From the Annals of Colossal Republican Nerve & Media Failure

From the NY Times article: “The president [Addington] said violated constitutional law. ‘I’m kind of surprised he did it, because more so than most presidents, this guy has a personal ability to assess the constitutional implications,’ Mr. Addington said, referring to Mr. Obama’s experience as a teacher of constitutional law. ‘It’s flabbergasting and, to be honest, a little chilling.’”

Nowhere in the following paragraphs does reporter Weisman point to the appalling and rich irony that this statement was made by a veteran of an administration that never failed to arrogate more power to itself. Surely, Weisman could have pointed at this without injecting the dreaded appearance of undue opinion-making into his piece. His editor should have insisted on more perspective in the story. It is journalism like this that makes news consumers like me disgusted with the New York Times and other media that consistently refuse to point out self-serving and tendentious statements made by partisan sources. // more. . .

Is the FBI probing Bain Capital?

A letter the Federal Bureau of Investigation sent in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request suggests that an investigation of Bain Capital–the company that Mitt Romney worked at for many years, and from which the New York Times has reported continues to receive significant compensation–is ongoing or possibly commencing within the Bureau. The letter, viewable on Scribd.com, has had the name of the person requesting information redacted, as well as the date it was written. The top of the letter reads “Subject: Bain Capital” The relevant paragraph in the letter, signed by the FBI’s David Hardy, Records/Information Dissemination Section Chief reads,

“I have determined that the records responsive to your request are law enforcement records; that there is a pending or prospective law enforcement proceeding relevant to these responsive records; and that the release of the information contained in these responsive records could reasonably be expected to interfere with the enforcement proceedings.” // see letter in post . . .

The 99% at the NY Times


Since I’m an optimist, I’ll offer a hopeful observation that this labor conflict at the Times ought to make the paper’s coverage of the #OWS Movement more respectful and less dismissive, as so much of their reporting has been over the past few months, like this snarky article by Ginia Bellafante from last September. I’ll be watching for any change of tone, even as I realize my optimism is probably unwarranted. // more. . .

George W. Bush, Skunk at the Party

Though Repub officials and candidates would clearly prefer to see the rest of the country forget about George W. Bush, all current polling shows that much of the country continues to hold him responsible for our economic troubles. Meanwhile, Repubs, hoping to fumigate the bad odor of Bush from the midst of voters are quick to claim that any mention by President Obama of the Bush years is sour grapes or somehow offensive. That’s crap, and the president should not refrain from mentioning the preceding administration when necessary, but it can be handled well by national DEMs and articulate surrogates. All supporters of the president should make sure the country remembers the twisted, ideological partisanship of the Bush administration, the nightmare at the beginning of this century, lest the country saddle itself with a replay of Republican extremism in the White House.

Media Organizations Inadvertently Pranking Themselves

Carl Franzen of TPM’s IdeaLab reports that for several hours today News Corp. was erroneously corroborating that the Twitter handle of @wendi_deng was in Twitter-speak a ‘verified account’. Turns out they were wrong, as was Twitter. . . . I detest seeing errors in books I’ve published–I get sick to my stomach the first time I see an error in a book I’ve edited–so my outlook here is informed by that. And yet, I know that I am fallible, along with other people, and that we’re all probably more mistake-prone in our screen-dominated age than in eras past. Mistakes will continue to occur in communications. But what’s inexcusable is to make errors on top of errors. Both companies here failed as organizations to correctly assess the matter at hand. I guess you might say they’re simply too complex to be simple when they need to be. // more. . .

Greg Sargent Nails the GOP Plan to Unseat Pres. Obama

Now, according to Sargent’s cogent analysis, those same Repubs plan to channel the electorate into blaming President Obama for supposedly falling short of what he’d pledged to accomplish–and which a clear majority of the country was, and may well still be, eager for him to achieve. Apart from the transparent sabotage of the president and the economy that’s been the undeniable plan of the Repubs, it was never likely that Barack Obama could in four years repair what had been in broken over the previous eight years. This among many reasons is why I will work for the president to give him, and the country, the second term he needs to really do the job. Meantime, I’ll be reading Greg Sargent for lucid analysis of the shifting political tides. Thank you, Greg! // more . . .