Posted on 06/16/2010 4:43:12 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The Economist is out with an editorial this week called “What’s Wrong With America’s Right.” It starts out rowing back from its endorsement of Barack Obama in 2008, explaining that he has done “little to fix the deficit,” shown “a zeal for big government,” and “all too often” has “given the impression that capitalism is something unpleasant he found on the sole of his sneaker.” So it asserts their endorsee needs to be “pegged back.” Then editors John Mickelthwait and Co. take out their humiliation on those American Republicans and conservatives who have stood most steadily on principle from the get-go.
Illustrating the editorial is a cover cartoon showing a tea party from Alice in Wonderland. Sarah Palin wears an apron and bears a gun, while holding up a frayed Democratic donkey with a bullet hole in its bosom. Next to her is Rush Limbaugh as a cigar-smoking White Rabbit. Next to him is a weeping Glenn Beck as the Mad Hatter, with his topper labeled “Nonsense 24/7.” There is a caricature of Barack Obama as a voodoo doll, slumping in a cup of oil labeled “BP.” From an adjacent cup protrudes a sign: “Immigrants out.” In the center of the table is the teapot, labeled “Fox.” Looking over the raucous scene are two dismayed looking elephants.
“[I]t is sad to report,” the editorial says, “that the American right is in a mess: fratricidal, increasingly extreme on many issues and woefully short of ideas, let along solutions.” It reckons the alleged dysfunctionality is “especially unfortunate.” It seems particularly upset at the tea-party movement, which it labels a tax revolt whose activists — “some clever, some dotty, all angry” — “seem to loathe the Bush-era free-spending Republicans as much as they hate the Democrats.”(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
As these geniuses finally wake up to the fraud that is Obama, would it be too much to expect them to acknowledge that we did in fact tell them so?
Instead when they find that, again, they’ve fallen for the kind of thing they always fall for, they have to find a way to say that even though they were wrong they were right, and even though we were right we’re still wrong somehow.
You’d think a rag that fancies itself an Economist would have figured out a long time ago that the O had never had a job and couldn’t possibly run a convenience store let alone the biggest economy in the world, but I suppose they just compared his blank resume to their own meager resumes and figured, heck, how hard can being president be?
It starts out rowing back from its endorsement of Barack Obama in 2008, explaining that he has done "little to fix the deficit," shown "a zeal for big government," and "all too often" has "given the impression that capitalism is something unpleasant he found on the sole of his sneaker." So it asserts their endorsee needs to be "pegged back." Then editors John Mickelthwait and Co. take out their humiliation on those American Republicans and conservatives who have stood most steadily on principle from the get-go.
Hmmm....
GBR Micklethwait, John Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
Rapporteurs
GBR Bredow, Vendeline von Business Correspondent, The Economist
GBR Wooldridge, Adrian D. Business Correspondent, The Economist
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/meeting_2010_2.html
Our family noticed The Economist turned into a vapid, center -eft rag about 10 years ago. We had been subscribers on and off for decades, but cancelled Now we ignore this Newsweek From London. Why pay for waht we can watch for free on CNNABCNBCCBSMSNBC?
Once upon a time, The Economist was a great read. No longer true.
The mag prints some free market stuff from time to time and even shows insights but it is basically a believer in Wise Expert theory of economic progress. They tout the glories of the market but they believe it needs a strong guiding hand.
While the Economist is often thought of as free market capitalist, there's a lot of Oxford condescension at work in the magazine.
Tony Blair's and New Labour's doing probably.
“What Is Wrong With the Economist?”
Consider where it is published, and you will have your answer.
Same here. I had been an Economist subscriber for years and found it absolutely crucial back in my university days. They had been editorially creeping toward statism for a while, but I maintained a subscription primarily for their world news snippets until 2002. The Economist, like the majority of western Europe, completely came unhinged and collapsed under the weight of BDS.
The Economist has been European statist for decades.
Now it’s just another rag.
” When I was in college (some years ago) the Economist was a serious, tightly written journal of economic liberty.”
Exactly my experience - early ‘80’s in the days of Thatcher and Reagan, when I was in college, The Economist was outstanding. Now it is indistinguishable from Newsweek, Time and other leftist nonsense.
You want a good weekly? Try the Weekly Standard, although I have to admit I let my subscritpion lapse when they came out in support of illegal immigration a few years back. I want to come back to the fold, but I need them to help me on this issue. Actually, they are the ones who weirded out, and need to take corrective action!
The Economist also backed Obamacare. I thought they were supposed to be advocates for free markets. They are just a bunch of leftie socialists.
BTW, Since when did the New York Sun start re-publishing again?
I remember they ceased publication due to lack of financial backing in September 2008.
Looks like they’ve returned. Not complaining of course, I like their editorial stance... just curious as to when they returned and who their financial backer is.
The Economist has been moving steadily left for the past 15 years. Only proves O’Sullivan’s Law.
Confirms my experience. When Andrew Knight was the Editor up until 85/86 it was outstanding. It's been all downhill since then. Their blinkers about the shortcomings of the European experiment ahve been particulaly painful to watch.
I remember they ceased publication due to lack of financial backing in September 2008.
Looks like they’ve returned. Not complaining of course, I like their editorial stance... just curious as to when they returned and who their financial backer is.
They didn't give up the ghost completely. They appear to be a weekly. Here's one from today.
Check their homepage.
No further explanation needed. You can't fix that kind of stupid. Commie bastages.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.