Patterico's Pontifications

7/30/2005

Fringe Leftist: MSNBC Makes Up Thunderstorm to Support Bush

Filed under: Humor,Morons — Patterico @ 6:27 pm

I have a Bloglines folder labeled “Morons,” which contains exactly two blogs. I almost never link either, but this time I can’t resist.

I am going to quote the silly post and comments in full, in case they are later altered:

(more…)

Opening Carpool Lanes to Hybrids: Not a Good Idea

Filed under: Public Policy — Patterico @ 12:12 pm

The L.A. Times reports:

Motorists who drive solo in fuel-efficient hybrid vehicles will gain access to carpool lanes in California under a massive transportation bill approved by Congress on Friday that includes billions of dollars for projects statewide.

This change is not likely to have the impact that its proponents expect.

(more…)

Big Media: Anonymity Good . . . Transparency Bad

Filed under: Media Bias — Patterico @ 10:08 am

Hugh Hewitt has begun implementing a new policy towards print reporters who want to interview him about John Roberts. He tells them: sure, you can interview me — but you have to do it live, on my radio show. That way, everyone will hear the complete interview — and they will know what you put in, what you left out, and how you spun my comments.

Guess what? Nobody has taken him up on it yet.

I wonder why. The latest reporter to decline his offer said she didn’t want the story “out there” before it ran in her paper. I have a different theory: she doesn’t want to lose her control over the way Hugh’s comments are portrayed to the public. I have discussed this issue in detail previously, in this post.

P.S. Hugh could establish for us which theory is right by agreeing not to run the interview live, but insisting on taping and broadcasting the whole thing.

Bugging the Readers’ Representative — But for a Good Cause: Truth

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Judiciary — Patterico @ 9:47 am

On July 27, 2005, after publishing this post about a misleading David Savage story on John Roberts, I sent this e-mail to the L.A. Times Readers’ Representative:

Hi,

David Savage’s story on John Roberts this morning (7-27) titled “Some Roberts Documents Released” says:

The White House opened to the public Tuesday thousands of pages from the files of a young assistant attorney general but declared off-limits all the files from the years when John G. Roberts Jr., now a Supreme Court nominee, was a top government lawyer urging the repeal of the Roe vs. Wade abortion ruling.

No one on Capitol Hill had asked for the Reagan-era files.

I am having difficulty reconciling this statement with one published in the New York Times on Monday:

The Bush administration plans to release documents from Judge John G. Roberts’s tenure in the White House counsel’s office in the mid-1980’s and his earlier job working for the attorney general, but will not make public papers covering the four years he spent as principal deputy solicitor general starting in 1989, two senior administration officials said Monday.

The decision fulfilled a request for disclosure of the documents made on Monday by Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which will hold the confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts, President Bush’s choice to fill the Supreme Court seat being vacated by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, said the senator’s spokesman, Bill Reynolds.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/26/politics/politicsspecial1/26confirm.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1122472481-15FDBSnhtKmG+38DtF2AwQ

These seem in conflict, unless I’m missing something.

Patrick Frey

It’s July 30, and I’ve heard nothing. I have forwarded the earlier e-mail to the Readers’ Representative again (and to editor Dean Baquet) with this note:

Hi,

Could you please respond to me regarding my e-mail of July 27 (which I am forwarding another copy of below)? I want to know whether Arlen Specter’s office requested the documents already released by the Bush Administration re John Roberts, as reported by the N.Y. Times on Monday. These are documents that the L.A. Times said Wednesday had not been requested by anyone on Capitol Hill.

I have seen no correction and have received no response. I’m sure the issue could be resolved by a simple query to Sen. Specter’s office.

Thanks.

Patrick Frey
Patterico’s Pontifications
http://patterico.com

In the meantime, if I am overlooking something or otherwise barking up the wrong tree, please let me know in the comments. The quotes look inconsistent to me, but maybe I’m missing something.

UPDATE: Via commenter Ed at Oh, That Liberal Media comes this link to Scott McClellan’s comments at a recent press conference:

Q: If they’ll answer the question. Yesterday, you suggested that — you determined — you made the release of these documents possible after discussions with Senator Specter. Did Senator Specter explicitly request these documents, or were they offered in conversation?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, and I never — no, in fact, I never said such a thing. I know that there are some reports in the paper that someone in his office may have said that, and that appears to have been a mischaracterization. But we did talk to him before releasing that information, and he appreciated the — he expressed his appreciation for the fact that we were going to expedite the release of these documents.

I am interested to see what Sen. Specter’s office says. If his office agrees, then perhaps the NYT owes the correction, rather than the LAT.

Clint Taylor: Prometheus, Deterred

Filed under: General,Terrorism — Patterico @ 8:52 am

Clinton Watson Taylor has an article about the poor guy who got killed by police in the London Tube.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1845 secs.