10/13/12, "Danish Wind Turbine Company That Received Over $50 Million In Stimulus Lays Off 800 Workers," Breitbart, Tony Lee
"A Danish wind turbine company whose subsidiaries received over $50
million in U.S. stimulus dollars announced on Friday it has cut more
than 800 jobs in the United States and Canada this year and may be
forced to lay off another 800 employees in North America.
This is yet another green energy company that received wasteful stimulus funds and does not even have anything to show for it.
According to Reuters, Vestas, the wind turbine maker, saw its order intake go down by 24 percent during the first half of the year.
"The U.S. wind industry has slowed, largely due to the uncertainty
surrounding the Federal Production Tax Credit extension," said Martha
Wyrsch, head of Vestas-American Wind Technology, Inc.
Vestas said without more tax credits and stimulus funds, the company will have trouble competing.
Vestas executives, according to Reuters, told investors that "it
would stop non-profitable projects," especially in Europe and America,
where demand for its products have plummeted." via Climate Depot
-----------------------------------------------------------------
10/12/12, "Vestas cuts 800 North American jobs as orders slow," Reuters
.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
11,000 rally for Romney in Lebanon, Ohio including Cincinnati Bengals Hall of Famer Munoz, Saturday, October 13
10/13/12, "11,000 Rally for Mitt Romney in Lebanon, Ohio," BattlegroundWatch blog
11,000 rally for Romney in Lebanon, Ohio, Sat., 10/13/12, middle photo of Bengals' Anthony Munoz, from BattlegroundWatch blog (2 more photos at link)
.
11,000 rally for Romney in Lebanon, Ohio, Sat., 10/13/12, middle photo of Bengals' Anthony Munoz, from BattlegroundWatch blog (2 more photos at link)
.
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Benghazi is Osama's revenge on Obama. Why did Obama think Osama would have nothing to say about being used as a re-election prop?
10/13/12, "Benghazi: Osama's Revenge on Obama,
" James Lewis, American Thinker
"Al-Qaeda is very much alive, and America is a paper tiger
.
The Middle East is beginning to fall apart -- Iran just sent a spy drone over Israel's sensitive defense installations, and the IDF waited hours to react; Turkey forced down a Syrian arms plane, and al-Qaeda's Al Zawahiri openly assaulted the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi in a six-hour attack, working through al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM), while the glorious Libyan friends did nothing as our ambassador was being raped and murdered.
The guards called for help, and nobody responded.
In Afghanistan, our soldiers are being murdered by the same
Afghan troops we are training to take over after we leave. They can see the weak horse and the strong horse, and they are trying to tell the strong horse what side they are on. These folks used to be on our side, but they know which way the storm is blowing.
Remember: host governments are always responsible for the safety of accredited diplomats and soldiers. Always, always, always. Embassies have a U.S. Marine color guard -- not for protection, but for a symbolic presence. Host governments have overwhelming power: armies, cops, and a huge intelligence apparatus. In Afghanistan, believe it or not, we are the guests of the regime. If Afghan soldiers are killing us, it's because the regime is trying to save its butt, now that we have bowed down to the Taliban.
When Ayatollah Khomeini staged the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979, he denied any responsibility. Jimmy Carter was weak enough to do nothing for a whole year, when the answer is right in the textbooks: the host government is always responsible for the security of diplomats. As soon as Reagan beat Carter, the U.S. hostages were released pronto, because Khomeini was not ready to die. His point was made.
Interesting footnote: Khomeini's runner to the embassy terrorists was a kid named Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It was a big career move for him.
America may not have a memory, but the Islamists do. They've got our number, and they knew how far to push. They are not interested in you and me -- not yet -- but in the 1.4 billion Muslims who are quietly loving the revenge of Allah. This is how al-Qaeda gets notorious, wealthy, and powerful. This is how Islamists make recruits all over the world, including the West.
Now Islamist throwbacks own Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Gaza. America is asleep at the switch, and Islamic fascists are on the march. Women in the millions are putting on chadors, niqabs, and black tents, not because they want to, but because they are afraid not to. They are right to be afraid. Our raving feminists are silent as the grave.
