Sep 15 2008

If only reporters understood economics

Category: economy,election 2008,McCain,media,Obama,Palin,politics,taxesharmonicminer @ 3:57 pm

Sarah Palin criticizes Obama’s tax plans, and the AP seems to think it has corrected her, by stating an irrelevant piece of data. (not to mention a largely wrong one)

Campaigning on her own, the Alaska governor also said Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama “wants to raise income taxes and raise payroll taxes and raise investment income taxes and raise business taxes and raise the death tax.

“But John McCain and I know that’s not the way you grow the economy,” she added.

In fact, independent groups such as the Tax Policy Center have concluded that four out of five U.S. households would receive tax cuts under Obama’s proposal, which include higher income and payroll taxes only for the wealthiest wage-earners.

Note that Palin did not say that Obama was going to raise everyone‘s taxes.  But the AP responds with a “fact check” from the Tax Policy Center that implies she did.  Surely this is simple failure to understand plain English. 

Speaking of plain English, four out of five U.S. households cannot receive income tax cuts, because two out of five U.S. households pay no income tax at all.  The last time I looked, two plus four does not equal five, a fact that apparently escapes both the AP and the Tax Policy Center.  Giving “tax cuts” in the guise of “refunds” to people who would not pay tax anyway is not a tax cut, it’s welfare, plain and simple.  It’s old fashioned socialistic confiscation/redistribution.

Speaking of the “independent” Tax Policy Center, while it is not directly affiliated with either party, it is most assuredly Left leaning, and usually favors Democratic policies.  They are sometimes subtle about it (although not in this case, calling a give-away a “tax cut”), but they are not possessed of Olympian detachment.

It would be more impressive (as journalism goes) to match the perspective of the Tax Policy Center with one from the Club for Growth, or the CATO Institute.  Both of these are also “independent” and “nonpartisan”, but simply more likely to lean Right. 

You can form your own opinion about why the AP would not seek their input in interpreting Palin’s statements.  I have mine.

In the meantime, what Palin said, quite clearly, is that if all of Obama’s tax plans are carried out, regardless of whether low-tax payers and non-tax payers get a short term “tax cut”, the economy is far less likely to grow vigorously than under McCain’s plan.  That economic growth would provide much more benefit to low- and non-tax payers than a single short term check, whether “tax cut” or “welfare”.

Go back and read her quote.  The APs rejoinder, masked as input from an “independent” think tank, is completely irrelevant to the point.

Embarrassingly, the AP seems not to know that.

Tags: , , , , ,


Sep 12 2008

The AP is totally in the tank for Obama

Category: election 2008,McCain,media,Obama,Palin,politics,White Househarmonicminer @ 9:35 pm

If you have any sense, you’ll simply ignore all AP reporting in this election cycle.  In what pretends to be a news article, the AP claims that McCain’s claims skirt the facts. This bit of magnificent analysis is by one Charles Babington.  The only hint given to the reader that it is mere opinion, and not NEWS, is the word “analysis” in the title. By rights, it has no place in a list of “news stories”, and should be clearly marked “editorial by left leaning writer”, but of course the AP isn’t that interested in helping you discern the difference. Here’s the first paragraph:

Republican presidential nominee John McCain, a self-proclaimed tell-it-like-it-is maverick, keeps saying his running mate, Sarah Palin, killed the federally funded Bridge to Nowhere when, in fact, she pulled her support only after the project became a political embarrassment. He said Friday that Palin never asked for money for lawmakers’ pet projects as Alaska governor, even though she has sought nearly $200 million in earmarks this year. He says Obama would raise nearly everyone’s taxes, when independent groups say 80 percent of families would get tax cuts instead.

This is risible. 80 percent of families don’t PAY income tax. About 40% of families pay no federal income tax. Obama wants to simply GIVE non-tax paying people a “tax cut” by sending them a check. In many cases of the 60% who DO pay income tax, the “tax cut” will amount to more than the taxes they pay.   He will pay for this by raising taxes on the top 5%. There are a couple of names for this: “welfare” is the polite one. Pure class-warfare socialism is another.

