 [1] |
|
Global Warming Report Distorted; "Have to" Have Price Caps?; Washington Post Ombudsman Scolded Paper on Civil Rights Leak
Schieffer's assertion came after Daschle suggested that instead of having the Senate pass a price caps bill, the Senate should pass the Feinstein bill, which says to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), 'look, do what you're supposed to do.' Come in and regulate this in a way that allows adequate supply and some price relief." Schieffer followed up: "I want to go back to this price caps. As Gloria pointed out, you have said this is not a panacea, but if FERC, if the energy regulatory agency does not do something in the meantime in between time, don't you just almost have to do that as a short-term solution?" Daschle agreed: "Well, Bob, I don't think you probably have much choice at that point, but I do think that we've got to force FERC to do its job. That's what they're there for. Why have a FERC if it doesn't do its job in crises like this? But certainly if that fails, I really don't know if there's much other choice." Co-host Gloria Borger's next question also pushed Daschle from the left to do something liberal sooner: "There's a lot of talk that Democrats are going to revisit this tax cut at some unspecified point in the future. What are you waiting for? Why not do it now?"
He concluded the June 10 Face the Nation with
his tribute to the First Amendment: Except, apparently, when the powerful congressional leader in question is just trying to silence those outside the media. Back on March 25 Schieffer cheered on the
efforts to pass McCain's campaign finance regulatory scheme:
While NBC's David Gregory declared that the report concluded "humans are playing a large role" in global warming, on the same day the Reason Public Policy Institute (RPPI) announced that it "applauded a report by the National Academy of Sciences for its willingness to go against the tide of political correctness and point out the many weaknesses in the current scientific understanding of climate change." Dr. Kenneth Green, Director of Environmental Programs at RPPI, contended: "The real news in the NAS report is their admission that there isn't enough scientific data to unequivocally link humans and climate change. The NAS report is the first mainstream report that doesn't soft-peddle uncertainty." But none of that uncertainty made it into NBC's story. To read the analysis from the RPPI, which the MRC's Rich Noyes brought to my attention, go to: http://www.rppi.org/rr103.html [2] To refresh yourself about the liberal environmentalist line espoused on June 7 on ABC and CBS, go to: http://www.mrc.org/news/cyberalert/2001/cyb20010608.asp#4 [3] Tom Brokaw introduced the June 8 NBC Nightly
News piece of propaganda: David Gregory laid out the dire prediction in
a one-sided story: "The President's latest environmental headache --
what to do about global warming -- proving to be a migraine. This week's
report shows the dramatic climate change caused by the emission of
heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide from cars and industrial sites is
worsening. And scientists conclude humans are playing a large role. The
potential effects daunting, including more severe weather from excessive
rain and flooding to severe drought, which could affect agricultural
production and food prices." An image he wouldn't have to defend but for this kind of ongoing distorted reporting. National Review Online has posted an illuminating piece by Paul Georgia in which he expressed concern about how the NAS analysis has been reported: "It is 23 pages of linguistic trickery that when parsed says little. It is likely to alarm those who don't understand scientific methodology or the nuances of the global warming debate, i.e., most of the public. Judging by the way it has been reported in the press, this is clearly an area of concern." Georgia concluded: "There is no smoking gun here. The best available evidence still suggests that the amount of warming likely to occur over the next 100 years will be trivial." To read Georgia's analysis, go to:
Getler, who even acknowledged that the Washington Times wasn't as gullible as the Post, concluded the "Post didn't distinguish itself" in how it handled "the stupid and destructive leak." For a rundown of television network coverage of the report's premature release, along with excerpts from the Washington Post and New York Times stories, refer back to the June 6 CyberAlert: http://www.mrc.org/news/cyberalert/2001/cyb20010606.asp#4 [5] Now, an excerpt from Getler's June 10 ombudsman column: ....Last week the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and The Post demonstrated the pitfalls of leaking and reporting on leaks.... On Tuesday's front page, The Post reported that the commission had concluded, in its "167-page final draft report obtained by The Washington Post," that Florida's electoral conduct was marked by "injustice, ineptitude and inefficiency" that unfairly penalized minority voters, and that Gov. Jeb Bush and State Secretary Katherine Harris had allowed disparate treatment of voters. As it turns out, The Post "obtained" the draft report along with the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. But readers in the Washington area who looked at the New York Times found a different treatment of the report. The Times, under a headline noting that this was a "divided" civil rights panel, reported that not all members of the eight-member commission were involved in putting together the report and that the two Republican-appointed members had not been consulted. The Times quoted one of the Republican appointees as saying the evidence does not support the conclusions; he linked the findings to the political agenda of the chairwoman, Mary Frances Berry, who supported former vice president Al Gore. The other Republican described the timing of the leak -- before consultation with other commissioners -- as "a procedural travesty."