Remember: both our Cairo Embassy and our Benghazi Consulate were attacked, with a black al-Qaeda flag waving over the ruins for the international cameras. Al-Qaeda's signature is simultaneous attacks in different places. This was the biggest victory for AQ since 9/11/01. We handed it to them. Obama bowed down to King Abdullah in public. Hillary has been videoed a thousand times walking with Huma, both wearing head scarves....
Signals. In the Muslim world, if you send an openly gay ambassador to Libya, you might as well paint a target on him. If you make Hillary -- the betrayed wife of President Bill -- your secstate, expect the outraged patriarchal pride of the throwbacks to take revenge. You think Hillary being secstate is wonderful and progressive, and they take it as a personal insult and demand bloody revenge. They are laughing at her now -- a weak woman with a weaker president.
In Egypt and Libya, our glorified "Arab Spring" buddies did nothing while our sovereign territory went up in flames, our diplomats were shot and abused, and our national security secrets were stolen. So-called "spontaneous protests" exploded in fourteen Muslim countries at the same time as the Cairo and Benghazi assaults. Our diplomats have now been pulled out of a reported 20 Muslim countries, including Tunisia, Mali, Algeria, Libya.
It was the eleventh anniversary of 9/11/01, and our State Department idiotically pulled the U.S. Marines and military contractors out of Libya -- in favor of radical Islamists hired at $13,000 per year. Instead of U.S. Marines to guard the embassies with machine guns those State Department moneys went to Green Chevy Volts.
To show them we mean no harm. How they must be laughing at us.
Hours before the Benghazi attack on Ambassador Chris Stevens, al-Qaeda released a web video from Ayman Al Zawahiri -- bin Laden's second in command. According to the Israeli intelligence-linked news site Debkafile.com:
Why the timing? It was 9/11, hours after the United States held memorial ceremonies for the victims, broadcast around the world.
It may not make sense to us, but it makes all the sense in the world to radical Muslims, al-Qaeda, Taliban, Salafists, Wahhabis, suicidal Twelvers, martyrdom freaks of Hezb'allah, and neo-Ottomans.
There are hundreds of these little sects around the world, all whipped up every Friday by the local imam, sheikh, or other revenge fantasist.
"Al-Qaeda is very much alive, and America is a paper tiger
.
The Middle East is beginning to fall apart -- Iran just sent a spy drone over Israel's sensitive defense installations, and the IDF waited hours to react; Turkey forced down a Syrian arms plane, and al-Qaeda's Al Zawahiri openly assaulted the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi in a six-hour attack, working through al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM), while the glorious Libyan friends did nothing as our ambassador was being raped and murdered.
The guards called for help, and nobody responded.
- A police car fled the scene.
- The other ten cop cars requested by the consulate never showed up.
In Afghanistan, our soldiers are being murdered by the same
Afghan troops we are training to take over after we leave. They can see the weak horse and the strong horse, and they are trying to tell the strong horse what side they are on. These folks used to be on our side, but they know which way the storm is blowing.
Remember: host governments are always responsible for the safety of accredited diplomats and soldiers. Always, always, always. Embassies have a U.S. Marine color guard -- not for protection, but for a symbolic presence. Host governments have overwhelming power: armies, cops, and a huge intelligence apparatus. In Afghanistan, believe it or not, we are the guests of the regime. If Afghan soldiers are killing us, it's because the regime is trying to save its butt, now that we have bowed down to the Taliban.
When Ayatollah Khomeini staged the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979, he denied any responsibility. Jimmy Carter was weak enough to do nothing for a whole year, when the answer is right in the textbooks: the host government is always responsible for the security of diplomats. As soon as Reagan beat Carter, the U.S. hostages were released pronto, because Khomeini was not ready to die. His point was made.
Interesting footnote: Khomeini's runner to the embassy terrorists was a kid named Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It was a big career move for him.
America may not have a memory, but the Islamists do. They've got our number, and they knew how far to push. They are not interested in you and me -- not yet -- but in the 1.4 billion Muslims who are quietly loving the revenge of Allah. This is how al-Qaeda gets notorious, wealthy, and powerful. This is how Islamists make recruits all over the world, including the West.
Now Islamist throwbacks own Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Gaza. America is asleep at the switch, and Islamic fascists are on the march. Women in the millions are putting on chadors, niqabs, and black tents, not because they want to, but because they are afraid not to. They are right to be afraid. Our raving feminists are silent as the grave.
