Actually he doesn’t like any criticism. “I thought his potshots — jokewise and then serious stuff — about the Internet and the rise of social media. He hates it. He hates this part of the media, and he really thinks that this sort of buzzification — this isn’t just about BuzzFeed or Politico — but he thinks that this sort of coverage of political media has hurt the political discourse.”
Actually, the Israeli ambassador is correct; the Obama White House is hiding behind the word “assessment”: “Well, our military has made an assessment, and an assessment looks like there’s a high probability of usage. That’s a very similar assessment made by Britain, by France, and, yes, by the United States. . . . It’s an intelligence assessment, Chris. That’s what intelligence agencies do. They make assessments, not, you know, definitive proof, of course.” Unless you are trying to avoid doing anything.
Actually, the National Republican Senatorial Committee would be thrilled. “The Senate is on track to vote again this year on tougher gun laws, according to one of the most outspoken gun control advocates in the Congress.”
Actually, Ron Fournier was too kind. “Washington never looks more out of touch than it will this weekend, when movie stars, music moguls, media mavens and their advertisers join President Obama at the annual White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.”
Actually I don’t think that’s even possible. (Assumes facts not in evidence.) “Does the White House Correspondents Dinner erode national media’s credibility?”
Actually it is about abortion, sometimes late in pregnancy. President Obama’s maddeningly opaque language in his Planned Parenthood speech conceals what he is really talking about: “When it comes to a woman’s health, no politician should get to decide what’s best for you. The only person who should get to make decisions about your health is you.” If he believed what he was saying was right, he’d at the very least be clear it’s about ending a pregnancy, terminating a human life, etc.
Actually, it’s a “train wreck,” which was inevitable when you centralize and regulate health care for hundreds of millions of people. David Brooks thinks Obamacare merely has implementation problems: “The experts talk about the problems that lie ahead in cascades. First, there is what you might call the structural cascade. Everything is turning out to be more complicated than originally envisioned. … Nearly everybody not in the employ of the administration agrees this law does not solve the cost problem, and many of the recent regulatory decisions will send costs higher.” Really, who knew?