On That Gettysburg Snub - With A Local Connection!

Much has been written in the last few days about President Obama and his "snubbing" of the ceremony marking the 150th anniversary of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.  CNN's Ashley Killough even posted this analysis of that decision:

As Pennsylvania gears up to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address on Tuesday, one prominent Abraham Lincoln fan won't be in attendance: President Barack Obama.

The National Park Service announced a few weeks ago the President won't be part of the activities commemorating the historic speech, and critics have since assailed Obama for skipping the event.

And who's the first critic assailing Obama?  The Trib's own Selena Zito:

"It would be an occasion for him to honor a crucial time in our past, to create a historical bridge to today," Salena Zito, a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review staff writer, wrote in a column.

"His dismissal of the request shows a man so detached from the duty of history, from the men who served in the White House before him, that it is unspeakable in its audacity," Zito added. "Ask almost any person in this historic town; even his most ardent supporters here are stunned." [Emphasis added.]

Missing, of course, from Zito's column is any sort of historical context - an omission also found in some of the regular news coverage of the event at the Trib.  Here's Mike Wereschagin:

Several of the new citizens said they'd been told President Obama would attend the ceremony. Instead, a National Park Ranger read a brief speech from the president and a message he recorded for the 16 new citizens was played.

Obama's decision not to appear “made him look bad,” said Mike Wood, 39, of Chesterfield, Mich. He should have come “just to show his respect,” said Wood, a re-enactor with the 7th Michigan Cavalry and author of the nonfiction Civil War book “Tuebor.”

And what was this omission of context?  Take a look:

But Obama's decision not to attend the Gettysburg commemoration ceremony is typical for a sitting president. President Reagan did not attend the 125th commemoration of the Gettysburg Address - in fact, Reagan never visited Gettysburg during his tenure in office. Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton also never visited the battlefield as president, and President George W. Bush toured the site in 2008, but did not speak or attend a commemoration ceremony. In fact, according to Hanover, Pennsylvania's local paper, The Evening Sun, William Howard Taft was the only sitting president to ever visit the site on the anniversary of the Gettysburg Address

That's right - Ronald Wilson Reagan never visited Gettysburg during his entire tenure in office and didn't attend the 125th commemoration of the speech.

Can we get that Civil War re-enactor declare that it made Reagan "look bad" by not showing?  Or  how it shows Reagan's disrespect?  Can we get Selena Zito to go on record saying that Reagan's unspeakably audacious failure to attend the 125th commemoration shows his detachment from the duty of history, from the men who served in the White House before him?

Yea, I didn't think so either.

..And They Keep Doing It

Back in August, I posted some observations/criticisms about some of the political news coverage I found at Richard Mellon Scaife's Tribune-Review.

I wrote then that Brill's Content, a now defunct political news site, asserted in 2001 that the political coverage over at the Trib was skewed and it's " information laundered" to suit Scaife's viewpoints.  Financial connections between the paper's owner and its sources were routinely omitted and its readers were being mislead about a story's credibility.  I added that that practice still seems to be taking place.

And now there's this piece by Selena Zito in Today's paper about Senator Pat Toomey.  Where Brad Bumstead ignored his boss's financial connections to the Club For Growth and Senator Toomey, Zito just simply omits any connection between Toomey and the Scaife-funded Club For Growth.

If you don't think this is a big deal, then ask yourself: How would my opinion of the piece change had Zito chosen to tell me that her boss had both donated to the campaign of the Senator she was interviewing AND to the conservative think tank he once headed?

Now do you see?

The Bishops Speak...

And guess who they want Catholics to vote for (without actually saying it, nudge-nudge wink-wink)?

From Selena Zito at the Trib:

Roman Catholic bishops in Pennsylvania are urging the faithful to remember the church’s teachings on marriage, education and religious liberty when voting on Tuesday, calling this presidential election a “historical challenge.”

The Pennsylvania Catholic Conference chose All Saints’ Day to issue its election statement reminding Catholics that “most urgent political issues — ranging from the economy, immigration and abortion to global security — raise profoundly moral questions.”

“Because politics is the place where competing moral visions of a society meet and struggle, our democracy depends on people of conviction fighting for what they believe in the public square, yet doing so with an abiding respect for one another,” the bishops said.

Here's the statement.

And even though this is Zito is political reporter here, Zito the conservative columnist just can't resist the conservative spin:

The bishops warned against efforts to redefine the nature of marriage, to exclude parental authority in school choice, to encroach upon Catholic health care and social services and to erode religious liberty — an apparent reference to a Health and Human Services mandate on contraceptives and federal funding for abortion in Obamacare. [Emphasis added.]