Remember: both our Cairo Embassy and our Benghazi Consulate were attacked, with a black al-Qaeda flag waving over the ruins for the international cameras. Al-Qaeda's signature is simultaneous attacks in different places. This was the biggest victory for AQ since 9/11/01. We handed it to them. Obama bowed down to King Abdullah in public. Hillary has been videoed a thousand times walking with Huma, both wearing head scarves....
Signals. In the Muslim world, if you send an openly gay ambassador to Libya, you might as well paint a target on him. If you make Hillary -- the betrayed wife of President Bill -- your secstate, expect the outraged patriarchal pride of the throwbacks to take revenge. You think Hillary being secstate is wonderful and progressive, and they take it as a personal insult and demand bloody revenge. They are laughing at her now -- a weak woman with a weaker president.
In Egypt and Libya, our glorified "Arab Spring" buddies did nothing while our sovereign territory went up in flames, our diplomats were shot and abused, and our national security secrets were stolen. So-called "spontaneous protests" exploded in fourteen Muslim countries at the same time as the Cairo and Benghazi assaults. Our diplomats have now been pulled out of a reported 20 Muslim countries, including Tunisia, Mali, Algeria, Libya.
It was the eleventh anniversary of 9/11/01, and our State Department idiotically pulled the U.S. Marines and military contractors out of Libya -- in favor of radical Islamists hired at $13,000 per year. Instead of U.S. Marines to guard the embassies with machine guns those State Department moneys went to Green Chevy Volts.
To show them we mean no harm. How they must be laughing at us.
Hours before the Benghazi attack on Ambassador Chris Stevens, al-Qaeda released a web video from Ayman Al Zawahiri -- bin Laden's second in command. According to the Israeli intelligence-linked news site Debkafile.com:
Zawahiri called on the faithful to take revenge on the United States for liquidating one of the organization's top operatives, Abu Yahya al-Libi in June by a US drone in Northwestern Pakistan. Its release was a "go signal" for the hit team to attack the US diplomats in Benghazi.Why Benghazi? Because al-Libi means "the Libyan." Obama's U.S. predator killed Yahya al-Libi in Pakistan, and al-Qaeda takes instant revenge on our top diplomat in Libya.
Why the timing? It was 9/11, hours after the United States held memorial ceremonies for the victims, broadcast around the world.
It may not make sense to us, but it makes all the sense in the world to radical Muslims, al-Qaeda, Taliban, Salafists, Wahhabis, suicidal Twelvers, martyrdom freaks of Hezb'allah, and neo-Ottomans.
There are hundreds of these little sects around the world, all whipped up every Friday by the local imam, sheikh, or other revenge fantasist.
Friday, October 12, 2012
Mitt Romney opens 4 point lead over Obama in Florida, poll taken 10/11, Rasmussen, Likely Florida voters. Romney leads Obama 51-45 on economy
"Given a choice of what the government should do in response to
the economy, 69% think it should cut spending, while only 18% call for
more government spending."
10/12/12, "Election 2012: Florida President, Florida: Romney 51%, Obama 47%," Rasmussen
"Mitt Romney has crossed the 50% mark for the first time to widen his lead to four points in Florida.
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Florida Voters finds Romney with 51% support to President Obama’s 47%. Two percent (2%) remain undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
This is the widest gap between the candidates in surveys this year, but Florida remains a Toss-Up in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections. Prior to these findings, the candidates have been within two points of each other in Florida in every survey since April. Last week, it was Romney 49%, Obama 47%.
Obama carried Florida over John McCain in 2008 by a 51% to 49% margin.
Ninety-six percent (96%) of likely voters in the Sunshine State say they are certain to vote in this year’s election. Among these voters, it’s Romney 51%, Obama 47%.
Ninety-two percent (92%) of likely Florida voters say they have already made up their minds which candidate they will vote for. Romney leads 52% to 48% among these voters.
The survey of 750 Likely Voters in Florida was conducted on October 11, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Florida voters now trust Romney more than Obama 51% to 45% when it comes to handling the economy. The GOP challenger has a narrower 51% to 47% lead in voter trust in the area of national security. This is comparable to findings among all voters nationally.
