Tom Blumer is a contributing editor for NewsBusters.
Tom Blumer has written for several national online publications primarily on business, economics, politics and media bias. He has had his own blog, BizzyBlog.com, since 2005, and has been with NewsBusters since December 2005. Along the way, he's had a decades-long career in accounting, finance, training and development.
Latest from Tom Blumer
Two cheers — and two cheers only — for the National Journal's Ron Fournier.
On Fox News's Special Report with Bret Baier last night, the former Associated Press Washington Bureau chief observed that the Jonathan Gruber videos about how the Affordable Care Act was dishonestly written and promoted, as well as President Barack Obama's reaction to those revelations, demonstrate that he (Obama) "has destroyed the credibility of his administration, himself, and government itself." Fine. But then, imitating the naive lover who won't give up despite constant betrayal in the hit song "I Can't Let Go," Fournier stated that he "would like to see this bill work."
The Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press — the entity which to our great misfortune is considered the de facto news source of record by the nation's establishment press — finally broke down several days ago and mentioned the name "Jonathan Gruber" in a news story.
Of course, the wire service saved Philip Elliott's story for Friday afternoon to minimize its visibility; the time stamp at the AP's national site is 4:20 p.m. ET Friday; that's only a minute later than the 3:19 p.m. CT time stamp found here at the earliest Google News entry I could find. Elliott largely made the story almost entirely about Republicans' and conservatives' reactions to what Gruber has said — as if they're the only ones who should be deeply troubled about Gruber's insulting descriptions of the American people and the fundamental dishonesty involved in drafting and passing the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, in early 2010. But he also quite dishonestly tried to claim that Gruber wasn't even an "architect" of the law (bolds and numbered tags are mine):
On Saturday (at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), I noted the hypocritical fury of Linda Greenhouse at the New York Times that the Supreme Court has taken on the King v. Burwell case over the legality of Obamacare subsidies in states which don't have their own Obamacare exchanges.
I need to address another item of Greenhouse gas contained therein, namely her claim that the Affordable Care Act requires no one to "spend more than 8 percent of his or her income of health insurance." That's only true if one chooses not to get covered.
Greenhouse is absolutely appalled that the King v. Burwell lawsuit has gotten to the Supreme Court. As will be seen, she's also quite selective in her outrage.
I think this makes six videos (CNN says they have Number 4, and I believe this is Number 5) of Obamacare co-architect Jonathan Gruber giving away the Obama administration's comprehensively deceptive game in drafting and promoting the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.
The most relevant 40-second snip is at the YouTube account and a Thursday afternoon post by the indispensable Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit. It's a small portion of a 33-minute June 2012 interview of Gruber at PBS's Frontline. The most important revelation is that President Barack Obama was in the room and actively participating in, if not leading, a discussion about how to effectively take away the tax benefits of the most generous healthcare plans which were then being offered in the marketplace. What resulted is now known as the "Cadillac Tax." But there is much more to that Frontline video.
Amy Crawford of the Associated Press, who wrote the wire service's original Sunday story about a proposed first-in-the-nation ban on the sale of all tobacco products in the town of Westminster, Massachusetts, covered the town's Wednesday night public hearing.
While it's nice that Crawford followed up on her original story, her opening paragraph, based on the facts as I understand them and coverage I have seen elsewhere, was very misleading:
Well, if this doesn't beat all.
Based on excuses provided by 63 people (35 percent) out of a "smallish sample" (I'll say) of 181 nonvoters, the Washington Post's Christopher Ingraham whined on Wednesday (HT Twitchy) about how "scheduling conflicts with work or school" kept people from voting last Tuesday. This alleged problem calls for solutions like "requiring employers to allow flexible scheduling on voting days," "making election day a national holiday," and/or "requiring eligible citizens to vote." Even if you buy the "I was working" excuse — which I don't — Ingraham acts as if other means of voting don't exist, when of course they do.
If Jonathan Gruber, the Obama administration and the establishment press thought that Gruber's faux mea culpa appearance on MSNBC Tuesday afternoon would get them off the hook and avoid the need to deal with and cover the Obamacare architect's exposure of the left's mendacity, they were sadly mistaken.
There's yet another damning "stupid voters" video. Megyn Kelly was all over it Tuesday night, exposing the defiantly silent White House's and others' former financial and emotional love for and dependence on the MIT economist's work.
Far be it from me to talk a leftist columnist out of an ignorant, self-satisfied position which might, if anything, cause his fellow travelers to hit the accelerator a little less aggressively in future political campaigns.
At the Atlantic on Monday afternoon, Richard Reeves, policy director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution, claimed that the left shouldn't be so glum after Tuesday's election results, because "progressive policies are working." His very first graph makes a mockery of his claim:
David Weigel's writeup this afternoon at Bloomberg Politics ("Meet the Mild-Mannered Investment Advisor Who's Humiliating the Administration Over Obamacare") is about the guy who has found at least two incriminating videos of Jonathan Gruber revealing the true intentions behind the Affordable Care Act. In some respects, it's well done and interesting.