There is no federal funding for abortion (except for rape and incest and when the life of the mother is in danger) - the Hyde Amendment has guaranteed that for decades.

And if there's any question whether federal funds can be used in Obamacare, there's an Executive Order that answers that question:

The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, section 508(d)(1) of Public Law 111-8) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

How could political reporter Selena Zito not know this?  And if she does, then it's simply dishonest to write what she wrote.  (Again, which is it with these folks at the Trib?  Incompetence or dishonesty?)

But let's move on to the Bishops' statement.  When they write:

Religious liberty itself – “our first, most cherished freedom” – is no longer secure. At first glance, this may seem otherwise because religious freedom is so deeply ingrained in our national history. But democracy has no special immunity to losing its soul by little steps. As Alexis de Tocqueville, the great chronicler of early American democracy, observed more than 150 years ago, “it is especially dangerous to enslave men in the minor details of life” – because the more the state provides, the more it inevitably controls.

Events have proven this true. In recent years a pattern of legislative and judicial actions has emerged in our country that undermines religious liberty and jeopardizes the contributions of religious bodies in the public realm. Government policies that seek to impose morally repugnant services on religiously affiliated medical providers...

And:

Consider today’s aggressive efforts to redefine the nature of marriage, to exclude parental authority in the choice of the best education for their children, and to force Catholic healthcare and social services to end their ministries unless they violate their religious identities through mandated support of practices contrary to the very sanctity of human life. [Emphasis added.]

Who do you think they want Catholics to support?  Notice how they framed the issue.  Now look at reality.

What's being discussed here is not The Church being forced to "end their ministries" in anyway.  It's about access to insurance (that they're not paying for) for women (who may or may not be Catholic but who work for a Catholic institution) who want contraceptives.  That's what the bishops oppose.  And in doing so, they're imposing their own faith in the name of religious liberty.

Amazing how faith, yet again, gets in the way of reality.

Um, Selena?

You really need to check your sources better.

In her column this weekend about how many Iowa Democrats are "disgruntled" with President Obama and the direction the nation is taking.

Which, itself, is not the issue.  Heck, I'm disgruntled with Obama - though not disgruntled enough to vote for the empty suit who's got millions off shore in Switzerland and the Caymans.

But let's not go there.  Let's get back to the column.  In it, Selena Zito writes about a disgruntled small business owner:

Winery owner John Guinan said he “wanted to put a sign outside that said, ‘I can’t wait to vote,’ but I thought it was a bit over the top.”

Five years ago, Guinan and his wife, Rose, transformed an old Ford assembly plant-turned-auto-dealership into the enchanting Santa Maria Vineyard & Winery, with stone courtyards and a restaurant offering the feel of Tuscany. Guinan said it’s “the third largest winery in the state.”

He admitted his passion to vote for Mitt Romney didn’t exist until Romney picked Paul Ryan as his running mate: “Right then and there, he had my vote. Ryan is very bright, very capable, and understands the serious problems facing the finances of our country.”

The small businessman, who employs more than 70 in the town of Carroll, found Obama’s “you didn’t build that” comment “galling, but not surprising. It is reflective of the concern I had about him on the front end,” referring to the value that Obama puts on government over individuals. [Emphasis added.]

God, I really hate to do this.

According to propublica.org, Carroll County, Iowa received about $22 million in stimulus funding of which $4.8 million went in via the Small Business Administration.

According to this page at propublica.org, the Santa Maria Vineyard & Winery received a guaranteed loan from the Small Business Administration of $1,000,000.  This was the reason given:

TO AID SMALL BUSINESSES WHICH ARE UNABLE TO OBTAIN FINANCING IN THE PRIVATE CREDIT MARKETPLACE

The page dates this at April 28, 2009.

According to this page, however, the numbers are different - only $31,000.  Perhaps Mr Guinan only had access to up to a million in guaranteed loans but only took advantage of $31,000.  I don't know either way.

Doesn't matter much to my argument, of course.  He's offended at the "you didn't build that comment" even though, according to propublica, his own history supports exactly what offends him.  However successful his winery is, he didn't build it himself!  He got some help from the guv'ment.

Selena should have checked this.  But she didn't.  Took only me a few minutes to find it.  Either she should have known and she didn't or she knew and didn't include it in the piece.

So which is it, Selena, incompetence or dishonesty?

Or is the data at propublica.org wrong?

Um, I Guess It Should Be Noted...

Let's start with Selena Zito of The Trib (who doesn't get it wrong - good for her):

Vice presidential hopeful Paul Ryan appealed to middle-class voters on Tuesday at a suburban steel company, urging them to swing the November presidential election to the GOP no matter their party affiliation.

