Groundhog Day at The New York Times
This is starting to get like Groundhog Day. The New York Times has another sloppy, poorly researched editorial today. This time, they take on the Bush administration on the issue of coal mines,
The Bush administration’s accommodation of the mining industry â?? notably by packing the mine safety agencies with pro-management appointees â?? has produced a marked decline in major fines for negligent companies. A recent data analysis by The Times documented a risky, business-friendly downturn in penalties since 2001.
As Winds of Change noted this morning,
These guys do what for a living?
Sadly, the professional journalists at the Times couldn’t so the five minutes of research that would have told them that - with the exception of an outlier to date this year - deaths under the Bush Administration are significantly lower than those under pro-labor Clinton.
As I noted in my post when the WV accident first occurred, the left would not be able to resist the compulsion to run with this,George W. Bush Caused The Mine Collapse. This was as predictable as it was laughable.
This is a symptom of Bush Derangement Syndrome, the inability to take a breath, do an ounce of research, or give an ioda of thought before taking any opportunity to attack George Bush. The results for the attackers…embarrassment at being wrong as rain once again.
Here is a portion of my earlier post,
Coal mine production reached the highest levels in history in recent years. In 2004 coal mining fatalities were near the lowest level in history with 28. Even with the recent high production, MSHAâ??s accident reduction efforts helped to keep the annual fatality totals nearly 50% lower in recent years compared with totals recorded in the early 1990s.
1. Clintonâ??s last year in office, 2000, there were 48 deaths in coal mines. In 2004, there were 28
2. The injury rate in 2000 was 6.64, in 2004 it was 5.00
3. Citations for safety violations in 2000: 58,285; Citations for violations in 2004: 64,635 (this would indicate to me more rigorous enforcement under Bush, especially after having cut back on coal industry enforcement jobs as the Democrats claim. Sounds to me like the Clinton administration was asleep at the switch)
The Times editors really need to start reading blogs! And we don’t even charge them for the privilege! If they did, they might have read Winds of Change, BizzyBlog or Pundit Review and realized, ahead of time for once, what a bunch of pathetic, agenda driven hacks they look like when they publish poorly researched editorials simply for the sake of Bush bashing.
March 22nd, 2006 at 9:59 am
So have fines not gone down? Was there more in the NYTImes story that said that the lack of fines has equaled a rise in deaths? Seems like your statement of the reduction of deaths and the Times statement of a decrease in fines can both be true.
Because I really don’t want to have to read the Times to get the explanation.
And in the end, maybe the fines and decrease in deaths have very little to do with some all powerful government agency, and more to do with better technology and miners and management actually just getting smarter. Sometimes things happen (like an industry getting safer) without the help of the government. Just a thought.
But I agree with your main point that attacking Bush over this is just plain silly. Not every problem is Bush’s fault.
March 22nd, 2006 at 10:45 am
The NY Times, along with the rest of the mainstream media, is a propaganda arm of the Bush administration. While appearing “liberal” by attacking Bush on a variety of basic issues, they dutifully parrot the administration’s talking points on the most serious of topics like 9/11, the Army’s use of white phosphorous in Fallujah, unlawful NSA wiretaps, etc. Let’s not forget that it was the NY Times that agreed to shelve the wiretap story at the administration’s behest. I’ve said it many times - the raging liberal/conservative debate in this is a smokescreen to keep the American public divided (and it’s working). If the “liberal” NY Times were really out to get Bush, they would seriously investigate the conspiracy theory that is the government’s official 9/11 explanation, an explanation that has been torn to shreds by true American patriots in the blogosphere.
March 22nd, 2006 at 11:24 am
John,
I love that you are commenting regularly on the site. Please continue. I just have to smile when I read that the MSM is a tool for the Bush administration. What next, are you going to dispute the moon landing or tell us why we should all join the flat earth society?
You can have your opinions on NSA, 9/11 etc, but to ask me to believe that the MSM is rooting on Bush, that is simply too much.