Also in line with national findings, 44% in Florida worry that the federal government will do too much in responding to the nation’s current economic problems, while 39% fear the government will not do enough. Given a choice of what the government should do in response to the economy, 69% think it should cut spending, while only 18% call for more government spending....
The government jobs report released on Friday in which unemployment fell below 8% for the first time in three-and-a-half-years has not changed economic perceptions in Florida. Just 15% rate the U.S. economy as good or excellent, while 46% think it’s in poor shape. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say the economy is getting better, but 41% believe it is getting worse.
Forty-eight percent (48%) of Florida voters approve of the job the president is doing, with 32% who Strongly Approve. Fifty-two percent (52%) disapprove of his job performance, including 45% who Strongly Disapprove.
Senior citizens remain strongly supportive of Romney, while younger voters support the president just as strongly. Obama leads 54% to 38% among voters n Florida not affiliated with either of the major political parties.
Along with Florida, Colorado, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin are Toss-Ups. Romney leads in Arizona, Indiana, Montana and North Dakota. Obama is ahead in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Washington."
.
.
10/12/12, "Election 2012: Florida President, Florida: Romney 51%, Obama 47%," Rasmussen
"Mitt Romney has crossed the 50% mark for the first time to widen his lead to four points in Florida.
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Florida Voters finds Romney with 51% support to President Obama’s 47%. Two percent (2%) remain undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
This is the widest gap between the candidates in surveys this year, but Florida remains a Toss-Up in the Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Projections. Prior to these findings, the candidates have been within two points of each other in Florida in every survey since April. Last week, it was Romney 49%, Obama 47%.
Obama carried Florida over John McCain in 2008 by a 51% to 49% margin.
Ninety-six percent (96%) of likely voters in the Sunshine State say they are certain to vote in this year’s election. Among these voters, it’s Romney 51%, Obama 47%.
Ninety-two percent (92%) of likely Florida voters say they have already made up their minds which candidate they will vote for. Romney leads 52% to 48% among these voters.
The survey of 750 Likely Voters in Florida was conducted on October 11, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Florida voters now trust Romney more than Obama 51% to 45% when it comes to handling the economy. The GOP challenger has a narrower 51% to 47% lead in voter trust in the area of national security. This is comparable to findings among all voters nationally.
Also in line with national findings, 44% in Florida worry that the federal government will do too much in responding to the nation’s current economic problems, while 39% fear the government will not do enough. Given a choice of what the government should do in response to the economy, 69% think it should cut spending, while only 18% call for more government spending....
The government jobs report released on Friday in which unemployment fell below 8% for the first time in three-and-a-half-years has not changed economic perceptions in Florida. Just 15% rate the U.S. economy as good or excellent, while 46% think it’s in poor shape. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say the economy is getting better, but 41% believe it is getting worse.
Forty-eight percent (48%) of Florida voters approve of the job the president is doing, with 32% who Strongly Approve. Fifty-two percent (52%) disapprove of his job performance, including 45% who Strongly Disapprove.
Senior citizens remain strongly supportive of Romney, while younger voters support the president just as strongly. Obama leads 54% to 38% among voters n Florida not affiliated with either of the major political parties.
Along with Florida, Colorado, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin are Toss-Ups. Romney leads in Arizona, Indiana, Montana and North Dakota. Obama is ahead in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Washington."
.
.
Obama vows to divert even more US taxpayer dollars to green scams if re-elected even though US CO2 has dropped drastically, is heading lower, and he knows it because he said so on August 28, 2012
10/11/12, "Obama: Carbon ‘Eating Our Planet,’ ‘A Threat to Our Children’s Future’," CNS News, Fred Lucas
"President Barack Obama warned his supporters about the threat of global warming and vowed that more money to subsidize green energy firms would prevent it.
“By the way, yes, my plan will reduce the carbon pollution that is eating our planet
because climate change is not a hoax,” Obama said at a campaign rally at the Bank United Arena at the University of Miami. “More droughts and hurricanes and wildfires, that’s not a joke. That’s a threat to our children’s future, and we can do something about it.”
Obama said that he planned to spend more money to subsidize green projects
such as wind and solar if elected to a second term."...via Climate Depot
===================================
At least some of the good news about the US atmosphere has reached Pres. Obama because he referenced it in a speech on Aug. 28. In the speech he used the term 'greenhouse gases' though the recent AP report about the 20 year drop specifically cites CO2:
8/16/12, AP: "In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years."...
