Posted on 02/11/2019 7:13:18 PM PST by DeweyCA
Earlier today I wrote about the Washington Post’s summary of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ efforts to walk back an embarrassing FAQ which her office used as part of the rollout for the Green New Deal. As bad as the Post story was in some ways, at least it managed to convey some of the embarrassing twists and turns this story has taken over the past four days. The NY Times published a summary today which omits all the troubling details and manages to work in the standard “Republicans pounce” formula used routinely by the media for any story that embarrasses a Democrat. This headline is like a parody:
Ocasio-Cortez Team Flubs a Green New deal Summary, and Republicans Pounce
The opening graph of the story furthers the narrative by confusing the timeline:
Days after introducing her Green New Deal — a plan to combat climate change that has won the endorsement of several Democratic presidential candidates — Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez found the proposal enmeshed in confusion when her staff published a summary that included provisions not endorsed by the candidates.
As I pointed out this morning, the FAQ was posted on AOC’s site two days before the official rollout of the Green New Deal resolution. So she didn’t get in trouble “days after” because her office published the FAQ. She got in trouble because her office gave the FAQ to news outlets that published it, allowing people to read it.
In any case, the fact that this wasn’t just published on the web but was intentionally handed out to NPR and other outlets by AOC’s staff as part of the Green New Deal rollout doesn’t even get a mention in the NY Times version of events:
Over the weekend her staff backed away from the document, saying it was incomplete and had been published by accident, after Republicans pounced on the plan, citing a blog post of frequently asked questions. That post included language that called for economic security “for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”
“An early draft of a FAQ that was clearly unfinished and that doesn’t represent the GND resolution got published to the website by mistake,” Saikat Chakrabarti, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, wrote on Twitter, referring to the plan by its acronym.
The Times just skips over the fact this was intentionally given out to the media (not just published by accident to the website by some junior staffer). By ignoring that and leading with the claim this was all an accident, you set up the inevitable “Republicans pounced” dynamic.
That’s not all that gets left out of this story. By ignoring the embarrassing incident Friday night when AOC’s Green New Deal adviser went on Fox News and claimed the FAQ had been doctored and the fact that she retweeted the claim, the Times avoids giving readers the idea that maybe, just maybe, it wasn’t the FAQ that was a mistake it was the shoddy, self-serving attempt to claim this was all a big mistake instead of a revealing window into where AOC thinks the Green New Deal is headed.
Personally, the last entity that I want to make a deal with is the government.
No cars, planes or electricity in 10 years. Enjoy the 1890s.
>>It is noteworthy that so many of the Dem Pres wannabes endorsed this farce.<<
And President Trump is gonna hang that Albatross around their neck.
The FAQ was obviously hacked by the Russkies—and the DNC will have to murder one of their staffers to prove it! ;-)
It’s worth noting that AOC only jumped on this “Green New Deal” bandwagon AFTER she was elected. She represents a crummy district in NYC that is 50% Hispanic, and where most people don’t give a damn about “climate change.”
The Newark Star-Ledger in neighboring NJ isn’t any better; look at the race-baiting headline this morning: “Unsolved mass lynching grand jury testimony set for release thanks to N.J. lawyer who took on Trump Justice Department”
Yes, this is a real headline - related to an incident that took place when Trump was born.
The leftist democrats have embraced “Ignorance is strength.”
JoMa
The ‘green’ is what they’ll be stuffing into their pockets
People don’t understand. What they are doing is a warped perversion of Art of the Deal.
This thing is absolutely full of straw men negotitating tokens to be traded away. In the end we’ll end up with socialized medicine and guaranteed national income, while breathing a sigh of relief that we got to keep airplanes and hamburgers.
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.