ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

NY Post issues qualified apology for its chimp cartoon.

021820091.gif Yesterday, the New York Post published a cartoon by Sean Delonas showing two police officers shooting a chimpanzee and saying, “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill.” Many people immediately questioned whether the chimp was meant to be President Obama. Hundreds of people protested outside the offices of the Rupert-Murdoch owned NY Post today, calling for the paper to be shut down. This evening, the Post put up an editorial apologizing to some people who were “offended by the image.” At the same time, however, editors said they were disgusted by “opportunists seek to make it something else“:

It was meant to mock an ineptly written federal stimulus bill.

Period.

But it has been taken as something else – as a depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism.

This most certainly was not its intent; to those who were offended by the image, we apologize.

However, there are some in the media and in public life who have had differences with The Post in the past – and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback.

To them, no apology is due.

Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon – even as the opportunists seek to make it something else.

Update

Wayne A. Schneider over at The Zoo has more on why this isn’t really an apology.

Politics

Now Issa cares about taking extra measures to preserve White House e-mails.

issa.jpgIn a letter to White House Counsel Gregory Craig today, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), the ranking Republican on the House Oversight Committee, “called on President Obama to put in place a system that ensures all White House emails be preserved even if official business was done through private e- mail accounts.” This newfound interest in the use of outside e-mail accounts at the White House is ironic, considering his dismissal of such concerns when Democrats investigated the Bush administration’s use of RNC e-mail accounts:

Republicans accused the Democrats of pursuing the investigation simply to dig up dirt on Rove and waste hundreds of thousands of dollars of money that the RNC could be using to shore up its candidates’ campaigns.

“Are we simply going on a fishing expedition at $40,000 to $50,000 a month?” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) asked National Archives and White House officials at the hearing. “Do any of you know of a single document, because this committee doesn’t, that should’ve been in the archives but in fact was done at the RNC?”

In 2007, the House Oversight Committee discovered that at least 88 Bush White House officials, including former adviser Karl Rove and former chief of staff Andrew Card, had RNC e-mail accounts. Additionally, the RNC has preserved no e-mails for 51 officials and had major gaps in the e-mail records of the 37 White House officials for whom the RNC did preserve e-mails.

Economy

Economists: Stop Talking About The Non-Existent Social Security Crisis

baker.jpgToday, Campaign for America’s Future organized a call with some prominent economists — including Nancy Altman, former top assistant to Alan Greenspan on the 1983 Social Security Commission and Dean Baker, co- director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research — to discuss the White House’s “fiscal responsibility summit,” which is to be held next week. The point of the summit is “to consider just how the government can get a grip on its increasingly ugly balance sheet.”

While the White House has “put out the word that the summit will not be the occasion to announce a task force on keeping Social Security solvent for the long-term,” there are concerns that it will be a perfect opportunity for Obama “to compromise with deficit hawks” on entitlement reform.

Just in case, Baker and Altman both took the opportunity to set the record straight on the Social Security crisis — or lack thereof:

BAKER: Social Security is not facing a crisis, or anything that any reasonable person could call a crisis…It’s a very distant problem.

ALTMAN: The “entitlement crisis” frame is entirely misleading.

Indeed, there is very little crisis-like about the Social Security situation, and talking about it with such language grossly overemphasizes the problem. The Congressional Budget Office “projects that the program can pay all scheduled benefits for the next 40 years with no changes whatsoever.” That’s not to say that smart reforms shouldn’t be made if someone comes up with them, but it’s not as if there’s a fire that needs to be put out right now.

It should be reassuring, then, that there is very little evidence from the administration that slashing Social Security is anywhere on the radar. In fact, in Politico today, Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag explained where the real fiscal crisis is:

“Social Security faces an actuarial deficit over the next 75-100 years. In the past, I’ve resisted the term ‘crisis’ to describe that kind of situation,” he said. “This is not quantitatively as important as getting health care done.”

Indeed, long-term fiscal stability is impossible without addressing health care costs. As Ezra Klein noted, “The simple fact is that the administration is not focused on Social Security…The Obama administration believes that the entitlement problem is a health care entitlement problem, and the health care entitlement problem is a health care system problem.”

