of attack AND IT DOESN’T WORK ANY MORE.


    • Ben says:

      I am puzzled. What line of attack?

      I am a big fan of Ron Paul and his libertarian approach? I believe American foreign policy has caused considerable problems in the world and it would be better if their military interventions overseas were scaled back considerably.

      Just to be clear, if you are suggesting I am some sort of closet Obama supporter then you are badly mistaken. I think Obama and his lefty, statist and generally incompetent approach to government makes him the worst President in the whole of US history.


      • noggin says:

        from the outside, i think the US election, is for the Reps to lose, they do seem to have been in disarray?, is Romney their best man? …. more years of Obama, … rightening.


      • geyza says:

        ben, you are entirely correct. Sadly there are people who change their own beliefs to be able to stay in with their political party, people who will vehemently and angrily oppose any policy of their political opponents, but fully and enthusiastically support the exact same policy if it were endorsed by their own party. These are the idiots who will vote for Romney agains Obama and for Obama against Romney.

        There is no significant difference between the two. Neither of those have a solution to America’s debt problem. They have an absolutely identical agenda described and spun differently that’s all.

        Obama carried on from where Bush left office and Romney would carry on the same agenda as Obama.

        They are all bought and paid for by the same elite bankers and corporations. They are both Corporatists, NOT capitalists. They are both Big Government corporatists who will piss away trillions of dollars of tax-payers money in wars, and bailing out corrupt corporations at the expense of mom & pop stores and the rest of the hard working, responsible and conservative Main St.

        I dread America’s future if either Romney or Obama win, because they are the imposed PR face of the SAME frikken ENTITY! Their policies are dictated to them by the same think-tanks and the same NGOs and they belong in the same secret societies run by the same elites who own Wall St.

        Never has George Carlin’s video “The real owners of America” been more true.


  6. Jeff Waters says:

    A typically incisive and unbiased tweet from our friend:

    Mitt’s press man’s “ass” obscures Romney’s message to the Poles



  7. John Smith says:

    Ron Paul is isolationist not libertarian

    A libertarian would support removal of dictatorships (Iraq/Afghanistan) and oppose propping them up (Saudi Arabia/Egypt/PA)


    • geyza says:

      A libertarian would NOT support their overthrow. A libertarian recognises that other countries should be free to be run however their leaders or their public decides it should be run and would but out of their internal affairs. A libertarian would support these countries’ rights to be different and would trade freely with ALL nations. That is NOT Isolationist, quite the opposite.


  8. wallygreeninker says:

    Anyone catch the piece on the Death of Gore Vidal on Radio 4 today, where Naughtie was talking to ‘polymath’ Jonathan Miller. Speaking of the lack of sympathy Vidal had with presidents who had strong religious convictions Miller came up with :
    “….for instance that rather mindless person walking on one knuckle now – Mitt Romney..” (suppressed chuckle from Naughtie) “I doubt if he could have borne one second of conversation with Mitt Romney.” (another suppressed chuckle from Naughtie.)

    The Beeboids seem more than relaxed about leaving their audience with visions of a mentally deficient gorilla when they think of Romney.
    2hrs44m in


    • Sarmad says:

      I heard this interview this morning and was shocked by Miller’s narrow focus. He mentioned the word ‘patrician’ many times, slipped in athiesm, about which he said Gore Vidal was unable to speak interestingly, and seemed at pains to stress that in the 1960s he moved in a certain kind of US celebrity culture. He name dropped a few times. So what??? Most of those people were stupid. I felt a bit disappointed by this appearance this morning as Miller has previously impressed me. Maybe I was just young?


  9. George R says:

    For MARDELL:
    – BBC-Democrat’s full-time OBAMA sycophant, and ROMNEY hater:-

    “Romney’s Apology Tour”

    By Pamela Geller


  10. George R says:

    “The BBC Isn’t Sure Israel Has a Capital”


  11. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Check out the US media sources the BBC puts in to show you their overall “verdict” on Romney’s trip:

    Thumbs down: ABC News political maven Michael Falcone, who is also a HuffPo blogger, former Politico (a Left-leaning, JournoList-infested outlet) writer, and ACORN defender.

    Thumbs down: Left-wing ideologue Roger Simon from Politico, who has said that businessmen make lousy Presidents, referred to “vulture capitalism”, has written that Romney isn’t likeable, and, in the very link the BBC provides here, calls Romney a racist for his statement about Israel doing better than the Palestinians.

    Thumbs up: One right-wing ideologue, Fred Barnes, from a conservative outlet, the Weekly Standard. He had the nerve to say the press was just waiting for something to pounce on. Imagine that.

    Thumbs down: Chris Cillizza from the Obamessiah-supporting WaPo. Although the BBC sums up his statement as Romney didn’t do well but it doesn’t matter much, what he actually said is that Republicans and his supporters were very disappointed in him and are now saying he’s not that good but doesn’t need to be. Hardly the same thing. His view is even more negative than the BBC showed, which is odd.

    Couldn’t the BBC have found some Left-wing media sources who weren’t already against Romney 100%? I’d accept a negative verdict more readily from more honest newsbrokers.

    Then Mardell fumes about Romney taking only three questions from the press during his trip. Shocking, I know. But when was the last time his beloved Obamessiah took questions from the press? Where’s Mardell’s criticism about that, I wonder? Answers on a hydrogen atom….


  12. lojolondon says:

    Yes, Romney is worse than Palin, because the BBC actually fears that he could beat ‘the chosen one’ in an election. All hands to the pumps!!