Reagan used to say, Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the democrats believe every day is April 15. Now, a new study from Hahvad, shows what most of us probably suspected. Republicans seem to enjoy celebrating the 4th more than Dems. A shock, I know.
Democratic political candidates can skip this weekend’s July 4th parades. A new Harvard University study finds that July 4th parades energize only Republicans, turn kids into Republicans, and help to boost the GOP turnout of adults on Election Day.
“The political right has been more successful in appropriating American patriotism and its symbols during the 20th century. Survey evidence also confirms that Republicans consider themselves more patriotic than Democrats. According to this interpretation, there is a political congruence between the patriotism promoted on Fourth of July and the values associated with the Republican party. Fourth of July celebrations in Republican dominated counties may thus be more politically biased events that socialize children into Republicans,” write Harvard Kennedy School Assistant Professor David Yanagizawa-Drott and Bocconi University Assistant Professor Andreas Madestam.
Their findings also suggest that Democrats gain nothing from July 4th parades, likely a shocking result for all the Democratic politicians who march in them.
The study suggests that if people are looking for a super-patriotic 4th of July celebrations, they should head to Republican towns. “Republican adults celebrate Fourth of July more intensively.”
As opposed to say…Berkeley, or Dearborn, or Madison, or….you get the idea.
It was just after 6am and the discussion kicking off the day was dealing with President Obama’s press conference from the day before. Regular MSNBC contributor and TIME Magazine editor Mark Halperin was asked his thoughts on the presser and he gave a rather unvarnished assessment:
At Ace of Spades HQ, Drew wondered why a guy, normally in Obama’s camp would be so off the reservation:
I’m not sure what the hell Halperin was reacting to but maybe it was just the thin skinned, immature and peevish nature of Obama’s grating personality was too much even for him.
Whatever the reason, he’s been suspended indefinitely by MSNBC and has apologized.
This is why Obama gives so few press conferences. When he is off-prompter, we see more glimpses of his true personality, and the more people see, the more they don’t like. We conservatives aren’t the only ones who have been noticing what a weird bird he is – That press conference was a debacle.
At any rate, you have to feel sorry for the guy — he really looked like he was ready to cry when he apologized after the commercial break. Look at his face:
“Joking aside, this is not a pro-forma apology, this is an absolute apology, heartfelt to the President and to the viewers, I became part of the joke, but that’s no excuse. I made a mistake and I’m sorry and I should not have said it, and as I say I apologize to the President and the viewers who heard me say that.”
I’m wondering, should this be considered just one isolated slip of the tongue, one deviation from the norm of their slavish devotion, or are many in the MSM finally turning against “the One”?
This week we see the carping emanating from Politico’s On the Media blog. As it happens, Obama stiffed the White House Press Corps once again as far as many reporters are concerned.
The journalists were annoyed that Obama gave a speech in the East Room but treated it under the accepted rules as if it were a speech emanating from the Oval Office. The reason this is a big deal is because the speeches made in the Oval Office are limited press access.
Consequently, Obama limited the press access to this particular speech and excluded many of the journalists from the full press pool for the speech. As the AP complained, “Some reporters complained that this amounted to less access and that there was little chance of distraction in the East Room, the largest room in the building. The White House refused to change the ground rules.”
So, once again we see Obama trying to limit press access as much as possible to the consternation of the press. As I said, though, this has not been the only time the press has whined about access to Obama or how he treated them.
Read on as his lists many more examples of the Obama administration dissing the media.
It could be that the era of the MSM’s ‘slobbering love affair’ with Obama is well and truly over.
I noted a while ago that the press is in a fix here. On one hand, they know, to be considered “serious minded people,” they have to acknowledge the size of the debt problem, and of the demographic bomb we call entitlements. They have been talking up this problem since the 80s, at least.
All serious people know this. Even the liberal twits in the media who don’t really understand this have heard other serious people talking about this and so know this is the serious, thoughtful position to take.
The fix for the media, then, is that their boyfriend Obama is explicitly contradicting what serious people know about our debt crisis, and is behaving like a demagogic toddler about it.
Krauthammer’s take on Obama’s demagoguery is priceless.
Someone at NBC decided it would be a good idea to remove the words “Under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance during one of their broadcasts. Citizens Against Religious Bigotry want to make sure this never happens again.
Were they following Obama’s lead? There will be more of this to come unless Americans stand up, and strongly object.
Hat tip: Brian B.
It looks like now that they think they’ve won the battle to corrupt the meaning of marriage, they’re working on the pledge. Conservatives must continue to stand athwart the left’s incessant cultural Marxism, and yell, “STOP!!!”
Granny Jandoesn’t like the hypocritical b.s. she hears coming from this President, and she ain’t putting up with it for one minute.
Granny says she should have used a laugh track, but most of this stuff is more disturbing than funny; (“I called the leaders here, together, I said we gotta get this done. I put Vice President Biden in charge….”) Ay-yi-yi.
Thank you. Your administration has laid out four different dates by which you’ve said that the debt ceiling must be raised or the U.S. would face potential dire consequences.Three of those dates have come and gone and we haven’t faced financial calamity. Some of your critics have argued that these are then scare tactics to force a deal. So why should the American people believe that the August 2nd deadline is the final deadline by which a deal must be raised? And would you also spell out for us what you believe will happen if the debt ceiling is not raised by that date?