Politics

Wash. Post defends George Will’s climate change denial: We ‘check facts to the fullest extent possible.’

will256u.jpgThe Washington Post has refused to run corrections on George Will’s recent “global cooling” column, despite its “stunning, boneheaded, egregious errors.” In response to a ThinkProgress request, Washington Post ombudsman Andy Alexander “sought clarification from the editorial page editors”:

Basically, I was told that the Post has a multi-layer editing process and checks facts to the fullest extent possible. In this instance, George Will’s column was checked by people he personally employs, as well as two editors at the Washington Post Writers Group, which syndicates Will; our op-ed page editor; and two copy editors.

Read Alexander’s full response at the Wonk Room.

Climate Progress

Obama’s first month: 31 days that made — and may remake — history

What team Obama has accomplished in its first month is nothing less than an unprecedented reversal of decades of unsustainable national policy forced down the throat of the American public by conservatives.

As but one example, has there been a single story in the traditional media about the fact that Obama, for the first time in three decades, has dramatically increased funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy R&D? Since Ronald Reagan became president in 1981, and slashed federal efficiency and renewables investments 80% to 90%, conservatives have blocked all efforts to ramp up funding in cleantech (see “Who got us in this energy mess? Start with Ronald Reagan” and “Why is our energy policy so lame? Ask the three GOP stooges.“).

The net result is that we lost market leadership in all of the major job-creating industries of the century — wind power, solar energy, and so on — since every other rich country in the world (and some developing ones like China and India) are not so ideologically blinkered (see below).

But much of the traditional media sees only the short-term partisan horse race, like some corporate CEO focused on the next quarter even as their company goes belly up. My favorite such misguided headline so far is from USA Today:

Stimulus slammed as Dems’ agenda

When are the media and the nation’s opinionmakers going to realize that the storyline of the decade — the storyline of the century — is not Dems vs. R’s or progressives vs. conservatives, but all of us vs. the 1,000 years of misery that is inevitable on our path of unregulated greenhouse gas emissions? (see Hadley Center: Catastrophic 5-7°C warming by 2100 on current emissions path and NOAA stunner: Climate change “largely irreversible for 1000 years,” with permanent Dust Bowls in Southwest and around the globe).

Years from now, long after the economy has recovered, this may well be remembered as the time that progressives, led by Obama, began the climate-saving transition to a sustainable low-carbon economy built around green jobs.

Call me a cock-eyed optimist [OK, maybe more like a Spock-eyed optimist].

How has Obama jumpstarted the one true task of every U.S. President of the 21st century — preserving the health and welfare of the next 100 billion people to walk the Earth?

Read more

Yglesias

The Entitlement Crisis is a Health Care Crisis

Ben Smith’s article about Peter Orszag’s influence winds up getting a bit vague on the policy specifics, but does capture Orszag’s key idea about long-term budgetary problems:

Orszag’s long-running project — something that has made him the left’s favorite Cabinet member — has been replacing talk of an “entitlement crisis” with his argument that Social Security requires only modest tax hikes and benefit cuts, while Medicare and Medicaid have much more dramatic fiscal woes.

“Social Security faces an actuarial deficit over the next 75-100 years. In the past, I’ve resisted the term ‘crisis’ to describe that kind of situation,” he said. “This is not quantitatively as important as getting health care done.”

I’m not sure Orszag really is the left’s favorite cabinet member—he’s a pretty moderate dude. Ask about Steven Chu or Hilda Solis. But the left certainly agrees with Orszag about this issue. And it’s not just an “argument.” It’s also true. My Wonk Room colleagues have a bunch of charts about health care, and this one illustrates the point well:

03_dominantbudgetchallenge.jpg

Only structural reform of health care can avoid long-term budgetary apocalypse.

Media

Rush: I’m No Coward On Race, I Stood Up To Media’s ‘Slavish Coverage Of Black Quarterbacks’

Yesterday, Attorney General Eric Holder said that the U.S. has acted as a “nation of cowards” when it comes to discussing the sometimes “awkward and painful” issue of race relations. Today on his radio show, however, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh rejected Holder’s view claiming, “I, El Rushbo, am no coward. … I show bravery on race” by standing up to the media’s “slavish coverage of black quarterbacks”:

LIMBAUGH: I, El Rushbo, am no coward. … In fact, I show bravery on race. I am totally willing to discuss it openly and honestly. How does one show bravery on race as I have? You talk about media bias, you talk about slavish media coverage of Black quarter backs in the National Football League. Then see what happens. Then watch all hell descend upon you from every quarter of this nation’s media. From print to broadcast to internet. … I show bravery on matters of race.

