Fact Check: Remaking America
Vol: 91 Issue: 30 Thursday, April 30, 2009
President Barack Hussein Obama marked his 100th day in office with a speech in which he told Americans that “we’ve begun the work of remaking America.”
If you thought America was ok unmade, or unremade, or if you just liked it the way it was, then let me remind you, as the Dems are fond of doing, that Obama won the election. If you didn’t vote for him, you have no right to an opinion.
The big networks learned that. Fox News backed the wrong horse during the election, then failed to fall down and worship The One once he won the White House. In return, while the White House hasn’t yet pulled Fox News’ credentials, Obama won’t call on its reporters.
Earlier yesterday in St Louis, Obama made a point of mentioning “certain news channels” where he’s ‘not very popular.’ At his third press conference last night, Obama called on reporters from every single network but one – Fox.
In all, Obama called on reporters from AP, Detroit News, ABC, CBS Radio, NBC, Reuters, CBS, CNN, NYTimes, Telemundo, BET, TIME and the Wall Street Journal. But nobody from Fox.
Obama’s apologists say it was payback for Fox’s entertainment channel refusing to give Obama free airtime. But Fox News Channel covered it wall-to-wall, so that doesn’t fly.
This is America Remade. If you didn’t vote for Obama, your opinion doesn’t matter. Whether you are just one citizen or if you represent millions, like Fox does.
This is a good time to point out that in America, there are but two branches of media. There is the liberal media, like MSNBC, CNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, PBS, The NYTimes, Washington Post, LATimes, Chicago Tribune, etc., etc.
The ‘liberal’ media is so-called because it only reports news that serves the Left’s agenda. News that does not necessarily serve the Left’s agenda but is too important to ignore is then spun until it does serve the Left’s agenda.
On the other side of the spectrum is the ‘conservative’ media. The conservative media is a bit easier to identify — Fox News and the Washington Times.
What I want to point out, however, is not the fact that there are more liberal media organizations than there are conservative media organizations. I want you to see that there are only TWO types of media; liberal and conservative.
Can you think of a media organization that does not lean one way or the other?
What does that mean, exactly? Well, if you are like me and cannot think of an unbiased news source, then what it means is that there is nowhere Americans can turn to for the truth. At best, they can hope for a version of the truth.
If you want the liberal version, you can turn to one of the many liberal outlets available. If you want the conservative version, there’s Fox News and the Washington Times. There is nowhere to turn to in order to get the news before it’s been propagandized.
I’m not defending Fox. Both the liberal and conservative media are, by definition, deceivers. Each takes a set of neutral facts and spins them to create a particular sympathy toward a particular and pre-determined agenda.
If you favor gun control, then you probably prefer CNN where you will only hear stories in which guns are used to commit crimes. If you oppose gun control, you prefer Fox, where you will hear how guns were used by law-abiding citizens to stop crime.
Each only tells half the story. This isn’t to blame the media, necessarily. There is no shortage of people who only want to hear the half they agree with. And if they choose the wrong outlet, sometimes they don’t hear any of it.
I was talking to my brother the other day. He’s not much of a news junkie — sometimes he watches the evening news after supper, sometimes not.
I asked him what he thought of the “tea party” demonstrations. More than a million people demonstrated in more than 700 cities against the fledgling Obama government. He didn’t know anything about them. Nothing.
But he knew Obama was “the most popular president” since Kennedy — he saw that on the news.
It remains a fact that almost everything most people think they know about history and politics is not true. At best, most of us know a version of the facts, some of which are true but most of which are not.
Millions upon millions of Americans believed Obama yesterday when he blamed the current economic mess on the previous administration. “It wasn’t me,” he said. Not true.
The US had undergone six years of uninterrupted growth when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006. That’s not a liberal ‘fact’ or a conservative ‘fact’ or a partisan ‘fact’ — it’s just a fact.
I was there. I remember it. I was bewildered by Pelosi’s claim the economy was suffering — and said so more than once.
“America’s Gross Domestic Product is growing at the rate of 4.1% according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. GDP forecasts show it will continue to climb into August 2004 from ten trillion dollars in March to eleven trillion by August.
Personal income is also continuing to rise, up 0.4% in February. It has risen every month for the past twelve months except September, 2003. Corporate profits, according to the BLS, are up by $81.4 billion last quarter.
Profitable corporations hire new workers. Unprofitable corporations lay workers off. But to listen to the spin doctors, profitable corporations are bad and must be penalized for being profitable by taxing away all the profits. It’s only fair, they say. “ (OL April 1st 2004)
“The politicization of the war on terror began even as Democratic Majority Leader Tom Daschle pledged the Democrats ‘not to politicize this war’ (OL 9/26/02, 3/22/04, 7/23/0412/23/05, etc.) Rather than coming together as one nation, the Left elected to use the war to divide the country as a springboard to power.
As the years went by and memories faded, the Democrat theme for ’04 was “How Bush Lost The War In Iraq” and the ’06 theme was “How Losing the War in ’04 Ruined the Economy in ’06”.
Nancy Pelosi pledged to ‘fix’ the Bush economy and ‘do something’ about high gas prices within her first 100 days as Speaker in ’06 (when unemployment was at 4.5% and gas was under $2.00/gallon)
If you keep telling people that their life savings are threatened if they leave it in the market, they will eventually begin to believe it and move those savings to a safe place (like under their mattress).” (OL December 15, 2008)
In 2006, Nancy Pelosi assumed the Speaker’s gavel and promised to ‘fix’ the Bush economy. She did. Along with Harry Reid. (And Senator Barack Hussein Obama)
For Barack Obama to blame it on the Bush administration isn’t merely disingenuous. It’s an outright lie. Although they can certainly make things worse, presidents actually have very little control over whether or not an economy does well.
It’s all about confidence. If investors aren’t afraid they’ll lose their investment, they will invest. The economy will do well. Scare them off, and they won’t invest. And the economy will suffer.
It’s not difficult to puzzle this out.
In his speech, Obama called former president Bush both a torturer and a liar. “Water-boarding is torture. . . We could have gotten this information in other ways.”
It’s incredible enough for a sitting president to openly accuse a former president of criminal conduct.
It’s even more incredible since its not true.
I’ve been water-boarded. So have most US military personnel at some point in their career. It wasn’t pleasant. But it wasn’t torture.
Indeed, I was once forced to sing the fourth verse of the Marine Corps hymn while standing in the “gas chamber” (a sealed room filled with tear gas) with my gas mask tucked under my arm.
Having endured both (Obama having endured neither) I can confidently state that the gas chamber came a lot closer to ‘torture’ than did water-boarding.
In any case, Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the guy who planned and executed the September 11 attacks. Torture? I don’t think so.
I was probably open-mouthed through much of the speech, since the majority of it was demonstrably untrue. When he finished, he opened it up to questions from the media (excluding Fox) and not a single one of his alleged ‘points’ was challenged.
Probably the only true statement he made was the one in which he said “we’ve begun the work of remaking America,” although into what remains to be seen. The rest was self-serving deception on his part.
Deception is the hallmark sign for the last days.
When asked, “What will be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world?” by His disciples, the first thing Jesus said was, “Take heed that no man deceive you.” (Matthew 24:3)
When writing to the Thessalonians to tell them how they would know when the Day of Christ was “at hand” Paul warned of the “mystery of iniquity” whose coming “is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.”
Further, Paul warned that it would be, “for this cause that God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but took pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2nd Thessalonians 2:9-11)
It’s all about deception. I’m not saying Obama is the antichrist. Obama might think he’s the One, but I’m not so sure – I think he’s just a decoy.
The Bible notes only two people in history personally indwelt by Satan. The first was Judas Iscariot. The antichrist is the second.
I don’t believe we’ll know who the antichrist is — I don’t think that he knows, whoever he is, that he’s the antichrist. But the signs that the world is preparing for his coming are all around us.
It sounds gloomy, but be encouraged. Before he gets here, we’re gone.