Posted on 04/24/2009 8:05:31 AM PDT by TheDailyChange
O’Reilly: “Will GE get paid for supporting President Obama? GE, which owns MSNBC, has been very aggressive in helping Barack Obama.
O’Reilly: “There is also emerging evidence that GE CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, and NBC News Chief Jeff Zucker, told CNBC personnel to stop criticizing Obama’s economic policies. Now, that would be a major breach of journalistic ethics. In fact, Obama critic Rick Santelli was reported to have said that he was sent to a “Re-education camp” by NBC. “
An O’Reilly Factor producer and GE stockholder, Jesse Watters, asked GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt the following question at a stockholders’ meeting in Florida: “Last week on MSNBC, Janeane Garofalo, said that Americans who attended tea parties and were protesting high taxes and government spending were racist rednecks. She was not challenged by the anchor on MSNBC. Are you okay with that? And do you consider this a form of hate speech sir?”
Immelt’s response: “Again, we have not censored MSNBC. Again, my own personal beliefs aside, I believe that MSNBC has some standards that they follow and that’s what you are seeing.
Watters: With all due respect, this is the kind of hate that MSNBC traffics in on a regular basis. Are you comfortable with this and do you think this hurts the GE brand?
Immelt: I don’t censor what they do or what they say despite the fact that I might disagree with some of it or much of it, some of the time.
O’Reilly: “Most CEOs would have stopped NBC’s corruption a long time ago. But Immelt may be looking for a major payout. When a powerful corporation which controls a major part of the American media may be using its power and the airwaves to influence politics in order to make money from government contracts - That kind of corruption would make Watergate look small.”
TDC asks: Why would GE CEO Immelt put his own beliefs aside when GE owns MSNBC? He wouldn’t. However, he would choose to do nothing about this hate speech if he is trying to get into Obama’s good graces.
O’Reilly: “There is also emerging evidence that GE CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, and NBC News Chief Jeff Zucker, told CNBC personnel to stop criticizing Obama’s economic policies. Now, that would be a major breach of journalistic ethics. In fact, Obama critic Rick Santelli was reported to have said that he was sent to a “Re-education camp” by NBC. “
An O’Reilly Factor producer and GE stockholder, Jesse Watters, asked GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt the following question at a stockholders’ meeting in Florida: “Last week on MSNBC, Janeane Garofalo, said that Americans who attended tea parties and were protesting high taxes and government spending were racist rednecks. She was not challenged by the anchor on MSNBC. Are you okay with that? And do you consider this a form of hate speech sir?”
Immelt’s response: “Again, we have not censored MSNBC. Again, my own personal beliefs aside, I believe that MSNBC has some standards that they follow and that’s what you are seeing.
Watters: With all due respect, this is the kind of hate that MSNBC traffics in on a regular basis. Are you comfortable with this and do you think this hurts the GE brand?
Immelt: I don’t censor what they do or what they say despite the fact that I might disagree with some of it or much of it, some of the time.
O’Reilly: “Most CEOs would have stopped NBC’s corruption a long time ago. But Immelt may be looking for a major payout. When a powerful corporation which controls a major part of the American media may be using its power and the airwaves to influence politics in order to make money from government contracts - That kind of corruption would make Watergate look small.”
TDC asks: Why would GE CEO Immelt put his own beliefs aside when GE owns MSNBC? He wouldn’t. However, he would choose to do nothing about this hate speech if he is trying to get into Obama’s good graces.
...The USSA is being born.
It drove me crazy that T Bone Pickens was pushing for Obama during the campaign and pushing for his GE wind farm investments at the same time.
Nancy Pelosi is also an investor in GE Windfarms and should be prosecuted for insider trading.
Yeah, O’Reilly gets all animated on this issue because he lost his ass with the GE stock decline. So O’Reilly’s gonna stay after this guy. But he’ll softpedal other issues to make sure he remains in good stead with the hosts of The View, the Oprah show, and any other left-leaning weasel outfit. Sellout.
