Category Archives: Media Criticism

“An RC Robotic Claw”

Is anyone else annoyed by that Chevron commercial with the kid talking about the thing that her “science” teacher helped her build? I’ve no problem with kids learning stuff like that, but it isn’t “science.” It’s engineering. This kind of thing (like the phrase “rocket scientist”) just promulgates false notions of what science is and isn’t, and doesn’t do much to make sure that kids are taught real science (and no, being taught real science also isn’t being taught that ZOMGaia we’re destroying the Earth!).

“This Is My Last Election”

Andrew Malcolm says that the president’s hot-mic gaffe yesterday feeds right into Romney’s campaign strategy:

A main strain of Romney’s assaults has been basically, Given the spending, chronic ineptness and apologies for America, can you imagine what Barack Obama would do in a second term unrestrained by any need to face voters ever again?

That’s an effective line because it leaves the worst things possible to voters’ imagination. And there is no response. What can Obama say, “My secret plans aren’t as bad as you think”?

What makes Obama’s Monday blunder so bad is that it doesn’t come from any sort of dismissable ignorance by someone who spent formative childhood years in Indonesia. It was clearly backstage conniving on Obama’s part and feeds directly into Romney’s ‘Can you imagine’ line.

Plus, it fits with the suspicions of millions that the community organizer has unspoken plans to take America in a transformative direction involving much more government. How else to explain his baldly touting more domestic energy while reducing federal drilling permits and torpedoing the Keystone pipeline?

The Etch-a-Sketch line by a Romney aide played into the meme that he might remake himself for the general election, something every successful primary candidate does to reach the broader audience necessary to win beyond one party. In 2008, the autumn Obama promising a centrist fiscal policy was a far cry from the spring primary fellow vying with Hillary Clinton for union support.

Now, Obama’s gaffe suggests to opponents their suspicions are credible about the Democrat’s hidden agenda that he sought secretly to discuss with the Russian.

But here’s something I haven’t seen anyone comment on — the title of this blog post. There are, after all, two possible interpretations of what he said. The conventional explanation is that he means that, since the Constitution as amended only allows two terms for a president, he won’t be running again. But considering his radical background, if one were of a conspiratorial bent, one would wonder if what he really meant was that after the next election, he’ll come up with some way to hold on to power indefinitely. Fortunately, given the attitude of much of the military toward him, a constitutional suspension is pretty unlikely, regardless of any interest he might have of being president for life.

[Update a while later]

Obama is enabling a return of the USSR. Well, again, given his red-diaper upbringing, that would make sense.

Bad Cholesterol

…is there no such thing?

I’m kind of amused by the commenter who fantasizes that he’s making some kind of point by claiming that “Eades is not a scientist.” What does he think a scientist is, or does?

[Update a few minutes later]

Speaking of nutritional science, this is junk nutritional science:

“Overall, we found that obese rats fed a high-fat, low-carb diet — comparable to that humans would consume — had larger, more damaging and deadly heart attacks than rats fed the control diet,” Lloyd says. “Our findings also suggest that, at the cellular level, a high-fat, low-carb diet impaired recovery of heart function in obese rats immediately following a heart attack.”

Only one problem. You can’t extrapolate dietary results for rats to humans. We have a different physiology and natural diet. Actually, there’s a lot of junk science based on rat research.

[Update a while later]

Link was missing. Fixed now.

Obama’s Failed War

…on energy production:

Overall, oil and gas production on federally controlled land is down by 40% since Obama took office.

So how is it possible that oil production can increase when the Obama administration is so overtly anti-oil?

Easy. As Gerard explains, there’s nothing they can really do to stop it.

While oil production is up, the increase relates almost entirely to investment and leasing decisions made before, sometimes long before, this administration came into office. The increase is also due to oil and gas development on private and state lands over which the administration has little or no control at all.

…while it’s true oil production in America is up, this is clearly in spite of Team Obama’s best efforts. Because the Founding Fathers limited the authority the federal government has on private and state lands, hundreds of small oil companies — not “Big Oil,” as environmentalists want you to believe — are able to drill for oil on private and state land, unencumbered by the heavy hand of Obama’s anti-oil agenda.

For him to take credit for this is like the crowing rooster who thinks it made the sun rise.