The President of the US will give His latest State of the Union address this evening, and the BBC has published the press release with key talking points.
Obama State of the Union speech to act on income inequality
Sound promising, no? Just by His words, He can move mountains. What they mean is that the President will announce one of His latest executive orders to help the poorest and most vulnerable and strike a blow against what Katty Kay has described as a social injustice which causes economic problems. There can’t be any doubt that she’s writing her from her personal beliefs. But is that really what He will be doing?
The White House said Mr Obama would unveil an executive order to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 (£6.10) an hour for new federal contract workers.
Oh. So He’s just spending more money that we don’t have, increasing our debt, as an ideological gesture. Not really doing anything to help the working poor in my neighborhood, then. The BBC wants to make sure you get the desired impression, though, so they add key details about who those public sector workers will be:
To sidestep lawmakers, Mr Obama will issue an executive order raising the hourly rate of federal workers with new contracts, such as janitors and construction workers. However, that measure is only expected to benefit a few hundred thousand employees.
Yeah, it’s only going to add a few hundred million dollars to the debt, but at least you know it’s going to noble blue-collar jobs. Now, what’s this about sidestepping lawmakers, you ask? After almost five years of this, we should all know the BBC’s Narrative by heart:
Just over a year after his re-election, Mr Obama must contend with determined opposition from the Republican Party, which controls the House of Representatives and has the numbers in the Senate to block his agenda.
Time is running short before Washington DC turns its attention to the 2016 race to elect his successor, threatening to render him irrelevant even with three years remaining in office.
In the face of a divided Congress, Mr Obama has pledged to use executive action to bypass Congress, and the White House says he will flesh out some of his plans in the State of the Union speech.
As always, the problem is an intransigent Congress, blocking His every move. Screw the separation of powers. Never mind that during the two years where He had super-majorities in both houses of Congress we got the disaster of ObamaCare and a failed Stimulus. It’s His Plans For Us that must be passed, regardless. As the BBC’s friends in the US Left-wing media and the Administration have been saying, the President has been acting too much like a Prime Minister and not seizing power like He should.
“The problem for us is that the test of our success became what we passed in Congress, and even in the best case — if the fever had broken and the clouds had parted — we still would have only gotten maybe 40 percent of what we wanted,” one senior White House official told the Post.
“The political discussion, the press, the politicians want to pull the president into the role of prime minister,” added the official, whom the Post did not name. “So you have to swerve really hard to the executive powers at a time like this.”
According to the report, an internal review of Obama’s failures last year — from Obamacare to sequestration to Iran to the 16-day government shutdown that cost American taxpayers $1.4 billion — led the White House to conclude that the president “too often governed more like a prime minister than a president.
“In a parliamentary system, a prime minister is elected by lawmakers and thus beholden to them in ways a president is not,” the report noted.
Obama will kick off his new agenda in his State of the Union address on Tuesday.
Funny how the BBC decided not to include that bit of information. And they certainly won’t be reminding you that the Junior Senator from Illinois criticized President Bush for doing this.
No. The thing is, the BBC is all for it because they support the President’s policies and report as if His Plans are correct and all opposition is wrong. What the BBC is doing here is more than reporting and analysis: they’re presenting this as if the President’s way is correct and Congress is wrong for not cooperating.
The worst part is Katty Kay’s inset “Analysis”:
Washington can be a cold, cruel city, as anyone who is living here this freezing January is well aware. And as he heads into his sixth State of the Union address, no-one is feeling the chill more than Barack Obama.
In last year’s address to the nation, Obama promised action on three important issues: immigration, guns and the environment. As of today, there has been no legislation on any of those. A gridlocked Congress has thwarted his every attempt to pass laws that would make it possible for undocumented immigrants to stay here legally or increase background checks on gun sales or expand environmental controls.
The president has three years left in the White House, but already everyone here is focused on who replaces him in 2016 and who will win the midterm elections in 2014. With time moving on, chances are slim that he can get anything major done in what remains of his presidency.
No questioning whether or not what He’s doing is entirely legal, no wondering about whether or not the policies He wants are correct, no asking if maybe Congress didn’t pass the legislation He wanted because maybe the majority of the public they’re elected to represent didn’t want it. No, to Katty Kay and the BBC, His Plans are correct, and inaction on them is wrong.
“As for God, his way is perfect:
The Lord’s word is flawless;
he shields all who take refuge in him.
For who is God besides the Lord?
And who is the Rock except our God?”
2 Samuel 22:30-32
Katty’s full editorial piece is more or less a pity party for Her beloved Obamessiah. Read the whole thing if you must, but have a sick back ready. While she points out that there have been some relationship problems for the President, none of it is apparently His fault. He has “an aversion to schmoozing”, but all that means is that He’s above the ugliness of political logrolling. It’s not meant as a criticism at all. Aside from an admission that He mishandled the discussion of attacking Syria, even the ObamaCare website disaster is presented as something that affected His political capital, and no mention of the damage the law itself has done and is doing.