Kevin
March 22nd, 2006 at 11:33 am
The Optimist,
As I send in my January post,
Citations for safety violations in 2000: 58,285; Citations for violations in 2004: 64,635.
This would indicate to me more rigorous enforcement under Bush, especially after having cut back on coal industry enforcement jobs as the Democrats claim. Sounds to me like the Clinton administration was asleep at the switch.
Hope that helps
Kevin
March 22nd, 2006 at 12:24 pm
[...] UPDATE: In aptly titled post (”Groundhog Day at The New York Times”), Pundit Review chips in (sorry guys, I must have deleted your trackback — it’s hard to get good help these days), and revisits their very good post on fatalities and safety from early January. [...]
March 22nd, 2006 at 1:04 pm
O great, now you are going to force me to actually read the Time’s article. Painful.
And the white phosphorous debate is an interesting side discussion. White phosphorous has been used as a standard military weapon since World War II. It is a very effective weapon. Is it a terrible way to die, yes. But I assume so is getting getting blown to bits by a fragmentation grenade. And it is an incindiery (sp?) weapon, and not really what many people consider a chemical weapon. And Washington is not a signatory of an international treaty restricting white phosphorus devices. If memory serves me correctly, that treaty was not done during Bush’s term, although I could be wrong.)
The point is that the white phosphorous debate I consider to be way off base. White phosphorous grenades were standard issue in World War II and have been used ever since. The fact that they are being used now is nothing really earth shattering. You can definitely argue that they are terrible weapons, but they are an acceptable weapon in the US arsenal if I am not mistaken.
March 22nd, 2006 at 9:57 pm
When the Jihadis get a bomb, they won’t… “Nuke Dubuque”, NYC LA or Dc and it will take 5-10 million Democratic voters with it.
If it weren’t so terrible a prospect, the Grim Gray Lady turning to “Aangry Orange radioactive gas at 10,000,0000 F,” along with its warped denizens, it might mitigate the tradgedy a bit.
Its only been three years since 4000 plus NY Times customers turned into concrete smeared dust, but it seems they have forgotten what happened just down the street. Meanwhile they bitch at a war that has not come close in casualties to half the the civilians on New York city streets that were murdered on Day One, 9/11.
The Gray Lady moans and cries to treat the terrorists as POWs; pray they succeed. Then we can conduct summary execute them for violating the Genewva conventions against committing atrocities on civilians.
March 23rd, 2006 at 9:47 am
Stan, your government lied to you regarding the events of 9/11. You will learn this in due course.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:48 pm
John,
What was that lie again? The Jews did it? We detonated the towers with explosives? I know that one is true, I heard Charlie Sheen talking about it this week.
Seriously, what lie?
Kevin
March 24th, 2006 at 9:23 am
Kevin, I’m not going to get into all the details and discrepancies. It’s too exhausting, and you’ll likely dismiss it outright anyways. Please consider how George Bush has invoked 9/11 ad nauseum and how the event has been used to justify wars that have benefited administration cronies. Please consider that a tremendous amount of evidence remains locked up for “national security” purposes. Please also consider how the mainstream media has intentionally labeled people like me who question the official government story a crazy, fringe, moonbat, conspiracy theorist. There’s a concerted effort to marginalize us because we know the truth.
March 24th, 2006 at 5:48 pm
John:
Yeah, but now we are all really interested in what the lie is. You are very well spoken, write succinctly and seem to really want to change our minds and not just yell at us. I respect that.
But you can’t just leave us hanging like that. Do you have a blog or site that goes over your theory?
We all know the government lies all the time. I made a point of studying several very large lies about battles happening in Grenada that never really happened at all. I just can’t believe that anything as horrible and destructive as the 9/11 attacks can be part of a massive cover up. But I’ll always listen to other views.
March 24th, 2006 at 6:23 pm
John,
For someone with a monopoly on the truth, I’d think you would be more willing to enlighten the rest of us?
Kevin
March 25th, 2006 at 8:50 am
Hey John,
You’ve got a friend in Charlie Sheen. Or are you Charlie Sheen posting “anonymously” as John. Hmmmm… Thats my conspiracy theory.