As far as GE goes think “Cap and Trade” AND GE Windmills. Get the picture?
With all due respect, media bias is not “staggering corruption.”
I think it has ALWAYS been clear that GE is USING MSNBC to push their own corporate interests.
They are using MSNBC to sell their “smart grid”.
They are using MSNBC to sell MAJOR industrial projects like windmill farms and building power line infrastructure.
MSNBC is just “in kind” bartering.
WHY ELSE would they have totally hamstrung CNBC?
They even had peopel this morning singing the “dear leader praise songs” regarding the faux stress tests. Passing the stress test means you took and KEPT tarp money, surprise surprise.
remember the movie “mr. smith goes to washington”?
The unelected power brokers wanted a construction project passed. To ensure the project passed the power broker USED his ownership of the newspapers and radio to shape the news in his favor.
This was not just a movie cliche but a commentary of the newspaper owners at the time. (spanish american war remember?)
MSNBC is just a tool. The use the low IQ on air personalities as yapping chiuauas to influence the masses.
The scam with pickens is that he wanted HIS company to own the windmills and then he wanted TAXPAYERS TO PAY FOR THE POWERLINES TO HIS WINDMILLS.
On top of that he wanted to FORCE commercial trucks to be converted to the natural gas HE SOLD.
All the industry big wig insiders just wanted pork pork and more pork.
Rhetoric. a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness” or “to make haste slowly.”
Or "journalistic ethics"
I still think that we need prosecute Nancy Pelosi for insider trading. It was just so arrogant of her to state that her investment in the GE wind project was inconsequential because she only had $250,000 invested in it.
“As far as GE goes think “Cap and Trade” AND GE Windmills. Get the picture?” ~ US Navy Vet
As far as GE goes, GE is merely the new Enron. bttt
GE CEO Confronted at Shareholder Meeting in Orlando!
VIDEO: http://www.thefoxnation.com/politics/2009/04/23/fox-nation-exclusive-ge-ceo-confronted-shareholder-meeting
My posts in 2008:
GE is Algore’s new Enron.
A couple of weeks ago I heard Bill O’Reilly say that in spite of America’s policy, GE was still doing business with Iran. He said he was going to keep hammering them until they cease and desist. He read letters on the air from people who wrote in to say that they were selling their GE stock and boycotting GE products.
16 posted on Saturday, July 26, 2008 10:04:55 AM by Matchett-PI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2051612/posts?page=16#16
<>
General Electric and Al Gore Scheme to Undermine Domestic Oil Drilling
Townhall.com ^ | July 26, 2008 | Tom Borelli
http://townhall.com/columnists/TomBorelli/2008/07/26/general_electric_and_al_gore_scheme_to_undermine_domestic_oil_drilling
<>
Enron chairman Kenneth Lay met with President Clinton and Vice President Gore in the Oval Office in 1997, prior to the Kyoto energy conference, according to the Washington Times of Jan. 16. The apparent purpose was for Clinton and Gore to get an agreement from Enron that it would support the draconian regulations and higher costs on the industry that would emerge from the conference, in exchange for government guarantees and taxpayer subsidies. This would expand the government’s power within the industry and guarantee handsome political contributions for the Democrats.
Enron would not disappoint. It became the poster corporation for the junk science of global warming, and supported the industry-killing Kyoto Protocol. Enron probably believed that promised taxpayer payouts would make up for its losses in support of unproductive, but politically correct, energy initiatives. The U.S. Senate, however, recognizing Kyoto’s negative impact on the economy at large, foiled Clinton-Gore plans by voting 95-0 to trash the unfair and inequitable Protocol. The Senate action wouldn’t stop Enron, however, from attempting to become the corporation of choice for the Clinton-Gore globalization agenda. [.....................] More at link here:
12 posted on Thursday, December 18, 2008 9:40:47 AM by Matchett-PI (Enron Gave Big Bucks to Democrats, Backed ‘Global Warming’ Scam)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2150762/posts?page=12#12
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2150762/posts?page=14#14
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2150762/posts?page=15#15
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2150762/posts?page=4#4
Madoff the Crook donated stolen money to Democrats the willing
The Collins Report ^ | December 18th, 2008 | Kevin “Coach” Collins
http://www.collinsreport.net/
It is not just bias when GE can profit in the hundreds of millions from taxpayers in the so-called stimulus bill! GE is already getting taxpayer money. They just want more of it!