... In case you missed the New York Times, you could have read the Washington Times. Its reporters didn't obtain the report but, not surprisingly, knew of the budding controversy. The next day, while The Post was catching up, but not on the front page, with the dissident Republican-appointed members of the commission (which has a majority of four Democrats, with the others Republicans and independents), the New York Times had moved on to Gov. Bush's scathing letter to the commission denouncing its findings. Not a word in The Post. By Wednesday, the handling of the report was also front-page news in the Washington Times and the subject of a critical editorial in the Wall Street Journal. The cynical reader might say: "Well, what else is new about that line-up?" But that is way too cynical. The question of what really happened to Florida's minority voters is one of the most important and profound issues still lingering from the unprecedented confusion of the 2000 election. This was a stupid and destructive leak, no matter where it originated. It undermines the credibility of the commission and politicizes and diverts attention from what should have been an authoritative and inclusive final report. It also may diminish and distort the coverage that comes after the official release. The Post didn't distinguish itself either. It should have done more reporting about this certain-to-be controversial report and, in a case like this, should not have been a party to nondisclosure about who did the leaking. END of Excerpt For Getler's column in full, go to:
MRC analyst Jessica Anderson caught this exchange on the June 8 broadcast: Sawyer: "People magazine, talk about
'Oops! They Did It Again,' which is what they call the cover of the
magazine on the Bush daughters. Oops, People magazine did it again and put
presidential daughters on the cover and I always think, give them a break,
give them a life, and you?" Rewind the videotape to Thursday, May 31, a
morning when Elizabeth Vargas was filling in for Sawyer. Vargas announced
just minutes into the show: For Vargas the answer was an emphatic yes as she proceeded to outline what happened before interviewing Dallas Morning News reporter Wayne Slater about it as well as Lisa Caputo, the former Press Secretary to First Lady Hillary Clinton. Sawyer should be looking closer to home for someone to criticize if she thinks common teenage activities by the Bush daughters should not be news.
The disclosure is buried deep within a lengthy June 8 story by Jonathan Osborne. An excerpt: ....According to police reports obtained Thursday by the Austin American-Statesman, the party sat down at a table on the lower level of the bar. The bartender recognized Jenna Bush and told the waitress to ask everyone at the table for identification. The three women -- the Bush twins and 20-year-old Jesse Day-Wickham -- handed their driver's licenses to the waitress, the reports said. After the waitress questioned the license presented by the girl in the halter top -- later identified as Jenna Bush -- she asked [Mia] Lawrence, the restaurant manager, to double-check the identification. Lawrence told Jenna Bush she would not be served alcohol.... The waitress brought three margaritas and three tequila shots to Barbara Bush, Day-Wickham and an unidentified man with them, according to police reports. The bartender told police he kept "vigil on the table...to make sure they did not slip parts or all of any drink to Jenna Bush." After other patrons pointed out that Jenna Bush's twin sister, Barbara, was at the table and was drinking, Lawrence called 911. By the time the first officer was dispatched at 10:34 p.m., "the tequila shots were all gone and...each of the three margaritas were at least partially consumed," the waitress told police. [Clay] Crabb and fellow officer Clifford Rogers met Lawrence at the entrance to the restaurant and were headed inside when the Secret Service agent tapped Crabb on the shoulder and asked "if there was a disturbance that they needed to know about," the reports state.... He [a Secret Service agent] brought the group out the front door of the restaurant, and they were getting into the Jeep when the officers told them to stop. Rogers asked Jenna Bush for the identification she used when she attempted to purchase the margarita. The report says she handed it over and started crying. "She then stated that I do not have any idea what it is like to be a college student and not be able to do any thing that other students get to do," Rogers wrote in his report. [Austin police sergeant Rodney] Keene wrote in his report that he asked Lawrence what she wanted police to do. "She said, 'I want them to get into big trouble,'" Keene wrote. Keene wrote that he told Lawrence "we would handle the situation the same way we would for any person under those circumstances, which was to confiscate the fake ID and turn them loose."... END Excerpt To read the entire story, go to: http://www.austin360.com/statesman/editions/friday/news_1.html [7] For the raw text of the Austin Police Department reports: http://www.austin360.com/local/partners/aas/metro/060801/apdreport.html [8]
On Friday's Washington Week in Review on PBS, Berke held up Danforth as an expert on where the GOP should go: "Former Senator Jack Danforth, who's a pretty respected conservative, told me I'm worried that the party is becoming too narrow." Just how "conservative" was Danforth in the Senate? In his last year in office, 1994, he earned mere 48 percent rating from the American Conservative Union while the group assessed Missouri colleague Kit Bond at 83 percent. ACU does not have a lifetime average for Danforth on its Web site, so I totaled his ratings from 1989 to 1994, divided by six and determined his average stood at 61 percent over his last term, hardly a conservative score. While his successor, John Ashcroft, earned a measly rating of 3 percent from the left-wing Americans for Democratic Action, the group approved of Danforth's voting 29 percent of the time over his Senate career.
