The MSM in this country continues to prove everyday that their liberal bias is strong. This time it’s The New York Times which has an article up with the headline:
A G.O.P. Leader Tightly Bound to Lobbyists
The article suggests that Boehner has a disturbing level of ties to “lobbyist friends.”
Mr. Boehner’s ties seem especially deep
But hey….did you know?
- Nancy Pelosi has raised almost twice as much money from lobbyists this election as Boehner has?
- At least 18 House Democrats have raised more lobbyist cash this election than Boehner has.
- Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid have pocketed more lobbyist cash in the past 18 months than Boehner has raised in the past 6 elections, combined?
~~~…What if we tried to use facts and data, rather than the reporter’s impression, to measure Boehner’s lobbyist ties against those of other politicians.
Let’s start with campaign contributions. The Times writes:
[Lobbyists] have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaigns
Here’s what they mean: from 1999 until today, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Boehner has raised $299,490 from lobbyists.
For comparison, Harry Reid, Blanche Lincoln, and Chuck Schumer have each raised more money from lobbyists in this cycle alone.
This election cycle, Boehner is not even in the top 20 recipients of lobbyist cash. He’s raised less than $40,000 from lobbyists this cycle — compared to Nancy Pelosi’s $71,000 from lobbyists.
I’m guessing Timothy Carney at the Examiner spent about all of five minutes to cull all that from Open Secrets. But Eric Lipton couldn’t be bothered with that kind of unbiased reporting. The paper, and our MSM, are circling the toilet bowl so they might as well play to their base eh?
Don’t forget their attempt to smear John McCain with allegations of marital infidelity just as he wrapped up the Republican nomination for President. The newspaper’s public editor ended up scolding the Times and its editors for publishing a hack job based on unsupported allegations from disgruntled former staffers. It wasn’t their only effort at tilting the election, either:
- Gray Lady fighting dirty against McCain campaign? Update: NYT Ethics Policy
- The Times Strikes Back, Lamely
- Someone please call the Gray Lady a waaahmbulance! Update: It wasn’t “tightly controlled” in 1999
In this case, the use of the phrase “especially deep” shows that the Times wanted to make Boehner look as though he was on the extreme outlier of the common practice of fundraising among lobbysists. Whatever one thinks of that practice, it’s one of the truly bipartisan efforts on Capitol Hill.
The only one tightly bound to each other here appears to be the New York Times and the Democrat party.
See author page