The Washington Post reported that Senate Republicans argued that use of the budget reconciliation process to pass President Obama's health, education and energy initiatives "would make bipartisan cooperation all but impossible on some of the most significant measures to come before the Senate in years," but not that Republicans used the reconciliation process to pass several major Bush administration initiatives.
Loading the player reg...
On Your World, Neil Cavuto hosted Trent Lott to discuss energy policy but failed to disclose that Lott is now a lobbyist for major energy companies. During the segment, Lott touted specific issues for which he lobbies, including "Algae to Ethanol technology" and offshore drilling.
Wall Street Journal editorial board member Holman Jenkins didn't like Barack Obama's comments about developing renewable energy sources:
Put away the "energy independence" conceit. This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler, was debunked by Churchill, who reasoned that true energy security came from a diversity of suppliers, not the foolish pursuit of self-sufficiency.
In an article discussing whether the Environmental Protection Agency would begin to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act, The New York Times quoted Jeffrey Holmstead warning that such efforts are "[p]otentially ... a huge mess." While the article mentioned that Holmstead is the "director of environmental strategies at the law firm Bracewell & Giuliani," it did not note that Holmstead lobbies on behalf of energy companies and that -- as the Times previously reported -- Bracewell & Giuliani is an energy lobbying firm.
Glenn Beck mocked the economic recovery package for including "$2.4 billion for carbon capture demonstration projects," adding, "I don't even know what the hell that is." Had Beck attempted to determine "what the hell" carbon capture is before ridiculing it, he would have learned that the provision funds the development of technology that he has previously criticized "liberals in Congress" for "block[ing]."
Goes to the WSJ's "New Administration Would Risk Backlash With Gas-Drilling Reversal."
It's about the possible political drawbacks the Obama administration would face for taking quick action to reverse the current White House's decision to expand natural-gas drilling in Utah. That's all well and good in terms of a legit news story.
But the Journal never points to any proof (i.e. polling data) to substantiate the claim that Obama would face a "backlash" if he halted the drilling. The closest the article comes is here:
John P. Burke, a professor at the University of Vermont who wrote a book on presidential transitions, said the incoming administration risks a partisan backlash if it clamps down too hard on drilling -- especially coming off a campaign in which a potent Republican rallying cry was "Drill, baby, drill!"
So basically, hardcore Republicans might be upset with the gas-drilling reversal. But we're pretty sure partisan Republicans are going to be upset by all sorts of initiatives taken by the Obama team.
To us, that hardly constitutes a "backlash."
The Washington Post, The Washington Times, the Associated Press, and The Hill reported Sen. John McCain's claims that Sen. Barack Obama is "offering government-run health care" and "an energy plan guaranteed to work without drilling," without noting that both claims are false. Obama has not proposed "government-run health care" and Obama's energy plan calls domestic oil and natural gas production "critical to prevent global energy prices from climbing even higher."
CNN's Amy Holmes falsely suggested that during the first presidential debate, Sen. Barack Obama "said the first thing he would sacrifice is energy policy," when he was asked what he would sacrifice in his "spending plans." In fact, Obama cited "energy independence" as the first example in a list of "things" that he said "have to be done."
On his radio show, Sean Hannity did not challenge Sen. John McCain's false claim during an interview that Alaska "provides 20 percent of America's energy requirements." In fact, according to the most recent figures of the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Alaska is responsible for "just 3.5 percent of the country's domestic energy production," and only 2.4 percent of the energy the U.S. consumes.
On Fox News' The Live Desk, Trace Gallagher repeated a debunked oil drilling myth, claiming that "more oil seeps through the ground off the coast of California than is ever spilled out there. So you're going to have much more environmental damage." In fact, according to a County of Santa Barbara report, "The evidence is clear that, far from being invisible against a background of seeps, major spills can have far greater and qualitatively different impacts on the environment than do seeps."
On MSNBC's Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough uncritically aired video of Sen. John McCain falsely claiming that Sarah Palin is "governor of a state that 20 percent of our America's energy supply comes from." In fact, as Factcheck.org noted, according to the most recent figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Alaska is responsible for "just 3.5 percent of the country's domestic energy production," and only 2.4 percent of the energy the United States consumes.
A Washington Times article uncritically repeated an assertion by Sen. John McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds that "[i]n the Senate, Barack Obama has voted in lockstep with President George W. Bush nearly half the time" and did not mention that, according to Congressional Quarterly, McCain voted with the Bush administration 95 percent of the time in 2007 and has voted with Bush 90 percent of the time over the course of Bush's presidency.
Loading the player reg...