Rather read aloud these Ratherisms proposed by Kilborn: -- "This election is tighter than Al
Roker's cummerbund." Kilborn wondered: "Which one would you
use?" Kilborn soon reminded Rather how he once signed off with the word "courage." Rather updated Kilborn, explaining he now ends the CBS Evening News: "And that's part of our world tonight." Off of a card, Rather then enunciated this recommended sign off: "I'm Dan Rather. And I made up the last three stories." On some nights that's not far off. -- Brent Baker [9] >>>
Support the MRC, an educational foundation dependent upon contributions
which make CyberAlert possible, by providing a tax-deductible
donation. Use the secure donations page set up for CyberAlert
readers and subscribers: >>>To subscribe to CyberAlert, send a
blank e-mail to:
mrccyberalert-subscribe >>>You
can learn what has been posted each day on the MRC's Web site by
subscribing to the "MRC Web Site News" distributed every weekday
afternoon. To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: cybercomment@mrc.org [11].
Or, go to: http://www.mrc.org/newsletters [12].<<< |
"Don't
you just almost have to" impose price caps on California electricity
prices "as a short-term solution?" So argued CBS's Bob
Schieffer in advancing the liberal thinking as reasonable and inevitable
in an interview with Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle on Sunday's Face
the Nation.
Freedom
of speech is vital, but only for members of the media. Or so it seems that
is Bob Schieffer's reasoning. Compare his impassioned defense of media
rights against any infringement with how just two-and-a-half months ago he
praised the Senate for taking up McCain's campaign finance reform bill
which would put restrictions on who could run television ads before
elections.
With an
over-hyped and distorted take on the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
global warming report, on Friday night the NBC Nightly News caught up with
ABC's World News Tonight and the CBS Evening News which had run
similarly exaggerated stories on Thursday night that advanced the liberal
environmentalist spin.
The
Washington Post's ombudsman took the newspaper to task for how it
advanced the political agenda of liberals on the U.S. Civil Rights
Commission by running a front page story based on a draft report about the
Florida election. Michael Getler noted how, unlike the Post, the New York
Times pointed out that the Republican members hadn't even seen the
draft, "quoted one of the Republican appointees as saying the
evidence does not support the conclusions; he linked the findings to the
political agenda of the chairwoman, Mary Frances Berry, who supported
former Vice President Al Gore."
We can
publicize the underage drinking of the Bush daughter, but you shouldn't.
Eight days after ABC's Good Morning America devoted a full and prominent
7am half hour segment to the Bush daughters, complete with interviews with
two guests, GMA co-host Diane Sawyer scolded People magazine for featuring
Jenna and Barbara on its cover. Sawyer bemoaned how People "put
presidential daughters on the cover and I always think, give them a break,
give them a life." Colleague Charles Gibson agreed.
Speaking
of the case of the Bush daughters, the MRC's Rich Noyes alerted me to a
story in Friday's Austin American-Statesman which revealed that when a
police officer asked the restaurant manager, who had already taken the
unusual action of calling 911, what she wanted the police to do about
Jenna and Barbara, she responded: "I want them to get into big
trouble."
Former
Republican Senator John Danforth a "respected conservative"
authority? He is from the perspective of New York Times Washington Bureau
Chief Richard Berke.
Appearing
on CBS's Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn on Friday night, Dan Rather
read aloud some suggested "Ratherisms" and uttered another wacky
one himself before Kilborn got him to announce a possible new sign-off
about making up stories.