From Pres. Obama's speech:
8/28/12, at Iowa State: "We’re on track to emit fewer greenhouse gases this year than we have in nearly 20 years. You can keep those trends going."
----------------------------------------------
The NY Times noted Obama didn't connect the meaning of these scientific findings to ordinary Americans on whose backs they were obtained.
The NY Times says:
8/28/12, "He did not note the role of the recession, with its attendant drop in manufacturing and car and truck trips."
-----------------------------------------------------
More on the US CO2 drop:
6/4/12, "Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006," Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage
"Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord."...
---------------------------------------
For those unaware of the good news, US CO2 emissions have dropped steadily since at least 2006 and are going lower. This has even been acknowledged in the NY Times. Whatever weather the US is having, it can't possibly be the result of excess CO2.
Other countries' CO2 hasn't dropped despite hundreds of billions spent on cap and trade and extra taxes. This isn't to say the US hasn't become partners with the 'climate' industry. Trillions have been taken from US taxpayers for climate expenses via outright agency budget allocations, tax subsidies, diversion of US military to climate or green projects, countless federal regulations, vast sums shipped out in foreign aid for 'climate' endeavors, etc. Devoting 13 federal agencies to 'climate' matters is hardly 'lagging' in action.
Global Warming 'action' was institutionalized in US government in 1990 by George Bush the 1st in the "U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990." (He mentions CO2 near the end). The US even exports fuel now.
.
.
"President Barack Obama warned his supporters about the threat of global warming and vowed that more money to subsidize green energy firms would prevent it.
“By the way, yes, my plan will reduce the carbon pollution that is eating our planet
because climate change is not a hoax,” Obama said at a campaign rally at the Bank United Arena at the University of Miami. “More droughts and hurricanes and wildfires, that’s not a joke. That’s a threat to our children’s future, and we can do something about it.”
Obama said that he planned to spend more money to subsidize green projects
such as wind and solar if elected to a second term."...via Climate Depot
===================================
At least some of the good news about the US atmosphere has reached Pres. Obama because he referenced it in a speech on Aug. 28. In the speech he used the term 'greenhouse gases' though the recent AP report about the 20 year drop specifically cites CO2:
8/16/12, AP: "In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years."...
From Pres. Obama's speech:
8/28/12, at Iowa State: "We’re on track to emit fewer greenhouse gases this year than we have in nearly 20 years. You can keep those trends going."
----------------------------------------------
The NY Times noted Obama didn't connect the meaning of these scientific findings to ordinary Americans on whose backs they were obtained.
The NY Times says:
8/28/12, "He did not note the role of the recession, with its attendant drop in manufacturing and car and truck trips."
-----------------------------------------------------
More on the US CO2 drop:
6/4/12, "Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006," Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage
"Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord."...
---------------------------------------
For those unaware of the good news, US CO2 emissions have dropped steadily since at least 2006 and are going lower. This has even been acknowledged in the NY Times. Whatever weather the US is having, it can't possibly be the result of excess CO2.
Other countries' CO2 hasn't dropped despite hundreds of billions spent on cap and trade and extra taxes. This isn't to say the US hasn't become partners with the 'climate' industry. Trillions have been taken from US taxpayers for climate expenses via outright agency budget allocations, tax subsidies, diversion of US military to climate or green projects, countless federal regulations, vast sums shipped out in foreign aid for 'climate' endeavors, etc. Devoting 13 federal agencies to 'climate' matters is hardly 'lagging' in action.
Global Warming 'action' was institutionalized in US government in 1990 by George Bush the 1st in the "U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990." (He mentions CO2 near the end). The US even exports fuel now.
.
.
State Dept. officials say Benghazi consulate wasn't attacked because of video
10/10/12, "State Dept. officials: Libya consulate wasn’t attacked because of video," Poynter.org, Andrew Beaujon
.
.
Why wasn't Libya hearing on page A1 of NY Times? Because NY Times sides with all powerful government against the people. As such the NY Times is a threat to every American. The main purpose of the NY Times is to re-elect its business partner, the Obama administration
Assassinations of Americans under Obama's protection must be hushed up:
10/11/12, "Why Wasn’t Libya Hearing on Page A1 of The Times?"