Further, if you ask the people in Alaska who “killed the bridge to nowhere”, they will say Sarah Palin.  Sarah Palin’s political enemies in Alaska say that she killed it.  Palin’s political friends say she killed it.  80% approval rating is hard to argue with.  But of course, Mr. Babington (one wonders if this is mispelled…  should it be Blabington?), from his olympian position as an AP flack, knows things that no one in Alaska knows, being so much smarter than the average Alaskan.

Even in a political culture accustomed to truth-stretching, McCain’s skirting of facts has stood out this week. It has infuriated and flustered Obama’s campaign, and campaign pros are watching to see how much voters disregard news reports noting factual holes in the claims.

Since this “news” story is full of factual holes, one can only hope the voters disregard it.  This diatribe goes on for a dozen more paragraphs of distortion about McCain and Palin, until at last, we get this sop to evenhandedness:

Obama, of course, has made exaggerated or questionable assertions as well. Earlier this year, for instance, he repeated a claim that more black men are in prison than in college, after news accounts refuted it. He also used a McCain remark about having troops in Iraq for “100 years” to exaggerate McCain’s proposals for being fully engaged militarily in that country.

THIS is the best this writer can find to document Obama’s false claims and questionable assertions?  What diligence.  What attention to detail.  What thorough research.

Voters are going to have to be very careful this season.  The major media are so far in the tank for Obama that they present pure opinion/spin pieces as if they are news.  A simple challenge to anyone who doubts this: try to find an AP piece, by ANY writer, ANY time in the last 6 months, that is this negative about Obama.  Since the AP seems to think it’s OK to disguise pure opinion as news, surely, if they were being evenhanded, they would publish at least ONE that was negative about Obama in the radical way that this piece is negative on McCain. 

Start looking.  I’ll check back next week to see if anyone found anything and put it in the comments area.  Oh:  and if, by some miracle, you find one, can you find another one? 

Tags: , , , , , ,


Sep 08 2008

This post is rated PG: why Left leaning talk radio is rotting garbage

Category: McCain,media,Palin,politicsharmonicminer @ 9:24 am

Stay Classy, Stephanie Miller: Jokes McCain Picked Palin ‘To Look At Her A**’ | NewsBusters.org

Out in the snarkiest swamps of liberal talk radio is the Stephanie Miller show, which is very low on policy talk and very high on toilet humor and sex jokes. At the end of the show’s first hour on Tuesday, Miller aired a clip of McCain’s Friday unveiling of Sarah Palin: “Here is Grampy McSame [McCain] introducing his trophy VP before he stepped back to check out her a** for twenty minutes.”

As McCain spoke, the show’s official impressionist, Jim Ward, began impersonating McCain: “My next trophy wife…The middle part of Alaska is a**…and she’s got a terrific one, my friends.” Miller lamely added: “She puts the a** in Al-a**-ka.”

Miller read critical quotes from Paul Begala, Peggy Noonan, and Joe Conason, and said the choice was incredibly desperate.  Then Ward piped up again in his McCain voice: “Desperation, and a desire to look at her a** for hours and hours, my friends.”

Miller wrapped the segment: “We better have fun, Jim, because she may be out by the end of this show.”

The Left wants a “fairness doctrine”, so they can muzzle talk radio, which is predominantly right-leaning. There are several reasons that right-leaning talk radio succeeds, while left-leaning talk radio mostly fails (Air America should be given last rites and planted… They can barely GIVE AWAY advertising, because so few are listening.). The “fairness” doctrine would demand that left leaning broadcasters get as much air time as right leaning ones.

Obviously, that would mean that half of talk radio would be rated G, and the other half would be somewhere between PG and PG-13, with occasional excursions into R ratings.   In this case, though, only (intellectual) children will be listening to the PG-13 stuff.

(Of course, I know better than this.  The real result of the “fairness” doctrine will be the end of talk radio, because no network can afford to devote half its time to programs that don’t attract an audience.  And that’s exactly why the Left is pushing the “fairness” doctrine, to end talk radio as a media force.  Free speech, anyone?)

Hey, all you lefties: aren’t you PROUD that Stephanie Miller is your spokesperson? The elegance of the satire is breathtaking.

Tags: , , , ,


Jul 31 2008

Challenge lies, or ignore them?