What's not well done is Bloomberg's choice of the pull quote to highlight:
A Sunday Associated Press item carried at its national news site informs readers that the town of Westminster in north central Massachusetts is seriously considering a ban on tobacco products. The Boston Globe covered the story in a lengthy report on October 28, and the Washington Post carried a brief item at its GovBeat blog that same day.
None of those three items addressed an obvious question: If it's okay to ban the sale of a product primarily on the basis of the harm it causes when smoked, what is the justification for legalizing marijuana throughout Massachusetts and elsewhere? Many Bay State observers believe, based on the number of nonbinding referenda passed and the changing public mood, that pot legalization is perhaps two years away.
When I saw this item, I thought to myself: "Imagine the ridicule which would shower down on a Republican or conservative presidential administration if they did something so obviously childish and clumsy." But since a Democratic administration is involved, it will more than likely get scant attention or be totally ignored.
What I'm referring to is the White House's inclusion of an artifical "buffering" clip during the first three or so seconds before President Obama's two-minute message advocating regulating the Internet as if it's a public utility. Video follows the jump:
The competition for dumbest quote I have been able to find by a leftist tonight just heated up.
Earlier this evening, I noted that Washington Post columnist David Ignatius on Thursday called President Obama "perhaps the least political president in modern U.S. history." One might think that nothing could possibly top that. Actually, I have found two which belong in the running in one long writeup at NewRepublic.com (HT to emailer "Just the Tip HQ") about Obama's chief adviser, Valerie Jarrett.
On Thursday, the first paragraph of a column by the Washington Post's David Ignatius on what he thinks President Barack Obama's foreign policy might be for the next two years contained what may qualify as the "Notable Quotable" of the year.
The first sentence was a pretty impressive failure at perception: "President Obama looked almost relieved after Tuesday’s election blowout." Look, David, even the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press, noted that Obama "struck a defiant tone." But it's the second sentence of Ignatius's opening paragraph that is the side-splitter (HT Patterico):
Saturday morning, Erica Werner at the Associated Press, aka the Administratino's Press, channeled her inner Nancy Cordes to play "gotcha" with Republicans who won election to the House on Tuesday.
Werner's report essentially regurgitated Cordes's petulance in the CBS reporter's question directed at House Speaker John Boehner on Thursday. Cordes identified supposedly stupid or ill-advised things some of the incoming freshmen have said in the past, while of course not identifying a single similar thing a sitting Democratic Party congressman has said on the floor of the House or in House committee hearings during their tenures. Excerpts follow the jump (bolds and numbered tags are mine):
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Aaron R. Hanlon, an infrequent columnnist at Salon, both have an excuse for Democrats' poor performance in this year's midterm elections: pervasive voter suppression.
You see, the left's new working definition of "voter suppression" — a definition which is never a subject of establishment press scrutiny — is apparently the following: "Many of the people who would ordinarily support us didn't register to vote, and many of our supporters who did register didn't bother to cast a ballot. Ergo, their vote was suppressed."
Late Friday afternoon, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and Republicans in Washington got their first taste of what they will likely see from the supposedly "objective" reporters at the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press, as they cover their relationship with President Obama and his White House apparatachiks during the next two years.
The headline at a story by Nedra Pickler and Erica Wener ("Immigration dispute erupts at White House lunch") and that story's first seven words ("A White House lunch aiming for cooperation") are fundamentally dishonest and untrue, respectively. The article's later text proves both of my contentions.
A search at the Associated Press's national site tonight on "Berlin Wall" (not in quotes) returns 14 stories.
Changing that search to "Berlin Wall Reagan" reduces that number to one. That single story is a short, seven-paragraph item about sections of the wall which are on display in different parts of the world. Reagan's name gets mentioned as follows:
The delusion is strong with this one.
On Friday's Morning Joe program on what remains of MSNBC, Al Sharpton, completely ignoring how late appearances in Maryland and Illinois by President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle coincided with significant deterioration in the situations of Democratic Party gubernatorial candidates in Maryland and Illinois, blamed Bill and Hillary Clinton, and not the Obamas, for Tuesday's Democratic debacle.
That the folks at the Associated Press have had it in for Scott Walker for over 3-1/2 years has been quite obvious. The wire service's reporters, particularly Scott Bauer, have made their personal opposition quite clear, sometimes quite bitterly and often dishonestly, to Walker's Act 10 and other policies in their supposedly "objective" reports.
So it wasn't any surprise, or really even a disappointment, that the wire service's unbylined report out of Washington noting Walker's victory Tuesday evening wouldn't even acknowledge that he "won" — only that he "survived."