January 10, 2011
More 'reporting' from the Gray Lady
In a news article entitled "House Democrats Rapidly Unleash Sharp Attacks," New York Times, reporter Carl Hulse writes about the progress Democrats are making against the new Republican majority after only seventy-two hours of the 112th Congress.
The article leads:
The article leads:
After four years of harassment by an aggressive Republican minority, House Democrats evidently absorbed a lesson along with all those political blows: the route back to Congressional power is paved with frontal assaults on the practices and policies of the majority.
You see? Republicans invented harassment and frontal assaults against the majority, a lesson absorbed by the benevolent Democratic opposition.That Democrats are unleashing harsh attacks against the new Republican majority is no surprise, nor is it surprising that Democrats are attacking in their first three days in the minority.
In fact, aside from what the article reveals about the ideology of the New York Times and Mr. Hulse, reports of gratuitous attacks by congressional Democrats after so short a time aren't newsworthy at all. In Hulse's piece, the "Newspaper of Record" gives readers another clear view of the New York Times' ideology and the lengths to which its staff will go to advance the cause of their allies in American politics. Not to be too picky here, but either the famous New York Times stylebook has been defenestrated or the financially troubled Times can no longer afford to pay copy editors. Hulse writes of congressional Democrats, approvingly,
"Being in the minority instead seems to summon up a blunt instrument." How, exactly, does one "summon up" a blunt instrument?Hulse reports:Mr. Boehner and other Republicans...casually dismissed findings from the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan fiscal scorekeeper, that the repeal [of ObamaCare] would add $230 billion to the deficit over 10 years, the same deficit that incoming Republicans promised to cut.
For the uninitiated, "Casually dismissed" in this case is lib-speak for "factually disputed."Hulse writes approvingly that House Democrats are focused on the legislative process, citing Republicans' use of similar tactics:But Republicans themselves showed during the health care debate that in the days of an engaged electorate, process fights can bring political gain. Remember demands to "read the bill"...?
Apparently, to Hulse and the Democrats, reading a bill is a bad thing.
The response from Republicans, as reported by Hulse, bears repeating and comment.
Republicans say that such attacks and others initiated by Democrats are distortions and that any heavy focus on legislative process typically reflects a weak case.
This is reported without attribution. If a Republican member actually said it, I disagree. Understanding the arcane aspects of Congressional rules and procedures and how they were used and misused in the last Congress is one key to understanding the Democrats' betrayal of the American people.
Congressional Republicans must stay on top of their game at all times and prevent the petty parliamentary maneuvers liberally employed by the former majority to distract from the mandate Republicans were given in the last general election, Hulse's distaste for Republicans' use of them notwithstanding.