Category: Hamas,Hizbullah,Israel,media,middle east,terrorismharmonicminer @ 9:00 am

A writer in the Jerusalem Post observes that US newspapers constantly attack Israel in editorial pages and with slanted, distorted coverage and wonders what the appropriate response is. To defend, or to ignore? It’s hard to know what will be most effective:

Verbal attacks on Israel in US papers and other media outlets are ceaseless, and can be demoralizing. But how do we measure their impact on the average American? Should we simply assume that a pro-Hamas op-ed in The New York Times is far more damaging to Israel’s cause than a local activist’s letter in a minor paper? Perhaps we should assume that Times’ readers are less likely to fall for obvious spin because they are more sophisticated than local media consumers? It’s impossible to be sure.

My inclination, which the writer eventually seems to share, is that if you want to affect public opinion, you have to fight unfair assertions, every single time.

The Bush administration learned, too late, that when you don’t answer outrageous assertions, and those assertions are constantly repeated, they have a way of becoming received wisdom in the relatively uncritical public mind. By the time the Bush administration wised up a bit and began to try to counter the main stream media’s narrative that Bush had lied about weapons of mass destruction, and that the presence of those weapons was the only reason for going into Iraq, it was just too late to affect the public understanding with facts.

People in sympathy with Israel, and Israel itself, need to learn this lesson: absolutely no good comes from “taking the high road” and not responding to outrageous claims. Lies need to be countered, period.

Tags: , , , , ,


Jul 12 2008

The AP, factless AND tactless on Tony Snow’s passing

Category: media,politics,White Househarmonicminer @ 7:51 am

Tony Snow has gone on to his considerable reward. But the AP can’t resist the temptation to take a swipe at President Bush’s former (and best) press secretary:

With a quick-from-the-lip repartee, broadcaster’s good looks and a relentlessly bright outlook, if not always a command of the facts, he became a popular figure around the country to the delight of his White House bosses.

I suppose I should not be surprised at the AP’s editorializing while pretending to do simple reporting. Maybe a couple of examples of “facts” that Snow got wrong? Or is the AP simply referring to the fact that Snow didn’t pretend to know what he didn’t? Is this the AP’s way of characterizing honesty?

Critics suggested that Snow was turning the traditionally informational daily briefing into a personality-driven media event short on facts and long on confrontation. He was the first press secretary, by his own accounting, to travel the country raising money for Republican candidates.

Surely this is the pot calling the kettle black. Everyone with an ounce of sense knows that it is the White House press corps that has turned the daily briefing into “a personality-driven media event short on facts and long on confrontation,” and that this transformation of a once relatively dry information exchange happened long before Tony Snow arrived on the scene. Many reporters “made their careers” by just this method, starting as far back as Dan Rather in the 1970s, and there have been many since, some of whom are still there.

The AP seems shocked that the role of White House Press Secretary is a political one, as well as an informational one. One wonders if they still wear short pants.

Of course, reporters are at their very worst when reporting on other reporters.

We’ll miss you, Tony. A lot.

Tags: , , ,


Jun 17 2008

Guilty until proven innocent: US Marines

Category: Uncategorizedharmonicminer @ 10:02 pm


A look back, and a look forward. The Haditha Marines have mostly been cleared. They behaved professionally and responsibly, doing the best they could in a very difficult situation.

Rep. Jack Murtha (D) is a pig, whose porcine nature is shared by the snuffling press who feed from the same trough of lies and distortions. I donated a little money to the Marines’ defense, as did about a zillion others. I am proud of the fact. Whatever honor Murtha derives from his own military service has been squandered on this debacle. He should spend about a week in sackcloth and ashes in front of the Capitol Building.

And the look forward: no apology will be forthcoming from Murtha or the press. Or, almost worse, there will be a very brief, almost anonymous release from Murtha’s press flacks, and it will get almost no coverage in the media. Perhaps the New York Times will apologize on page 23 just below the used car ads…. but probably not.

Michelle Malkin’s take:

Haditha prosecution goes 0-7. But you won’t see that headline in the same Armageddon-sized font The New York Times used repeatedly when the story first broke.

The Times, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa, and the rest of the anti-war drum-pounders who fueled the smear campaign against the troops two years ago should hang their hands in shame. They won’t, of course. Perpetuating the “cold-blooded Marines” narrative means never having to say you’re sorry.