NY Times Public Editor, Margaret, Sullivan
"Stories about Wednesday’s Congressional hearing on Libya were prominently displayed on the front pages of major newspapers throughout the United States on Thursday morning.
The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post, for example, both led with the story, meaning that editors placed it in the primary news position on their front pages.
But The New York Times was not among them
. The six stories on The Times’s front page included one on affirmative action at universities, one on Lance Armstrong’s drug allegations, two related to the presidential election, one on taped phone calls at JPMorgan Chase, and one on a Tennessee woman who died of meningitis. The major artwork on Page A1 was from Syria, and the only mention of the hearing on Libya came in a one-paragraph summary at the bottom, leading readers to a well-displayed story on Page A3.
I talked with Jill Abramson, the executive editor, about the decision, which she said she may have set in motion while running the morning news meeting on Wednesday.
“I said that I wanted us to weigh the news value against the reality that Congressional hearings are not all about fact-finding,” she said. In other words, they are often deeply politicized.
She described The Times’s Libya coverage in recent weeks as “excellent and very muscular,” and she said that for her and the managing editor Dean Baquet, “it’s been one of the absolute key stories – getting to the bottom of what happened and why.”
She suggested that she puts more emphasis on The Times’s original reporting. “We have done a lot on the security issues in Libya and will continue, with our own reporters, to pursue this,” she said.
Mr. Baquet, who ran the afternoon news meeting at which the decision was made, said the reasoning was simple enough: “I didn’t think there was anything significantly new in it,” he said.
Like Ms. Abramson, he was wary of the political nature of the hearing, noting that “It’s three weeks before the election and it’s a politicized thing, but if they had made significant news, we would have put it on the front.”
And, he added, “There were six better stories.”
But many readers wrote to me Thursday morning in dismay. They were disturbed not only by the lack of Page 1 coverage, but also by what they see as not enough attention paid to Libya and the events surrounding the fatal attack on the United States Consulate in Benghazi.
This e-mail, from Brendan DuBois of Exeter, N.H., was typical:
I can’t think of many journalistic subjects that are more important right now, or more deserving of aggressive reporting." via Free Republic
=========================================
The NY Times has downplayed the entire Libya scandal, not just its congressional hearings:
9/27/12, "Pat Caddell Says: Media Have Become “Enemy of the American People"," Accuracy in Media, Roger Aronoff
"“We’ve had nine day of lies over what happened because they can’t dare say it’s a terrorist attack, and the press won’t push this,” said Caddell. “Yesterday there was not a single piece in The New York Times over the question of Libya. Twenty American embassies, yesterday, are under attack. None of that is on the national news. None of it is being pressed in the papers.”
Caddell added that it is one thing for the news to have a biased view, but “It is another thing to specifically decide that you will not tell the American people information they have a right to know.”
He closed his talk with these words: “ The press’s job is to stand in the ramparts and protect the liberty and freedom of all of us from a government and from organized governmental power.
When they desert those ramparts and go to serve— to decide that they will now become an active participants—when they decide that their job is not simply to tell you who you may vote for, and who you may not, but, worse—and this is the danger of the last two weeks—what truth that you may know, as an American, and what truth you are not allowed to know, they have, then, made themselves a fundamental threat to the democracy, and, in my opinion, made themselves the enemy of the American people.
And it is a threat to the very future of this country if…we allow this stuff to go on, and…we’ve crossed a whole new and frightening slide on the slippery slope this last two weeks, and it needs to be talked about.”"
.
10/11/12, "Why Wasn’t Libya Hearing on Page A1 of The Times?"
NY Times Public Editor, Margaret, Sullivan
"Stories about Wednesday’s Congressional hearing on Libya were prominently displayed on the front pages of major newspapers throughout the United States on Thursday morning.
The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post, for example, both led with the story, meaning that editors placed it in the primary news position on their front pages.
But The New York Times was not among them
. The six stories on The Times’s front page included one on affirmative action at universities, one on Lance Armstrong’s drug allegations, two related to the presidential election, one on taped phone calls at JPMorgan Chase, and one on a Tennessee woman who died of meningitis. The major artwork on Page A1 was from Syria, and the only mention of the hearing on Libya came in a one-paragraph summary at the bottom, leading readers to a well-displayed story on Page A3.
