They MANUFACTURE OPINION talking points as "facts" to weave an article where opinion masks as reporting, in this case, INVERTING the risk of global warming as a campaign issue to Democrats, because FRED HAITT and the Washington Post are flat-earth society reactionaries who want to take America back to the good ol' days of Sharecropping & Segregation, if not outright chattel slavery (as the nation's capitol city once enjoyed).
By writing this piece as "GLOBAL WARMING IS A DANGEROUS ISSUE FOR DEMOCRATS!", Mr. Hiatt and his WaPost continue their relentless attempt to minimize and marginalize Global Warming (and other environmental issues) as important national issues, because they agree with the George Bush/Dick Cheney/GOP vision of America as a banana republic, wealthy plantation lords with absolute powe on vast plantations, surrounded by a sea of ignorant, disposable, disenfranchised peons.
TPM catches the essence of the Post's LYING:
<< There was ZERO POLLING DATA in the piece to support this claim. As Matthew Yglesias noted, the basis for it appeared to be little more than the [Washington Post's] "time honored principled Everything is Bad News for Democrats." >>
Of course, David Broder and George Will are the signature staid, fuddy-duddy "CONVENTIONAL WISDOM" commenators for the Whore WaPost, and despite OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE - EVERY GLACIER ON EARTH in RETREAT in both satellite photos and in visits to those glaciers - George Will writes op-ed after op-ed saying that GLOBAL WARMING is nothing but a Democrat hoax and a Commie plot!
As we just mentioned, FRED HIATT, GEORGE WILL, and most of the writers and editors of the Washington Post ARE PAID PROFESSIONAL LIARS - royal courtiers and court sycophants to power, wealth, and money.
TPM's insightful conclusion:
Yet despite the fact that lots of Republicans have reached this conclusion, somehow The Washington Post was only able to discover that this is a risky issue for Democrats. This illustrates once again that the default setting for many in the political media is still that Dems are always vulnerable; Dems are always at risk of getting too far ahead of public opinion; and Dems are always at risk of provoking a backlash from the same public that strongly agrees with them.
==================================
Sorry, Washington Post -- Pollling Data Shows That Global Warming Issue Is Risky For Republicans [and NOT for Democrats, as the Whore Post stated in their article.]
by Greg Sargent at TalkingPointsMemo.com
November 8, 2007
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/11/sorry_washingto.php
A few days ago, The Washington Post ran a long front-page story that carried this frightful headline:
Climate Is a Risky Issue for Democrats
There was ZERO POLLING DATA in the piece to support this claim. As Matthew Yglesias noted, the basis for it appeared to be little more than the "time honored principled Everything is Bad News for Democrats."
Well, as luck would have it, we now have some actual empirical evidence on this question: A new poll that, unsurprisingly, finds that the public wants action on the biggest global problem before us right now and that it's a risky issue for Republicans.
The Politico got an advance look at a poll conducted for an environmental group by Whit Ayres, a REPUBLICAN pollster, that surveyed voter opinion on the green question in the 49 closest House districts:
In a presentation similar to ones provided to congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle in recent days, Ayres illustrates how independents — who were responsible for ousting the GOP majority in 2006 — are unmistakably supportive of swift action to cut carbon emissions and require cuts in carbon dioxide emissions by cars, factories and power plants.
Ayres seemed most surprised that independents and, to a lesser extent, Republicans wanted the U.S. to act even if China and India, two big polluters with rapidly growing economies, did not.
The swing district independent voters said they were much more likely to support a candidate who votes to cut carbon emissions.
Republican voters were SURPRISINGLY SUPPORTIVE OF EFFERTS to COMBAT GLOBAL WARMING also made it clear they were much less likely to hold members of Congress accountable if they failed to act anytime soon...
Republicans are split in three camps: a small but vocal group who think global warming is basically a hoax (26 percent of GOP voters in the Ayres poll said it does not exist); a big group that includes GOP presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani who agree the Earth is warming but are reluctant to embrace plans opposed by business or viewed as burdensome government regulation; and a growing number who are pushing for specific, market-based solutions now.
The latter group is on the rise.
In sum, this pollster found that (a) independents, whom Republicans need to win back, are "unmistakably supportive" of action on global warming; (b) that Republican voters are "surprisingly supportive" of action; and (c) that the number of Republicans who want specific, market-based solutions now is "on the rise." While The Politico doesn't provide the polling numbers, the conclusion is clear, and Politico even spoke to "a lot" of Republicans, including a former top Bush strategist, who are saying that inaction on this issue holds real peril for them.
Yet despite the fact that lots of Republicans have reached this conclusion, somehow The Washington Post was only able to discover that this is a risky issue for Democrats. This illustrates once again that the default setting for many in the political media is still that Dems are always vulnerable; Dems are always at risk of getting too far ahead of public opinion; and Dems are always at risk of provoking a backlash from the same public that strongly agrees with them.
It'll be interesting to see if WaPo revisits this issue, now that we have some actual empirical evidence to shed light on the topic the paper reported so extensively on. Somehow one doubts that WaPo will call up Ayres and ask him what gives.
No comments:
Post a Comment