Links:
Results 1 - 10 of about 50,900 for enron cap and trade.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=enron+cap+and+trade&btnG=Google+Search
Tip of the iceberg:
05/08/2008
“Cap and Trade” - an Enron Brainchild
http://www.investigatemagazine.com/a...ate_oct_5.html
Quote:
Amidst the talk about the benefits that Kyoto Protocol is supposed to promote, it is perhaps forgotten especially amongst the greenies how Kyoto was born in the corridors of very big business. The name Enron has all but faded from our news pages since the company went down in flames in 2001 amidst charges of fraud, bribery, price fixing and graft.
But without Enron there would have been no Kyoto Protocol.
About 20 years ago Enron was owner and operator of an interstate network of natural gas pipelines, and had transformed itself into a billion-dollar-a-day commodity trader, buying and selling contracts and their derivatives to deliver natural gas, electricity, internet bandwidth, whatever. The 1990 Clean Air Act amendments authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to put a cap on how much pollutant the operator of a fossil-fueled plant was allowed to emit. In the early 1990s Enron had helped establish the market for, and became the major trader in, EPA’s $20 billion-per-year sulphur dioxide cap-and-trade program, the forerunner of today’s proposed carbon credit trade. This commodity exchange of emission allowances caused Enron’s stock to rapidly rise.
Then came the inevitable question, what next? How about a carbon dioxide cap-and-trade program? The problem was that CO2 is not a pollutant, and therefore the EPA had no authority to cap its emission. Al Gore took office in 1993 and almost immediately became infatuated with the idea of an international environmental regulatory regime. He led a U.S. initiative to review new projects around the world and issue ‘credits’ of so many tons of annual CO2 emission reduction. Under law a tradeable system was required, which was exactly what Enron also wanted because they were already trading pollutant credits.
Thence Enron vigorously lobbied Clinton and Congress, seeking EPA regulatory authority over CO2. From 1994 to 1996, the Enron Foundation contributed nearly $1 million dollars - $990,000 - to the Nature Conservancy, whose Climate Change Project promotes global warming theories. Enron philanthropists lavished almost $1.5 million on environmental groups that support international energy controls to “reduce” global warming. Executives at Enron worked closely with the Clinton administration to help create a scaremongering climate science environment because the company believed the treaty could provide it with a monstrous financial windfall. The plan was that once the problem was in place the solution would be trotted out.
<>
Results 1 - 10 of about 31,900 for GE kyoto cap and trade
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=GE+kyoto++cap+and+trade&btnG=Google+Search
Tip of the iceberg:
Obama’s ‘Cap and Trade’ Plan Imposes Huge Tax
by Christopher C. Horner
03/02/2009
In his February 24 speech, President Obama asked Congress to send him “…legislation that places a market-based cap on carbon pollution and drives the production of more renewable energy in America.” But by “market-based cap” he means that the government would mandate carbon dioxide emission permits – which are essentially permits to use energy – that companies would then be able to sell among themselves.
His budget assumes a staggering $650 billion in revenue from this scheme. But who picks up the tab? Who ultimately pays the cost of buying these slices of global warming baloney, and why would industry support such a scheme?
The answer is that you and I do, as does everyone who buys anything requiring energy, just like we pay the cost of all the other taxes paid by manufacturers. It’s a tax, folks. Plain and simple, Obama’s “market-based cap” plan is a tax on American business.
