Tag Archives: New York Times

News

The leftist New York Times refuses to publish CRU’s global warming e-mails

1 Comment

All the news that fits, they print.

Story from Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

With the release of hundreds of emails by scientists advocates of global warming showing obvious and entirely inappropriate collusion by the authors — including attempts to suppress dissent, to punish journals that publish peer-reviewed studies casting doubt on global warming, and to manipulate data to bolster their own arguments — even the New York Times is forced to concede that “the documents will undoubtedly raise questions about the quality of research on some specific questions and the actions of some scientists.” But apparently the paper’s environmental blog, Dot Earth, is taking a pass on publishing any of the documents and emails that are now circulating.

[…]This is the position of the New York Times when given the chance to publish sensitive information that might hinder the liberal agenda. Of course, when the choice is between publishing classified information that might endanger the lives of U.S. troops in the field or intelligence programs vital to national security, that information is published without hesitation by the nation’s paper of record.

Click here to read all the details.

Glenn Beck gives a good summary of the e-mails here:

Here is my previous post on the hacked e-mails.

Related posts

Obama is a fiscal conservative
The universe is eternal
There is independent evidence

Commentary

Is Thomas Friedman a liberal fascist?

1 Comment

Consider this post from extremely left-wing NYT.

Excerpt:

Watching both the health care and climate/energy debates in Congress, it is hard not to draw the following conclusion: There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today.

One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century. It is not an accident that China is committed to overtaking us in electric cars, solar power, energy efficiency, batteries, nuclear power and wind power. China’s leaders understand that in a world of exploding populations and rising emerging-market middle classes, demand for clean power and energy efficiency is going to soar. Beijing wants to make sure that it owns that industry and is ordering the policies to do that, including boosting gasoline prices, from the top down.

Our one-party democracy is worse….

Jonah Goldberg adds:

So there you have it. If only America could drop its inefficient and antiquated system, designed in the age before globalization and modernity and, most damning of all, before the lantern of Thomas Friedman’s intellect illuminated the land. If only enlightened experts could do the hard and necessary things that the new age requires, if only we could rely on these planners to set the ship of state right. Now, of course, there are “drawbacks” to such a system: crushing of dissidents with tanks, state control of reproduction, government control of the press and the internet. Omelets and broken eggs, as they say. More to the point, Friedman insists, these “drawbacks” pale in comparison to the system we have today here in America.

I cannot begin to tell you how this is exactly the argument that was made by American fans of Mussolini in the 1920s. It is exactly the argument that was made in defense of Stalin and Lenin before him (it’s the argument that idiotic, dictator-envying leftists make in defense of Castro and Chavez today). It was the argument made by George Bernard Shaw who yearned for a strong progressive autocracy under a Mussolini, a Hitler or a Stalin (he wasn’t picky in this regard). This is the argument for an “economic dictatorship” pushed by Stuart Chase and the New Dealers. It’s the dream of Herbert Croly and a great many of the Progressives.

All of this is courtesy of Muddling Towards Maturity.

Videos

Paul Krugman says that public option would lead to single-payer health care

Leave a comment

Video from Verum Serum.

Morgen writes:

And so here, once again, is our gregarious friend from the NY Times, Paul Krugman, speaking about healthcare reform. This is a segment from an interview which aired on Democracy Now! in October 2007.

[…]Paul Krugman is a well-known economist who writes regularly for the NY Times. The fact that almost 2 years ago Krugman so willingly conceded information that conservatives have had to dig to uncover is a damning indictment of the bias and/or incompetence of the media. (And Krugman made this same point in a February 2007 NY Times column.)

The public option has now been the central controversy of healthcare reform for what…at least 3 months? And yet up until very recently, did anyone in the MSM think of looking into or reporting on how the idea came about? And whether conservative assertions that it is a trojan horse for single payer had any merit? Does it really take bloggers doing research in their spare time to discover and document information of such national importance?

Verum Serum rocks!