Incredibly, “The Economist” Magazine Endorses Barack Obama!

| November 3 2012
David Leeper

One of my favorite volunteer activities is reading for the visually impaired.  Every other week, I record a reading of The Economist magazine for Sunsounds of Arizona, an affiliate of National Public Radio.

The next issue I will record (Nov 3 – Nov 9) has just been published.  In that issue, The Economist editors give their endorsement to Barack Obama rather than Mitt Romney.

From reading this magazine aloud regularly for 2-1/2 years, I know that it tends to lean Left despite (ostensibly) being an advocate for free markets, free enterprise, and limited government regulation.  But with this endorsement, The Economist has flipped completely upside down.

How?  Why?

There could not be a clearer contrast between a Big Government, anti-business, fiscally ignorant, crypto-neo-Marxist ideologue like Barack Obama and a successful business man, entrepreneur, fiscal-crisis-management executive like Mitt Romney.  And yet, they chose the former over the latter.  Astounding is too mild a word.

The article’s tag line reads:

America could do better than Barack Obama; sadly, Mitt Romney does not fit the bill.

What?  Who better than Romney do they have in mind?  They don’t say.

To be sure, their endorsement waffles to and fro, and they feign great intellectual difficulty in making this “close call”.  But of course it isn’t a close call at all.  The editors’ personal need to burnish their Political Correctness credentials has triumphed over their journal’s once-noble charter, namely that of representing a voice for free enterprise in a Europe and UK that has been sliding inexorably toward socialism.

So the “endorsement” says little about the American candidates but speaks volumes about The Economist editors.  It shows how thoroughly the UK/European mind has been infected by the Progressive / Liberal / Statist poison that took root there more than 100 years ago.

The Economist editors could at least have maintained some credibility by offering a reluctant, tentative, and tepid endorsement for Romney.  They’d have had plenty of company.  For example, Charles Schwab, John Chambers, and Bernie Marcus, real business people who deal with real business economics, have endorsed Mitt Romney.  And in an act of bravery that makes me proud to be a former Intel employee, Paul Otellini, Intel’s CEO and a member of Obama’s own Jobs Council, has endorsed Mitt Romney.  But alas, the allure of all those UK/EU cocktail parties were too much for The Economist editors to resist.

The actual Economist article may be found here.  If read carefully, the cognitive dissonance of the writers shines through.  Against Romney they offer only a few Democrat talking points which have not only been done before but done better.  Very insightful, gentlemen — a real service to your readers looking for a fresh perspective.

A video of the editor-in-chief discussing the endorsement appears below.  If the video is not viewable on your device, you can find it at this link.

Well, then …

So be it.  The Economist editors may now safely attend the EU cocktail parties with those overdressed, overtitled, underemployed Euro-trash hypocrites who awarded Nobel Peace Prizes to the terrorist Yasser Arafat, the climate-hoax hysteric Al Gore, and the street-hustler-turned-politican Barack Obama, a man raised and coached by feral Marxists.  So it’s down with truth, wisdom, and honor — and up with political correctness!

I want to keep my gig reading The Economist for the visually impaired.  So I’ll have to be on my best behavior when I read aloud this particular Economist article into my recorder.  I mustn’t let my incredulity shine through in my voice!