AP Howler: BP Spill Handling a 'Stain' on Admin's 'Reputation for Relying on Science'
Thursday evening, NB's Ken Shepherd accurately pointed out how little establishment press interest there has been in prominently carrying an Associated Press report about how the Obama administration has been, in the words of the wire service's Dina Cappiello, "downplaying scientific findings, misrepresenting data and most recently misconstruing the opinions of experts it solicited."
This is not to excuse those who have given her report short shrift, but the AP and Cappiello herself did their level best to try to minimize the significance of what was to come in their headline and first paragraph, respectively:
Govt's handling of science on oil spill questioned
The oil spill that damaged the Gulf of Mexico's reefs and wetlands is also threatening to stain the Obama administration's reputation for relying on science to guide policy.
First, as to the "Please don't read this, it's really boring" headline:
- This isn't about some abstract entity known as the "Gov't." It's about a presidential administration headed by Barack Obama and populated with environmental extremists like Carol Browner and Ken Salazar. The headlines during Hurricane Katrina were about "the government." No, they were about George W. Bush's alleged mishandling of the situation (which was in reality largely the fault of Louisiana's governor and the mayor New Orleans.
- "Handling of science of oil spill" -- How about "misrepresenting facts of oil spill"?
- "Questioned" -- What a weasel word. How about "criticized," "skewered," "condemned," or "faulted"?
As to the administration's "reputation for relying on science," since when?
To name just three examples:
- The administration continues to push for radical controls over almost everything anyone does in the form of cap and trade legislation based on scientifically unsupported and largely discredited notions relating to supposedly human-caused global warming -- er, climate change -- oh, I meant climate disruption.
- The administration continues to support life-destroying embryonic stem cell research when adult stem cell research is where virtually all meaningful medical progress has been achieved.
- It deliberately modified the Bush administration's successful PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) program for fighting AIDS in Africa to minimize and mostly exclude abstinence education, even though "No generalized HIV epidemic has ever been rolled back by a prevention strategy primarily based on condoms."
Cappiello's first paragraph attempts to tell readers that what follows in the rest of her report represents a rare exception. Sorry, ma'am, it's more like the rule.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
- Tom Blumer's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Sorry
Submitted by Anneke9 on Fri, 11/12/2010 - 11:52am.
Sorry, this was posted to wrong story and deleted...
At what point does
Submitted by Ashrak on Fri, 11/12/2010 - 12:52pm.
At what point does embarrassment actually set in for today's journalists?
Stain
Submitted by Six String Spiff on Fri, 11/12/2010 - 12:52pm.
The Obama admin has been nothing BUT a stain itself...
on the United States Constitution.
Can anybody give me any evidence of this President doing ANYTHING for this country that hasn't either:
A. Made things worse.
B. Trashed a foreign relation
C. Legitimized an enemy
??
No trade agreement, lying about the spill, Axelfraud
Submitted by Tomorama on Fri, 11/12/2010 - 1:38pm.
Stain, and that was just this week................
I penned a letter to the Boston Globe this morning even though they did put the AP story on page two yesterday, they NEVER published two huge stories along the way........
Obama and Salazaar allowed for BP to forgo already in place inspections right before the oil spill
Obama and Salazaar thought so highly of the safety of this very site they were going to give it a safety award
And of course, Obama received more money from BP than anyone else last electiojn cycle
Again, all the news that's fit to omit, or misreport, deflect or simply lie "for" your "cause".
Obama admin. Muzzling science since the beginning
Submitted by Gary Hall on Fri, 11/12/2010 - 1:44pm.
This should be no surprise; the Obama administration has been muzzling science since the beginning. And, as expected, the national media is keeping the information away from the broad public.
Back in June of 2009, in an online only post, CBS picked up this "shocker (my bold):"
EPA May Have Suppressed Report Skeptical Of Global Warming
[..] Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty "decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data." [..]
That appears to conflict with an e-mail from McGartland in March, who said to Carlin, the report's primary author: "I decided not to forward your comments... I can see only one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office." He also wrote to Carlin: "Please do not have any direct communication with anyone outside of (our group) on endangerment. There should be no meetings, e-mails, written statements, phone calls, etc."
One reason why the process might have been highly charged politically is the unusual speed of the regulatory process. Lisa Jackson, the new EPA administrator, had said that she wanted her agency to reach a decision about regulating carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act by April 2 -- the second anniversary of a related U.S. Supreme Court decision.
Surprise surprise.
Noel covered it here: Media Ignore EPA Suppressing Skeptical Global Warming Report
(;~/ gary
When the President lies about
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Fri, 11/12/2010 - 10:55pm.
When the President lies about his record and BC, why else has he sealed them, then why do we think he will not change the numbers to fit his reality.
THE LEFT HATES SCIENCE!!!
Submitted by Tenebrous on Fri, 11/12/2010 - 11:33pm.
Ok, that's the kind of thing the papers would say, except with a different noun, if a conservative president had done the same thing. And they've said it over things that weren't even close, which shows you something.
Visions and Principles blog