TheJOTUS

The Jim of the United States

Archive for March, 2008

Now On Sale: The “Typical White Person” t-shirt

Posted by TheJOTUS on March 21, 2008

I found this on Michelle Malkin’s website.  The “Typical White Person” t-shirt is available–referencing Obama’s remarks about his poor maligned grandmother.

1tee.jpg

There is another one via Instapundit.  Indeed capitalism is good.

Advertisements

Posted in B. Hussein Obama, Jim's Gems (Click of the Day) | Leave a Comment »

News Coverage And The Iraq War

Posted by TheJOTUS on March 18, 2008

veterans_0314.jpgBelow is an article by the Media Research Center on the Iraq war and the media’s coverage of it–or lack thereof.  It is hard to believe it has been 5 years since we led an International Coalition of Troops into Iraq and mowed through Saddam like Ted Kennedy through a bottle of Vodka, but I digress:

Five Years of Slant Against Iraq War Success

Analysts at the Media Research Center have studied TV news coverage of the Iraq war from the beginning, even before the first bombs fell on Baghdad in March 2003. The record shows the networks have trumpeted bad news — setbacks for the U.S. coalition and allegations of misdeeds by American troops — while minimizing good news such as the success of the 2007 troop surge and acts of heroism by U.S. soldiers.

Pre-War Opponents. Contrary to prevailing liberal mythology, all three networks (especially ABC) tilted their pre-war news in favor of Bush administration opponents. Covering the congressional debate over using force, for example, the networks gave a majority of soundbites (59%) to the losing anti-war side. Reporters also sanitized the “peace” movement, masking the radical affiliations of left-wing organizers while showcasing more sympathetic “middle class” demonstrators.

Combat Coverage. Soon after coalition troops liberated Iraq, MRC reviewers awarded decent grades to most of the TV networks, praising the fine, factual reports presented by the embedded journalists who rode along with U.S. troops. But poor marks went to TV reporters stationed in Baghdad, who often passed along the enemy’s unverified propaganda. Worst of all was MSNBC’s Peter Arnett, who reported lies about U.S. use of “cluster bombs” against Iraqi civilians. Arnett was later fired for denouncing the U.S. in a Saddam propaganda video.

Hyping Misdeeds, Hiding Heroes. In less than two weeks during the spring of 2004, NBC alone pumped out 58 stories on the Abu Ghraib prison abuse story, but in the preceding year devoted only five stories to the discovery of mass graves of Saddam’s victims. In 2006, the networks jumped on unproved charges of a Marine “massacre” at Haditha, with more than 200 minutes of coverage in three weeks. During the preceding five years, those networks gave just 52 minutes to the stories of America’s highest-decorated soldiers in the war on terror.

Mostly Bad News. In 2005, Iraq was a mixed bag — historic democratic elections, but continued violence. But an MRC study showed the network coverage emphasized the bad news. Out of 1,712 evening news stories, the lion’s share (848, or 61%) focused on U.S. casualties, bombings, kidnappings or political setbacks, compared to just 245 (14%) that reported positive developments. (The remainder were mixed or neutral.) An MRC study of cable news coverage in 2006 found that all three networks emphasized bad news, although the Fox News Channel aired nearly as many stories about coalition success in Iraq (81) as CNN (41) and MSNBC (47) combined.

Little Time for Good News. The last six months have seen a massive reduction in insurgent attacks and U.S. casualties. But the three broadcast evening newscasts have shown little interest in the good news, with coverage dropping every month since September.

Posted in Conservatives in the Know, Jim's Gems (Click of the Day), Nuggets of Potpourri, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

Lost Your Job? Apply At The Fed!!

Posted by TheJOTUS on March 13, 2008

big_government.jpgIn the era of a Big Government there was this little nugget of potpourri from The New York Times:

U.S. Payrolls Unexpectedly Fall for Second Straight Month

By REUTERS
Published: March 7, 2008

Filed at 8:31 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON, March 7 (Reuters) – U.S. employers cut payrolls for a second straight month during February, slashing 63,000 jobs for the biggest monthly job decline in nearly five years as the labor market weakened steadily, a government report on Friday showed.

 But there is good news!!!!!!!!

One bright spot was that the government added 38,000 jobs in February on top of 4,000 new-hires in January.
Does anybody else see something wrong with this?? 

Posted in Jim's Gems (Click of the Day), Nuggets of Potpourri, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

B. Hussein Obama

Posted by TheJOTUS on March 6, 2008

obamaosama2.jpg This from an artcicle in the Chicago Tribune back on September 25, 2004.  Back when B. Hussein Obama was just a lowly State Senator from Illinois:

This on Iran and Pakistan

Iran announced on Tuesday that it has begun converting tons of uranium into gas, a crucial step in making fuel for a nuclear reactor or a nuclear bomb. The International Atomic Energy Agency has called for Iran to suspend all such activities.

Obama said the United States must first address Iran’s attempt to gain nuclear capabilities by going before the United Nations Security Council and lobbying the international community to apply more pressure on Iran to cease nuclear activities. That pressure should come in the form of economic sanctions, he said.

But if those measures fall short, the United States should not rule out military strikes to destroy nuclear production sites in Iran, Obama said.

“The big question is going to be, if Iran is resistant to these pressures, including economic sanctions, which I hope will be imposed if they do not cooperate, at what point are we going to, if any, are we going to take military action?” Obama asked.

Given the continuing war in Iraq, the United States is not in a position to invade Iran, but missile strikes might be a viable option, he said. Obama conceded that such strikes might further strain relations between the U.S. and the Arab world.

“In light of the fact that we’re now in Iraq, with all the problems in terms of perceptions about America that have been created, us launching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in,” he said.

On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse. So I guess my instinct would be to err on not having those weapons in the possession of the ruling clerics of Iran. … And I hope it doesn’t get to that point. But realistically, as I watch how this thing has evolved, I’d be surprised if Iran blinked at this point.”

As for Pakistan, Obama said that if President Pervez Musharraf were to lose power in a coup, the United States similarly might have to consider military action in that country to destroy nuclear weapons it already possesses. Musharraf’s troops are battling hundreds of well-armed foreign militants and Pakistani tribesmen in increasingly violent confrontations.

And this on gay marriage

Earlier Friday, Obama clarified his position on gay marriage after several days of criticism from [GOP Senate candidate Alan] Keyes on the issue. Keyes, a vehement opponent of gay marriage who has called homosexuals “selfish hedonists,” charged during a campaign swing Downstate this week that Obama favors gay marriage.

But during a taping of WBBM-AM’s “At Issue,” Obama said that his Christian faith dictates that marriage should be between a man and woman.

“I’m a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman,” Obama said.

So Mr. Obama would attack Iran if they continue with their nuclear program unabated?  He would also even have the US invade Pakistan and take away their nuclear weapons if Mr. Musharraf were to be overthrown?  Both sound very much like the kind of “pre-emptive warfare” he now so eloquently and adamantly attacks.

In addition, Mr. Obama’s remarks that “marriage should be between a man and a woman,” might not play so well with the homosexual community he is now courting.

But, again, this is from way back in 2004, when Mr. Obama was merely a lowly Illinois state senator.  Not the “rockstar” being he is today.

Posted in B. Hussein Obama, Jim's Gems (Click of the Day), Nuggets of Potpourri, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »