Under the Hammer

It's not often that we run movie advertisements in Under the Hammer, but then again there are not many movies out there like 2016: Obama's America. It is playing at the Carousel Grande on Battleground in Greensboro, the Regal Palladium on Samet Drive and the Regal Oak Hollow Mall in High Point, and the Carousel Cinemas at Alamance Crossing in Burlington. The Obama forces are challenging some of the facts, but how can you challenge Obama's own words or the words of his brother George Obama, who lives in a hovel in Kenya.

, , ,

The national unemployment rate of 8.3 percent is everywhere, but that really doesn't matter much to those of us in Greensboro. What is far more important is the unemployment rate in Guilford County, which is 10.2 percent. So if the unemployment rate is going to figure in to how you vote this fall, think about the fact that in Guilford County – three years into the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama, Gov. Bev "Dumpling" Perdue and Chairman of the Guilford County Board of Commissioners Skip Alston – the unemployment rate in Guilford County is over 10 percent. If that's important to you and you think it's important to the area, voting for Republicans this time around makes sense.

, , ,

Obama, in an interview with Associated Press reporter Ben Feller (formerly of the News & Record), talked a lot about how bipartisan he was going to be in his second term. This is what he said when he ran for his first term, and it's hard to find a president who has been more partisan. Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote. Why was that? It was because, with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a working majority in the House, Obama didn't need a Republican vote. If he was interested in being bipartisan he would have put in a few changes to get a couple of Republican votes, but he didn't care at all. Obama didn't even get Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe, who is more liberal than a lot of the Democrats in Congress.

On the problem with our borders, Obama told a group that he was going to get the support of eight or 10 Republicans, because that is how many he needed to get something passed. In other words, he wasn't going to go after one more Republican vote than he absolutely had to have.

The contempt that Obama has for the American people should be amazing, but we have all just gotten used to it. He thinks we are all idiots, and fairly often he lets us know. When he ran four years ago he talked about being beyond partisanship and ushering in a new era of working together for the common good. After Obama won the presidency in November 2008, Obama said, "Let's resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long."

It appears he hasn't resisted the temptation very well.

It looks like Obama is likely going to never sign a budget during this four-year term. The federal government has been operating on continuing resolutions for nearly four years. Obama is not the first president to have the other party control one House of Congress, but usually there is a spirit of compromise and each side gives in so that a budget can be passed. According to those who have negotiated with him, Obama's idea of negotiating is to try and browbeat the other side into doing exactly what he wants, and if that doesn't happen he declares that they are unreasonable.

The Republican leadership in the House and Senate, unlike Obama, have held legislative positions for a long time. They know that you have to compromise to get anything done. Obama didn't do much in the Illinois state Senate or the US Senate, so he hasn't had a chance to learn those lessons.

The idea that he is going out and preaching bipartisanship in this election is insulting, and if he were a Republican the news media would all be writing articles based on the same information as this editorial. It doesn't have to be an editorial to simply write what he said four years ago, what he has done and what he is saying on the campaign trail.

, , ,

The television commercial currently being run in Missouri featuring Melissa Ohden – an attractive young woman who was aborted but lived – is an extremely powerful advertisement and should be run all over the country. As Ohden states in the ad, Obama voted not once but four times to kill people like her who survive an abortion. Obama voted for a law that states she was not a human being and had none of the rights of a human being. In fact she didn't even have the rights of a dog or cat who must be treated humanely.

If there is a reporter in the White House Press Corps who is not on the Obama team or scared of the White House, Obama will be asked about how he justifies being complicit in the killing of people like Ohden and how he squares it with common human decency.

Maybe some foreign reporter will ask the question. Of course, they will probably be deported the next day.

, , ,

It's unfortunate, almost unbelievable, but true. If you want accurate reporting on the national political scene, the best place to look is in British newspapers. Mainstream American journalism is dominated by liberals. You have The New York Times and The Washington Post leading the pack, and everyone else follows along like puppy dogs.

The British reporters are under no such constraints of liberal political correctness. British journalists actual report on how much Rep. Paul Ryan means to the Republican ticket, not about the fact that Romney will not release his tax returns for his entire life or that he has investments overseas.

, , ,

For years I have been writing about the liberal bias of The New York Times and how it is pervasive in the mainstream media. Conservatives keep writing about it and talking about it, but the liberals routinely deny the bias exists. Now we have The New York Times itself agreeing with everyone else in the world – other than liberal politicians and members of the mainstream media and in particular New York Times editors – about the pervasive bias of the paper.

The New York Times Public Editor Arthur Brisbane, in his last column before stepping down, was inspired to write some truth about his newspaper. He wrote, "Across the paper's many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism – for lack of a better term – that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.

"As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects."

The current New York Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson, of course, disagreed. But when you give someone the title of public editor and invite them to write about The Times, you can hardly spike the column when they write something that most of the country recognizes as true, even if the denizens of the The Times building in New York don't agree.

And most of the country does agree with Brisbane and not with Abramson. A recent survey showed that the believability rating of The New York Times was 49 percent, while that of The Wall Street Journal was 58 percent, and The New York Times came in behind ABC News, CNN, NBC News and CBS News.

...continued on page 2

...continued from page 1

Considering the major gaffes by ABC News lately that is really something. ABC reported that the Aurora, Colorado, shooter was a member of the Tea Party and that his mother confirmed he was the shooter when neither was true. Then ABC reported that Tony Scott, the filmmaker who recently committed suicide, had inoperable brain cancer and that also was based on rumor not fact.

Consider that the American people think ABC, with all of those recent mistakes, is more reliable than The New York Times and you have an idea of how far The New York Times has fallen.

Brisbane is also right in his description of what the problem is at The New York Times. It isn't part of some great conspiracy but simply that the people who work there share the same far-left world view or, as he calls it, "progressivism."

A great example of this occurred at The Washington Post in the 1980s when Post reporters were allowed to march in the pro-abortion parade. The reason the editors allowed this change in the policy against participating in political demonstrations was that they said they didn't think anyone would mind because everyone was in favor of abortion. It is an interesting opinion in a city where a huge pro-life rally involving hundreds of thousands of people takes place every year. Of course, none of those hundreds of thousands evidently worked in the news department of The Washington Post, or if they did they didn't tell anyone about their bizarre belief that a baby was a human being before birth.

People have too many ways to get news these days, and the people that use a few of these avenues soon realize that they are getting news with a very decided slant from the mainstream media.

Here is a paragraph from the front page of The New York Times on Monday, August 27 by Adam Nagourney in Tampa: "Mitt Romney arrives here this week to accept his nomination from the increasingly disparate coalition of factions known as the Republican Party, confronting the challenge of unifying them behind him and – should he win –exerting his own authority over a party that is in many ways still forging a post-Bush identity."

Certainly that is all true, but it is the way it is written that creates the bias. In the Democratic Party they talk about the same thing – calling it "the big tent," and celebrating the diversity of the party. In the Republican Party it is termed "disparate." Of course there are a lot of factions in the Republican Party. It is one of the two major parties in the country with millions of members from all 50 states, or as Obama says 57 states.

To top it off, the photo that goes with the article is of a bunch of children with Ron Paul signs. For those who have been asleep for the past couple of months Ron Paul is pretty much a nonfactor at this point in the presidential race.

, , ,

The attitude of the mainstream media toward the mistakes made by Obama and Vice President Joe Biden falls into that same category. They are laughed off for Obama and dismissed for Biden as "Joe just being Joe." The fact that Biden doesn't know what state he is in or what century and talks about putting black people back in chains is OK. When he asked someone in a wheelchair to stand up and be recognized that is just Joe being Joe.

But what do you think about when you read these words: Vice President Dan Quayle. I don't know that there has ever been a survey done, but "potato" or more accurately "potatoe" always pops into my head. Because Quayle actually read what was on a card given to him by a teacher that misspelled potato he was forever branded. The media wrote about it until it was part of the national fabric of political thought – a really easy trivia question for anyone old enough to remember.

Biden has made much worse mistakes, but the media mentions them and then lets them go and they don't stick. It's one of the big differences.

Obama either doesn't know how to spell Ohio or doesn't understand how to make letters with his arms, but that's OK. It's not really a problem. But if Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan makes that mistake you can bet you will read about it over and over again.