Now is the time where a BBC journalist bashes and mischaracterizes Republicans and their policies:
His saving grace is that Republicans are in an even weaker position than he is. The party’s approval ratings are lower than the president’s. They are failing to reach out to women, young people, Hispanics and African Americans – all important voting groups. And on the signature issue of income inequality – something Obama intends to spend a lot of time on this year – Republicans are struggling to come up with any ideas that don’t smack of “let’s just cut taxes.”
This is an editorial remark, Katty’s opinion of her political opponents. Notice that cutting taxes is treated as an anathema. Also notice Katty’s ignorance on young people. They are in fact turning away from Him because of His policy failures. But Katty lives in the bubble, so isn’t aware of it. Now turn back to your hymnal:
This buys the president a little bit of time. He can still use that to get things done over the next six months, which is really all he has before mid-term fever makes legislative action totally impossible.
The smart money in Washington thinks two things could get done this year. First, we could see some form of immigration reform: not a big comprehensive bill, but something smaller. And, Mr Obama may be able to use his Presidential powers to bypass Congress and get something done to raise the minimum wage. That could help narrow the gap between rich and poor.
It is a far cry from the lofty, change-the-world approach of the first term. But six years have beaten the idealism out of Barack Obama. The man who goes to address Congress on Tuesday is more pragmatic. Forget changing the way government works here.
Here’s another way of saying it:
“Truly I tell you,” he continued, “no prophet is accepted in his hometown. I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian.”
All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff. 30 But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way.
Everyone else is the problem, not Him, not His policies. The policies, as we learn from the personal friend of the White House spokesman, are good and just. So everything He does now will be correct in the eyes of the BBC. Can’t wait to hear the rejoicing in His word from the BBC tonight, and the scorn heaped upon Republican rebuttals.
PS: Post title is from Acts 5:29 with one alteration.
UPDATE 1/29: The BBC has completely replaced the preliminary article I linked to and discussed at the top of this post with what seems mostly to be Katty Kay’s pronouncements on the speech. Not even News Sniffer has the original, so it’s down the memory hole.
Katty Kay and the rest of the BBC crowd have just one small problem – they just cannot agree with the wide view 0 inclusing among mmany Democrats – that Obama is the worst President for many decades, hopeless at economic policy, hopeless on foreign policy, with the biigest social failure ever in his ObamaCare fiasco. But worse than that to err is human – Obama tries to act outside the constitution, failing to implement laws Congress has passed and forever trying to use executive action to achieve his “progressive” ends. His Attorney General and the Justice Department and the IRS are being run Chicago-style to attack political opponents,
We have dictatorial Presidential behaviour – and it is all the fault of the Republicans ?
Yes you need a sick bag to read Katty Kay’s biased piece. But you’ll also likelyt need a sick bag to listen to all Obama’s whining tonight.
“Amnesty Ends the American Dream”
by Daniel Greenfield.
Most Americans watching the State of the Union tonight will be thinking :”Obama, you were forced to confess that ObamaCare is one big lie, and even then you did not apologise properly. How about a proper apology tonight – otherwise everything else you say will be suspect, empty words from an empty suit”.
The whole State of the Union thing is demeaning to the US political process. Americans should be ashamed of the whole pantomime. Especially when the President is scornful of all his opponents, does not believe in dialogue and some degree of compromise/negotiation – and always blames everyone but himself. We will see endless obsequiousness to a man who scarcely deserves any respect.
One of the bits from the Washington Post that the BBC would never repeat – a catalogue of Obama’s unpopularity :
Yet the devoted Katty Kay can mention only that the website had problems. She doesn’t think His lies have affected His political capital at all.
That sounds familiar somehow, John. Perhaps if we just make a couple of word substitutions….
Most Britons watching the BBC defending itself over the latest controversy will be thinking :”BBC, you were forced to confess that your claims are one big lie, and even then you did not apologise properly. How about a proper apology tonight – otherwise everything else you say will be suspect, empty words from an empty suit”.
The whole Dame Janet Smith/Pollard/Dinah Rose review thing is demeaning to the British notion of accountability and public service. Britons should be ashamed of the whole pantomime. Especially when the BBC is scornful of all their opponents, does not believe in dialogue and some degree of compromise/negotiation – and always blames everyone but themselves. We will see endless obsequiousness to a media organization which scarcely deserves any respect.
MARK LEVIN: WHO IS BARACK OBAMA……?
Yet again, it was hardly a speech that could, in conscience, be termed ‘presidential’. To my mind, it was virtually a political campaign speech, highly partisan, and not one written for the whole nation. But from Obama, we would expect nothing less. [I could stomach only half of it, I must confess].