allowed nuclear secrets to fall through the cracks
Tu Stultus Es
Last edited by Macbeth (14 years, 4 months ago)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 … inion_mainOne of the more puzzling conservative and, increasingly, mainstream media critiques of President Obama is that he plays too hard, or too much, or something.
The same cable TV and talk-radio hosts who don't seem to work on Fridays in the summer object that Mr. Obama has played golf 44 times as President, more often even than that notorious weekend warrior, George W. Bush. The latest alleged outrage is that the President indulged his inner teenager too heartily on his birthday weekend when Michelle was in Majorca, hooping it up with NBA stars and perhaps even sneaking in a cigar or two in between mulligans on the links.
We can see why media snarks with nothing else to say would stoop to this line, but what's up with the right? The objection always sounded petty and partisan when liberals threw it at Mr. Bush, and it sounds no more persuasive when leveled against a liberal President. One of the more useful conservative insights is that life shouldn't be ruled by politics, and that is no less true merely because we live in a 24/7 cable TV news cycle.
We wish Mr. Obama played more golf. Seven days a week, in fact. Imagine how much better off America would be—and how much more popular the President would be—had he taken the rising public protests against ObamaCare last summer as an opening to drop the subject and work on his handicap?
The more Mr. Obama and his White House team practice their putting strokes, the less time they'd have to pass more stimulus, overregulate more industries, or raise more taxes. The economy would recover more rapidly with less political handling.
So by all means, swing away, Mr. President. Work on that jump shot, polish your short game, practice your fly cast mending. Then watch GDP and your approval ratings rise.
Only recently.eleven bravo wrote:
wsj is newscorp
But Murdoch has total editorial control now.JohnG@lt wrote:
Only recently.eleven bravo wrote:
wsj is newscorp
Right. Yeah. Ok.Dilbert_X wrote:
But Murdoch has total editorial control now.JohnG@lt wrote:
Only recently.eleven bravo wrote:
wsj is newscorp
According to articles I've read he does, it was sold to him on the basis he wouldn't meddle, and he reneged on that immediately.JohnG@lt wrote:
Right. Yeah. Ok.
Even if that were true, why exactly would it negate anything?Dilbert_X wrote:
According to articles I've read he does, it was sold to him on the basis he wouldn't meddle, and he reneged on that immediately.JohnG@lt wrote:
Right. Yeah. Ok.
Instead of being a reasoned opinion with evidence to back it up it suddenly becomes Fox in print, ie nothing more than Murdoch's agenda.JohnG@lt wrote:
Even if that were true, why exactly would it negate anything?Dilbert_X wrote:
According to articles I've read he does, it was sold to him on the basis he wouldn't meddle, and he reneged on that immediately.JohnG@lt wrote:
Right. Yeah. Ok.
While I certainly don't agree with all of the editorials written in the paper, there are some gems and the one I posted is one of them.Dilbert_X wrote:
Instead of being a reasoned opinion with evidence to back it up it suddenly becomes Fox in print, ie nothing more than Murdoch's agenda.JohnG@lt wrote:
Even if that were true, why exactly would it negate anything?Dilbert_X wrote:
According to articles I've read he does, it was sold to him on the basis he wouldn't meddle, and he reneged on that immediately.
Who's the ugly cow on the right?Macbeth wrote:
Dr. Laura thing aside, if this is the best CNN can come up with then they deserve the ratings pummeling by Fox News.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUdCk4AV5ag
It's not intelligent anaylsis, it's one sided and unfair, and really really boring.
Stopped watching after they showed what someone said about it on twitter.Macbeth wrote:
Dr. Laura thing aside, if this is the best CNN can come up with then they deserve the ratings pummeling by Fox News.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUdCk4AV5ag
It's not intelligent anaylsis, it's one sided and unfair, and really really boring.
They are somewhat crap.JohnG@lt wrote:
I agree 100% with FM. The last time I watched the news was probably during the Iraq invasion. I don't get the allure of watching talking heads yelling at each other on tv, or presenting the news couched in their own deep seated opinions. What some former journalism major on CNBC/MSNBC/CNN/FOX has to say on a subject doesn't interest me in the slightest.
bloomberg is a good channelDilbert_X wrote:
They are somewhat crap.JohnG@lt wrote:
I agree 100% with FM. The last time I watched the news was probably during the Iraq invasion. I don't get the allure of watching talking heads yelling at each other on tv, or presenting the news couched in their own deep seated opinions. What some former journalism major on CNBC/MSNBC/CNN/FOX has to say on a subject doesn't interest me in the slightest.
Newsprint is much better, once you learn to sort the opinion and agenda from the reporting.
Sure, except the founder is a douchebag who has trampled on three popular votes in order to remain in power. Hizzoner is a swell guy.eleven bravo wrote:
bloomberg is a good channelDilbert_X wrote:
They are somewhat crap.JohnG@lt wrote:
I agree 100% with FM. The last time I watched the news was probably during the Iraq invasion. I don't get the allure of watching talking heads yelling at each other on tv, or presenting the news couched in their own deep seated opinions. What some former journalism major on CNBC/MSNBC/CNN/FOX has to say on a subject doesn't interest me in the slightest.
Newsprint is much better, once you learn to sort the opinion and agenda from the reporting.