Industry is actually behind this massive tax, having sold their support so that the tax is not merely passed through to consumers, but it allows companies to skim the scheme for a profit, again at your expense.
This tax, however, is nearly twice the size of the failed BTU tax which Al Gore still attributes the Democrats’ loss of Congress the next year.
The BTU tax was offered in the name of deficit reduction. Obama’s global warming tax is expressly to pay for new middle-class welfare entitlements, even though it takes away from the beneficiaries about the same amount they will fork out in increased energy costs (if not the entire inflationary impact). The important point for his movement, however, is that more money is run through the state, creating dependency.
With BTU, the then-new “rock star” Democratic president Clinton was rebuffed by a Democratic Congress once the public fought back. This was only after the House had passed the tax by one vote – cast by Rep. Marjorie Margolies Mezvinsky (D-PA), who tearfully marched down to change her vote after being singled out for flipping by the White House. As she shuffled back up the aisle, a prescient Republican caucus loudly waived “bye, Margie!” knowing the gift she had given them. She was among many BTU-tax supporters later driven from office.
Then business successfully “Swiss-cheesed” the tax proposal by lobbying and achieving so many carve-outs that the tax simply collapsed. With an insufficient business constituency, Democratic Sens. Bennett Johnston, John Breaux and David Boren could not justify so angering the public and instructed the new president how the world would work.
There are two lessons here.
First, as Al Gore confessed to the Financial Times, going through the front door of a direct energy tax is too risky. Hence the cap-and-trade rationing scheme; it’s a tax but a non-transparent one, also making it vastly less efficient (more expensive) according to economists at, for example, the Congressional Budget Office. The message to lawmakers is to worry about one job: yours. Hide the tax. The part about also doubling the tax seems to be all Obama’s idea.
Second, cap-and-trade shows that business has also learned how to sell its support in return for additional schemes to further pick your pocket, siphoning of some of the cost to themselves. Cap-and-trade provides them billions of your dollars in return for playing along.
It’s still so ugly that some senators are exploring ways to actually ram through the scheme itself – and not just the assumptions of revenue from it – on the filibuster-proof budget process. This means they need just 50 votes plus Veep Joe Biden, not 60. It also means there would be no public development, meaning “exposure”, of the scheme.
So there remains a chance that the administration and industry have managed to lock this deal down without the taxpayer represented in the room.
If business is going to pass on the tax to consumers – as they always have to do – are businesses supporting this plan to curry favor with Obama? Of course they are. But who are “they”?
Top Companies Behind Obama’s “Global Warming Tax”
General Electric – the folks who brought you the expensive “energy-saving” light-bulbs by government mandate also bought Enron’s windmill business, that being the company which originally hatched this scheme. Beyond windmills GE has redesigned its business lines to capitalize on the energy-scarcity agenda, with little luck to date but counting on a lobbying budget bigger than “big oil”, combined.
And, just by the way, they’re the owners of NBC, MSNBC, CNBC and one of the few American companies that still trades with our most dangerous enemy, Iran.
Utilities – Cap-and-trade creates what is essentially a carbon cartel, restricting the supply and raising the price of fossil energy and thereby creating windfalls for the lucky holders of emission credits. It is surely a coincidence that companies caught engaging in illegal market manipulation — Enron, and electric utilities American Electric Power, Cinergy, Entergy, and Calpine — have been among the most aggressive lobbyists for the Kyoto Protocol or kindred emission trading schemes.
Cinergy’s CEO James Rogers is a Ken Lay protégé who, after merging with and taking the reins of Duke Energy, has added even more muscle to the global warming lobby.
Wall Street — Among the most influential lobbyists for Kyoto-style policy are Wall Street firms planning to make commissions on the purchase and sale of carbon credits. Again surely a coincidence, the players most heavily invested in profiting from a cap-and-trade scheme were among those mostly heavily implicated in last year’s collapse (e.g., Lehman Bros., JP Morgan Chase). The crumbling Bank of America, naturally, is also a leading cheerleader of the scheme.
