Opinion Forum

Slammed By The WSJ

April 20th, 2010

I just wanted to share with everyone a couple of great articles in the Wall Street Journal that caught my eye today.

The first is titled “Why the Left Needs Racism” by James Taranto. It shows how the Tea Partiers are damned if they do, damned if they don’t when it comes to including blacks in their events, explains the costs blacks are forced to pay in order to retain their separateness from the racial collective, and highlights the utter hypocrisy on race that has rested at the core of the Democratic Party for decades due to the political necessity of keeping the black voting bloc away from the Republican alternative.

The second is “An Economy of Liars” by Gerald P. O’Driscoll, who is a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute. He explains the workings of crony capitalism, pointing out that distorting the price system through government intervention is a form of market fraud far more serious than anything Goldman Sachs could dream of contemplating and that such a system “owes more to Benito Mussolini than to Adam Smith.” (But it’s the Tea Partiers who are the fascists. Really.)

These articles are nothing less than two examples of the truths the mainstream media refuses to print or acknowledge, issues that almost no major newspaper other than the WSJ is willing to seriously discuss. Oddly enough, the WSJ is also the one major newspaper that has suffered no serious consequences from the economic downturn, a fact that liberals are at a complete loss to explain since to them, the mere act of making profit is automatically assumed to come at the expense of telling lies. Or as the corrupt Mayor Bascom in Atlas Shrugged posits, “In this world, you’re either virtuous or you enjoy yourself. Not both.”

The mainstream media has accepted the lunatic idea that in this world, you either tell the truth or you make money, which is doubtless the mantra that the New York Times will be chanting to Obama and Washington should the day ever come when it decides to seek a bailout. But no matter how often they say it, they won’t be able to deny the existence of the Wall Street Journal as proof positive to the contrary.

Articles written by Brianna Aubin
Tags: capitalism, Democrat, profit, racism, Republican, Tea Party, truth, WSJ
Categories: Media, News, Politics | Comments (11) | Home

11 Responses to “Slammed By The WSJ”

Tom | April 21st, 2010 at 4:22 am

Membership in the Tea Party movement is self-selected. From what I’ve seen, African Americans and other minorities aren’t discouraged from participating or being in leadership positions. Those who attack the movement, however, are inevitably going to point to the fact that minorities are underrepresented, based on their proportion of the total population. They then try to claim it’s racist, when in reality it just doesn’t represent the interests and policy preferences of many minorities. Seeing the facts and then incorrectly ascribing them to racism is just politics as usual, and when race is involved it gets emotional. We should keep in mind that these kinds of things go in both directions and not get overly concerned about it.

There can’t be any doubt that all segments of the media are biased at least to some extent. That’s just human behavior. I think we have to be a bit careful, though, about how confidently we define “truth.” In the context of political discussion, it’s hard to find objective truth because whoever is doing the defining is starting from a subjective viewpoint. The solution is really pretty simple. If you want to avoid liberal bais, stay away from the NYT. If you want conservative, pro-business bias, go with the WSJ (at least in op-ed terms).

The greater success these days of the WSJ no doubt reflects the attitudes of readers, but it also reflects the more successful business approach of Rupert Murdoch et al. versus that of the feckless “Pinch” Sulzberger et familia at the NYT Co.

d | April 21st, 2010 at 7:02 am

You do not have to be a liar to make a profit.You must work hard,and give your customers what they want,within reason. If you cannot give them what they want,I found that blunt,apologetic,truth always works and keeps you in business.
The Tea party,is not made up of minorities,because,the minorities are, for the most part,behind Obama,because he is a Democrat and he is a minority and they are proud that he is president.You cannot fool the Democratic minorities into believing big business,is good for them.

Brianna | April 21st, 2010 at 3:21 pm

“The Tea party,is not made up of minorities,because,the minorities are, for the most part,behind Obama,because he is a Democrat and he is a minority and they are proud that he is president.”

Doris, I actually… I actually… wait for it, I’m having trouble saying it… I actually agree with you. I might faint /joke

“You cannot fool the Democratic minorities into believing big business,is good for them.”

Doris, big businesses are simply successful small businesses. Among their other evil effects, they have a tendency to increase production and drive down prices. Yes, some big businesspeople are crooks… so are subsets of every subset of the human population. It makes no more sense to increase business regulation when a businessman gets exposed for corruption than it does to increase regulation on doctors or lawyers when one of them them is convicted of a crime.

d | April 22nd, 2010 at 6:08 am

Awesome! I agree,but I was in business,most minorities were not. I understand the misconseption that big business pays no taxes and gets away with murder.This is what people think,and I don’t think that. I know they do pay taxes,tons of them,but they do go around a lot of taxes.If they couldn’t,they would not stay in business,due to paying most of their profit in taxes and fees.You have to be in business or be very smart to understand that,of course I am,or have been both. (: Right now,I have to pick myself off the floor,because I did faint,when you agreed with me.

Susan Critelli | April 22nd, 2010 at 6:50 am

A lot of what passes for “racism” these days is really ordinary disagreements misinterpreted by thin skinned, hypersensitive whiners.

I can remember “white-only” water fountains, and an adult black man stepping off the sidewalk to let me pass when I was a little girl. Bull Connor’s thugs hosing civil rights demonstrators was even uglier than depicted in the history books. THAT is racism at its ugliest, and was part of the Southern culture I grew up in, and for which young people have no frame of reference. My 18 year old son is stymied by the very idea that I would think it remarkable that we have come far enough that a black man could be President.

Understand, I am not upset by this. I would just rather it had been Alan Keyes or Thomas Sowell.

The Tea Partiers are protesting, among other things, the runaway growth of government and erosion of liberty, and Obama has set into motion policies designed to facilitate both. For the vast majority of them, it is surely a policy issue rather than a race issue. As “d” points out, most of the protesters are white because minorities “are, for the most part,behind Obama,because he is a Democrat and he is a minority and they are proud that he is president.” True, but growing numbers of the protesters are disgruntled Democrats and whites of other stripes who voted for Obama and are now having Buyer’s Remorse.

d | April 22nd, 2010 at 7:27 am

I voted for Obama,but think maybe,just maybe,it will not turn out right. I would never join the tea party,because I see it as racism. Yes,I know you will all say no,but I think it is a racist movement,disguised as a political movement. I know a lot of these people, and they are trying really hard to pretend that they are not racist,but underneath,they cannot stand the idea of a black president. They spout a million times, that they are not racist,but before this,they did not hide it so well. I,too,lived in that era in the south. When I was 15,there was a washateria near my home,in there, a sign said,coloreds in back door. All the restaurants proclaimed,coloreds in back door,I was appalled by this,and if my mother would have allowed it,I would have been involved in protests. I really know these kinds of folk,and most,in my opinion,would not be at the rallys,if Obama were white.

Brianna | April 22nd, 2010 at 9:02 am

“I would just rather it had been Alan Keyes or Thomas Sowell.”

I don’t know enough about Alan Keyes to say, but I am a big fan of Sowell.

Clarissa | April 22nd, 2010 at 9:34 am

The very language of “including blacks in their events” is beyond racist.

Daniella | April 22nd, 2010 at 9:58 am

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127181/Tea-Partiers-Fairly-Mainstream-Demographics.aspx

Brianna | April 22nd, 2010 at 10:14 am

“The very language of “including blacks in their events” is beyond racist.”

So when Leftists brag that their protests are much more diverse than the tea parties, is that racist too?

Brian Bagent | May 1st, 2010 at 12:43 am

“So when Leftists brag that their protests are much more diverse than the tea parties, is that racist too?”

Of course not.