Watch it:

Limbaugh is clearly still bitter about the fact that he was forced to resign from his position as an ESPN commentator in 2003 for claiming that the media were only interested in Philadelphia Eagles Quarterback Donovan McNabb because he is black (despite the fact that McNabb has shown himself to be incredibly talented):

Sorry to say this, I don’t think he’s been that good from the get-go. I think what we’ve had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn’t deserve.

By citing the McNabb episode as a “brave” moment in the history of race-relations, Limbaugh actually reaffirmed Holder’s point. As Holder explained yesterday, discussions surrounding race and public policy in American society ought to be “nuanced, principled and spirited.” But too often, we leave the conversation to “those on the extremes who are not hesitant to use these issues to advance nothing more than their own, narrow self interest.”

The result is a de facto acceptance and even endorsement of Limbaugh’s repeated race-based outbursts and criticism of public officials who choose to speak out.

Climate Progress

Washington Post Defends George Will: The Editorial Page ‘Checks Facts To The Fullest Extent Possible’

Seven-Layer Dip
The Washington Post “multi-layer editing process,” via The Onion.

George Will’s recent “global cooling” column contained several demonstrable falsehoods. Despite waves of criticism, George Will and Post opinion editor Fred Hiatt have refused to respond or run corrections on Will’s “stunning, boneheaded, egregious errors.”

When contacted by the Wonk Room, the Washington Post’s ombudsman, veteran reporter Andy Alexander, “sought clarification from the editorial page editors”:

Basically, I was told that the Post has a multi-layer editing process and checks facts to the fullest extent possible. In this instance, George Will’s column was checked by people he personally employs, as well as two editors at the Washington Post Writers Group, which syndicates Will; our op-ed page editor; and two copy editors.

Wow. I’d hate to see what Will’s columns look like before the “multi-layer editing process.”

Full email from Andy Alexander (ombudsman@washpost.com): Read more

Yglesias

Supporting George Mitchell

4960.jpg

George Mitchell pissed some people off during his time as a mediator in Northern Ireland. But at the end of the day, he delivered an agreement. And when the agreement wound up in some choppy waters, heads were knocked together and the thing was made to work. And today, Protestants and Catholics alike are better off than they used to be. It’s an auspicious background for an envoy to deal with the Arab-Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, not everyone sees it that way. Gary Bauer, for example, has joined Abe Foxman in warning that Mitchell might be too even-handed—shudder.

Rep. Bill Delahunt takes a different view, though, and has introduced a resolution into the House of Representatives in support of Mitchell. Thus far, he has 53 co-sponsors and J Street is trying to get some more.

Update

I’m told it’s actually 56 cosponsors.

Politics

Poll: Majority of Americans disapproved of congressional GOP during stimulus fight.

Over the past several weeks, Republicans have bragged about their unity in opposing President Obama’s economic recovery package, predicting that their obstruction would “give us a shot in the arm going forward.” However, a new AP/GFK poll taken during the final days of the fight over the stimulus bill shows that Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of Republican efforts to block Obama’s plan:

Congress’ approval is only 31%-59%, but additional questions show a much more complicated picture. The number for Congressional Democrats is at 49%-45%, while Republicans are at 33%-59%. The Republicans appear to be cramping Congress’ style. [...]

Only 30% say Obama hasn’t done enough to cooperate with Republicans in Congress — the GOP base vote, basically — while 62% say he’s doing the right amount and 6% say it’s been too much. Flipping it around, only 27% say Republicans have done enough to cooperate with Obama, with 64% saying not enough and 5% saying too much.

Meanwhile, people are increasingly confident that Obama is leading the country in the right direction. Since Obama’s election, there’s been a 23 percent rise in those saying the country is headed in the right direction. In October, only 17 percent of Americans felt that way, while 78 percent thought the country was headed in the wrong direction.

- Matt Finkelstein

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up