Support plummeting for Obama and his mainstream media supporters

Obama support plummeting among people who work for a living.

Excerpt:

During the week of June 7-13, only 46 percent of Americans overall told Gallup they approved of the job Obama is doing as president, tying for the worst week of Obama’s presidency. Two weeks ago, forty-six percent also said they approved of the job Obama is doing, and last week 47 percent said they approved.

But when the president’s approval is separated by incomes groups, it is only the lowest income bracket recorded by Gallup—those who earn less than $2,000 per month—that gives Obama a majority approval rating, with 52 percent saying they approved of the job he is doing as president.

Obama support plummeting with married couples and church-goers.

Excerpt:

President Barack Obama’s weekly approval rating is at an all-time low for his presidency, according to the Gallup Poll, and it is especially low among those 65 or older, those who are married, and those who attend church every week.

During the week of June 7-13, 46 percent of those surveyed told Gallup they approved of the job Obama was doing as president, while 46 percent said they disapproved. In its analysis of the poll results, Gallup points out that equals the lowest weekly approval rating Obama has received since his inauguration. Two weeks ago, in the period from May 24 to May 30, Obama’s approval and disapproval ratings were also at 46 percent, but a week ago (May 31-June 6) his approval increased to 47 percent, before dipping back to 46 percent again last week.

Obama’s highest weekly approval rating—67 percent—came in the week he was inaugurated (Jan. 19-25, 2009).

Support for the mainstream news media is also way down.

Excerpt:

A new poll by Rasmussen Reports shows that a majority of Americans are angry at the media.

The survey of 1,000 likely voters found that 66 percent of voters describe themselves as at least somewhat angry at the media, including 33 percent who are very angry. The poll did not differentiate, however, between news outlets such as CNN and Fox News Channel.

Voters have said consistently in surveys that they believe the media has a liberal bias and most reporters try to help the candidates they want to win. Prior to Election Day in 2008, 51 percent of voters said that most reporters were trying to help Barack Obama win the presidency.

“Americans have spoken and they are livid with the media,” L. Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center, said in a statement. CNSNews.com is a part of the Media Research Center.

“A new Rasmussen poll found an astonishing two thirds of American voters are at least somewhat angry at the media, including an entire one third who said they are ‘very angry.’ That’s disturbing but unfortunately, not surprising,” Bozell said.

If they excluded Fox News from the “media”, the disapproval numbers would be a lot higher.

Stephen Meyer evaluates Craig Venter’s claim of creating artificial life

Did biologist Craig Venter really give life to lifeless matter? Stephen Meyer explains what really happened.

Excerpt:

A biologist in California has summoned headlines around the world, some distressed and some celebratory, by supposedly doing in reality what Dr. Frankenstein did in fiction: giving life to lifeless matter.

[…]First, Craig Venter has not actually produce artificial life. He and his colleagues read the gene sequence of one bug, copied it onto another strand of DNA, and inserted the copy into another bacterium from which its DNA had been removed. They then found that the second bacterium was able to use the instructions on the second strand of DNA. Nevertheless, both bacterial cells came, like all life we know of, from other life.

He copied some information from one computer to another, then claimed to have invented the computer?

And more:

Venter, of course, did not produce a new gene, a truly novel genetic message. He merely copied one that already existed. Nevertheless, even copying and substituting DNA required his genius. Indeed, to the extent that Venter succeeded in simulating a process involved in living systems—copying pre-existing genetic information—he did so as a result of his own ingenuity and creativity. Craig Venter himself was the crucial actor in this technological achievement.

It’s not a simulation of naturalistic evolution if it requires an intelligent agent. If an intelligent agent is involved, it’s intelligent design. He didn’t create any more information, either – he just copied what was already there. Where did that information come from? That’s the real problem of the origin of life. Where does the information from the first living system come from? Has anyone shown that this information can arise without an intelligence?

Read the rest of the article here.

Brian Auten interviews philosopher Paul Copan

Brian Auten does it gain with an interview of one my favorite Christian scholars, Paul Copan.

The MP3 file is here.

Topics:

  • how Christians should deal with hard questions
  • finding balance in communication
  • using the moral argument in conversation
  • common errors when using the moral argument
  • the content of his upcoming book, Is God a Moral Monster?
  • advice for the apologist
  • and more!

Paul Copan is really a very hands-on, practical philosopher, solidly evangelical and fearless on defending the toughest Christian convictions.