It means never having to look Lt. Col. Chessani (charges dismissed), Lt. Andrew Grayson (acquitted), Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum (charges dismissed), Capt. Lucas McConnell (charges dismissed), Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt (charges dismissed), Sgt. Sanick Dela Cruz (charges dismissed), Sgt. Frank Wuterich (awaiting trial) and their families in the eyes and apologize for the preemptive character assassination they all faced at the hands of the hyperventilating, noose-hanging press.

Read the whole thing. Ask yourself how you’d feel if the accused was your son, or nephew, or brother, or uncle…. or father. And if, God forbid, the accusations turned out to be true (which, it is becoming very clear, is not the case here), would you feel that your loved one had been fairly treated by Murtha and the press? A Marine who had over-reacted under stress would not deserve this treatment.

These guys were character-assassinated by the very best.

I wonder how Murtha is sleeping these days. Does he have some fantasy where he thinks all the accusations were true, but couldn’t be proved? Does he think he has some special bit of insight and secret information? Is he hopelessly partisan, deep in Bush hatred, or just crazy as a loon? Impossible to say.

This would be a good time for decent people to pray for the falsely accused to be able to reassemble their lives.

Tags: , , ,


Jun 05 2006

Reuters roots for Islamic militia in Somalia?

Category: Uncategorizedharmonicminer @ 8:53 pm

Experts say US funding Somali warlords – Yahoo! News: “(Reuters) – The United States has been funneling more than $100,000 a month to warlords battling Islamist militia in Somalia, according to a Somalia expert who has conferred with the groups in the country.”

Reuters’ leftist slip is showing, as usual. The USA is funding “warlords”, but the Islamists are “militia”… how noble of them!

Reuters names only one source, John Prendergast, a Senior Adviser at the (non-profit) “International Crisis Group.” Prendergast worked in the White House and the State Department in the Clinton administration from 1996-2001, a bit of information Reuters omits, but which bears on the objectivity of Prendergast as the only named source. All the other sources are “anonymous”.

Reuters seems to think it’s bad for the US to fund anti-Islamist groups in Somalia, and implies the UN is investigating US provision of arms to Somalia “warlords”. Outside of the hilarity of the UN investigating anything at all, the obvious point is simple.

Shouldn’t the US do what it can to prevent an Islamist takeover of Somalia, with all the potential for Taliban-style rule that would be a certainty?

Tags: , ,


Jan 30 2005

The Bear Dances and Sings

Category: Uncategorizedharmonicminer @ 2:41 am

CNN and FOX are covering the election in Iraq.

I can only stand in awe of the courage of these determined voters. Their sheer guts and commitment to show up at all should be a lesson to nay-sayers everywhere about what people in this part of the world really want. How many voters would show up in, say, Chicago, in a similar situation? I don’t know… but these Iraqi voters deserve our very highest respect.

CNN’s current online headline is “Iraqis vote amid scattered attacks”. Roughly half the TV coverage from CNN seems to be about the attacks today, but a solid half is about the vote itself.

FOX’s headline is “Iraq’s Historic Vote Begins”. The first paragragh tells of attacks, but also provides context: lots of voters, and many foiled attacks, as well as some successful ones. FOX’s TV coverage is stressing the protection provided by Iraqi forces, police and military, directly around the polling places. FOX has shown many entire families, from elderly to young children (presumably not voting yet…), walking together to polling places… in some cases carrying Iraqi flags, showing thumbs up to the camera, etc.

Both cable networks have provided reasonable coverage on how many Iraqi women are voting, although it seems to have been inadvertent in one CNN report, where the reporter could not be heard over all the women talking in the polling place.

ABCNEWS is carrying a story stressing the attacks, predicting lack of Sunni turnout, stressing how bad the result of a low Sunni turnout will be, etc. Big shock. Little mention of who is providing the election security… mostly Iraqis around the polling places. All attacks listed in GREAT detail.

Another ABC article, IRAQI HISTORY MAY COLOR VIEWS OF ELECTION tries to downplay the importance of a successful election. I consider this to be evidence that the election must be going well in the eyes of the editors.

Tags: , , ,


« Previous Page