These firms are the first cohort of what we will continue to identify for you as the companies lobbying for Congress to stick you with a “global warming” tax.
You are now faced with the question of whether to allow your elected representatives to approve one of the largest tax increases in history, raising $650 billion over eight years from mandating then selling “cap-n-trade” carbon dioxide ration coupons.
Under the Obama scheme, billions of dollars of those rationing coupons will be given away to companies supporting the scheme, and their “cost” nonetheless priced into your energy costs. This is precisely how it has worked in Europe, at great economic cost.
Yet all businesses are on the hook for their sheepishness in the face of this long-running, cynical ploy by businesses underwriting the campaign of environmentalist hysteria proclaiming the end of the earth. Some, like NEC Electronics America, have just announced with a sigh that, with California having just adopted a version of this scheme, it appears that their operations there will be pulled back to Japan.
There’s not enough room on that island nation to ship all of our jobs, though China, India, Mexico, South Korea and others have made clear they are waiting to accommodate the rest.
The one thing we do know is that if this doesn’t prove politically to be BTU redux for the Democrats, there’s no room for manufacturing here.
Mr. Horner is author of “Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed.”
<>
Put oil firm chiefs on trial, says leading climate change scientist
The Guardian ^ | June 23, 2007 | Ed Pilkington
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/23/fossilfuels.climatechange
Posted on Monday, June 23, 2008 3:24:05 AM by spandau-guard
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2034981/posts
James Hansen, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
My comment:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2034907/posts?page=70#70
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2034907/posts?page=75#75
37 posted on Monday, June 23, 2008 8:01:00 AM by Matchett-PI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2034981/posts?page=37#37
Why Enron Wants Global Warming
by Patrick J. Michaels
Patrick J. Michaels is senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute and author of “The Satanic Gases.”
This article appeared on cato.org on February 6, 2002.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3388
How Enron hyped global warming for profit
The Kyoto Conspiracy (Gore, Enron, Carbon Trading, Global Warming)
Investigate Magazine ^ | March 2006
http://www.investigatemagazine.com/archives/2006/03/investigate_oct_5.html
Posted on Friday, April 06, 2007 2:56:24 PM by Shermy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1813229/posts
Enron Gave Big Bucks to Democrats, Backed ‘Global Warming’ Scam
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/1/16/135018.shtml
Phil Brennan, NewsMax.com
Thursday, Jan. 17, 2002
Also posted here in these two threads:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1770760/posts?page=32#32
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1765301/posts?page=5#5
70 posted on Monday, June 23, 2008 12:35:59 AM by Matchett-PI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2034907/posts?page=70#70
“Mr. Hansen should be put on trial for slander, willful defamation, and attempts to incite public hysteria.” ~ rabscuttle385 #65
Mr. Hansen isn’t the only one to deliberately incite public hysteria. Another one of Algore’s science “advisors” was also a “Reverend”:
The Reverend Sir John Houghton, former head of the UK Meteorological Office, Publisher of Al Gore’s book on GW and Former Co-Chair of the IPCC, said this:
“Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen ...
[Interjection: Couldn’t that legitimately be called, “lying for Jesus”?]
“.. human induced global warming is a weapon of mass destruction at least as dangerous as chemical, nuclear or biological weapons that kills more people than terrorism.”
“While no one can ascribe a single weather event to climate change with any degree of certainty...the parallels between global climate change and global terrorism are becoming increasingly obvious.” ~ Reverend John Houghton
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,93466,00.html
*
“We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” ~ Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory) (in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989)
*
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” ~ Maurice Strong - Secretary General of the Rio Summit in June of 1992
75 posted on Monday, June 23, 2008 1:01:04 AM by Matchett-PI (Driving a Phase Two Operation Chaos Hybrid that burns both gas AND rubber.)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2034907/posts?page=75#75
members of congress are exempt from insider trading rules. (not a joke)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.