I talked with Jill Abramson, the executive editor, about the decision, which she said she may have set in motion while running the morning news meeting on Wednesday.
“I said that I wanted us to weigh the news value against the reality that Congressional hearings are not all about fact-finding,” she said. In other words, they are often deeply politicized.
She described The Times’s Libya coverage in recent weeks as “excellent and very muscular,” and she said that for her and the managing editor Dean Baquet, “it’s been one of the absolute key stories – getting to the bottom of what happened and why.”
She suggested that she puts more emphasis on The Times’s original reporting. “We have done a lot on the security issues in Libya and will continue, with our own reporters, to pursue this,” she said.
Mr. Baquet, who ran the afternoon news meeting at which the decision was made, said the reasoning was simple enough: “I didn’t think there was anything significantly new in it,” he said.
Like Ms. Abramson, he was wary of the political nature of the hearing, noting that “It’s three weeks before the election and it’s a politicized thing, but if they had made significant news, we would have put it on the front.”
And, he added, “There were six better stories.”
But many readers wrote to me Thursday morning in dismay. They were disturbed not only by the lack of Page 1 coverage, but also by what they see as not enough attention paid to Libya and the events surrounding the fatal attack on the United States Consulate in Benghazi.
This e-mail, from Brendan DuBois of Exeter, N.H., was typical:
After a day of Congressional testimony where two public officials outlined the numerous times that their request for extra security for our diplomatic offices in Libya were ignored, time and time again, no doubt contributing to the slaughter of four Americans on 9/11/12, and when it was clear that the days of stories coming from the White House that the attack began after a nonexistent spontaneous demonstration outside of the U.S. Consulate …Another reader, Sharon Hastings of St. Petersburg, Fla., wrote as follows (her e-mail is abridged here):
The lead story in today’s paper is about Lance Armstrong. Lance Armstrong!
The Libya story isn’t even on Page 1. It’s on Page 3.
What does this say about The Times’s news judgment?
- I am writing to say how shocked I am at The NYT’s coverage of the Benghazi events and, more so, the coverage of the hearings. This is a major scandal and The Times has more often than not buried the story. The hearings, which made major revelations, are presented as simply partisan wrangling. The major elements on the story this morning are not brought up until the end of the story.
- This is deeply shameful, and it reinforces the widely held perception of The Times as deeply partisan — especially before the election. Does The Times truly believe — can it possibly believe — that it is neutral in its news coverage? Either The Times is deeply deluded or extremely cynical in its claims in this regard. Sadly I suspect cynicism.
I can’t think of many journalistic subjects that are more important right now, or more deserving of aggressive reporting." via Free Republic
=========================================
The NY Times has downplayed the entire Libya scandal, not just its congressional hearings:
9/27/12, "Pat Caddell Says: Media Have Become “Enemy of the American People"," Accuracy in Media, Roger Aronoff
"“We’ve had nine day of lies over what happened because they can’t dare say it’s a terrorist attack, and the press won’t push this,” said Caddell. “Yesterday there was not a single piece in The New York Times over the question of Libya. Twenty American embassies, yesterday, are under attack. None of that is on the national news. None of it is being pressed in the papers.”
Caddell added that it is one thing for the news to have a biased view, but “It is another thing to specifically decide that you will not tell the American people information they have a right to know.”
He closed his talk with these words: “ The press’s job is to stand in the ramparts and protect the liberty and freedom of all of us from a government and from organized governmental power.
When they desert those ramparts and go to serve— to decide that they will now become an active participants—when they decide that their job is not simply to tell you who you may vote for, and who you may not, but, worse—and this is the danger of the last two weeks—what truth that you may know, as an American, and what truth you are not allowed to know, they have, then, made themselves a fundamental threat to the democracy, and, in my opinion, made themselves the enemy of the American people.
And it is a threat to the very future of this country if…we allow this stuff to go on, and…we’ve crossed a whole new and frightening slide on the slippery slope this last two weeks, and it needs to be talked about.”"
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
About Me
- susan
- I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout and World War II Air Force pilot born in Brooklyn, finally settling in New Jersey.