The Wisconsin congressman walked on stage clutching a Terrible Towel as a crowd of about 2,000 supporters at Beaver Steel Services, a family-owned manufacturer in Rosslyn Farms Industrial Park, chanted, “Here we go, Ryan, here we go!”

Above his makeshift stage, in front of a flatbed truck holding steel plates, hung a banner reading “We did build it” — a reference to President Obama’s July 13 speech in Virginia, in which he said business people did not succeed on their own but instead with the help of an American system.

Not the best writing in that last sentence but let's move on.

CNN had more of the story:

The old anecdotes fed into a larger narrative about the economy that the Romney-Ryan team has been trying to drive home for months. The campaign continues to take out of context a comment Obama made in Roanoke about business.

Their message was reinforced by the backdrop at Beaver Steel with the words "We did build it!" displayed behind Ryan on a flat-bed truck.

"Or how about the latest doozy in Roanoke, VA? Tony and Tony, father and son, we're here in your business. You have 50 employees in your business. You created jobs. You worked hard. You sacrificed. You rolled up your sleeves, you took risks. You had good days, you had bad days. Tony, you built this business. The government didn't build it for you. It's your business, your achievement, and we all benefit from that. That's what this country is built upon. You see, it's this belief that we need a government-centered society driven by a government-driven economy. It doesn't work," he said.

Glad they point out the "out of context" part.  I've already written about what the President actually said.  But here it is again:

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. [Emphasis added.]

Now let's look at where Ryan was speaking: Beaver Steel Services.  Google the business and youll find that it's on Arch Street in Carnegie - right near Interstate 376.

Where do you think I-376 came from?

Read this.

How many millions of dollars (State and Federal, meaning TAX dollars) went to building I-376?  And how does that benefit Beaver Steel Services?

And doesn't that prove the President's point?

Selena Zito Does It Again.

Take a look at this "straight news" piece from a few days ago:

The conservative political advocacy group Americans for Prosperity will begin airing ads on Wednesday in Pennsylvania and 10 other states, spending $6.7 million on a weeklong TV buy to criticize President Obama for the nation’s escalating debt.

And here's how she characterizes the ad:

The 30-second ad, airing on Pittsburgh stations WPXI, KDKA and WTAE, shows a clip from a 2009 NBC interview with Obama in which the president pledged to cut the deficit by half by the end of his first term in office.

“I will be held accountable,” Obama said at the time. “If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.” The ad concludes with a rolling debt counter and urges voters: “Let’s make this a one-term proposition on Nov. 6.”

This is the ad she's talking about:


By the way, for those checking the details on the "I will be held accountable" part, (and you might want to pay attention to this, Salena) Obama was not talking about cutting the deficit when he made that statement.  It's two separate issues sewed together by our partisan friends at AFP.  ABC has already fact-checked the "one term proposition" part.  Take a look:

But while there is no doubt the U.S. economy continues to struggle, an examination of the context of Obama’s 2009 comments to NBC’s Matt Lauer suggests his “proposition” might not have been as sweeping as Republicans make it out to be.

Obama was responding to specific questions about the Troubled Asset Relief Program and whether its economic benefits would merit the costs, then estimated at $700 billion.

“At some point will you say, ‘Wait a minute, we’ve spent this amount of money. We’re not seeing the results. We’ve got to change course dramatically?’” Lauer asked Obama.

“Look, I’m at the start of my administration. One nice thing about the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I’ve got four years. And, you know, a year from now I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress,” Obama said. “But there’s still going to be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”

Not only did AFP cobble together the "deficit" part with the "accountable" part, they omitted the "Tarp" part, but they sliced out some more context from Obama's answer.  You can read the full transcript here.

And Selena Zito's letting them get away with it.

But that's not all - guess what else she left out?

Ever wonder where Americans for Prosperity came from?  Koch Industries has an answer:

In 1984, Dr. Richard Fink, Charles Koch and David Koch and Jay Humphreys co-founded Citizens for a Sound Economy and Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation. Over time the participants in CSE and the CSE Foundation developed different visions. In 2004, CSE became FreedomWorks and the CSE Foundation was renamed Americans for Prosperity Foundation. AFP Foundation created a 501(c)(4) organization, Americans for Prosperity. AFP and AFP Foundation have grown to more than 2 million members in all 50 states and 34 state chapters and affiliates.

And guess, just guess who also gave a ton of money to Citizens for A Sound Economy Foundation:

• $175,000 in 2001
• $175,000 in 2002
• $175,000 in 2003

That's right, her boss Richard Mellon Scaife.