The Union leans Left

George Rebane

RR has long argued and demonstrated that the local Left is terribly out of touch with important happenings here and elsewhere.  One of their constant complaints is that The Union is so far biased to the Right in its editorial stance that it should be renamed The Tea Party Gazette.  Nothing could be further from the truth as documented by an ongoing audit by the Nevada County Republican Women Federated (NCRWF).

Members of the NCRWF leadership met on 16 November 2015 with Union publisher Jim Hemig and editor Brian Hamilton to present their most recent tranche of data from their audit of the newspaper’s editorial page contents – editorials, syndicated columns, submitted commentaries, political cartoons, and letters to the editor – which were published in the August-September timeframe.  The audit revealed that of the 329 pieces published, 140 espoused liberal views, 90 were conservative, and 99 were neutral.

Messrs Hemig and Hamilton have long held that their newspaper seeks to represent a balanced political perspective for our community, and they were reportedly surprised to learn that their actual editorial policy was skewed 61% - 39% in favor of leftwing submissions and ideas.

I must add my own surprise to that of The Union’s management.  While having long had a hunch that the paper had a liberal bent to it - that has always been corroborated by the public statements/talks by Hemig and Hamilton - I wrote that off as their being part and parcel of the progressives' preponderance in the news media in general.  (None of this, of course, has been noted or admitted by the Left whose position seems to be that if an outlet doesn’t continuously espouse the socialism of Marx, Engels, et al, then it has been co-opted by the corporatist Right.)

But the nagging question remains as to what specific local pressures exist to tilt the newspaper so markedly toward the left.  Other indicators of the paper’s disposition on this issue are its lax enforcement of its announced policy of a 30-day interval between publishing letters from any one correspondent.  Some frequent writers are definitely favored.  (My own infrequent letters are batting about 500 in this league for getting published.)  And there is a significant problem with the paper’s policy of letting a considerable time lapse between an issue raised in a column and publishing the responding letters.  Again, the Left is favored in this regard.

An illustration of this asymmetric policy is the 19nov15 letter from a Ms Angelica Niblock, an unabashed leftwinger, demonstrably ignorant, and a True Believer in preventable man-made, catastrophic global warming (PGW).  She takes the newspaper to task for having published the full page ad piece by Mr Frank Pinney making the case that ‘global warming is a hoax’ (more here).  She claims that the ad was disguised as an "authentic part"(sic!) of its editorial content, and that the newspaper should no longer publish pieces that are skeptical of man-made global warming.  Her main point is that exposing such ideas to public view is akin to printing statements that Negroes are inferior to white people. And moreover, that permitting such arguments skeptical of PGW in the public forum indicates that The Union does not “take its role in journalism seriously and make wise decisions when asked to print smut.”

Ms Niblock is not the only liberal who has recently demanded that The Union adhere to her higher principles of journalism and thereby institute a policy of proscribing conservative thought and ideas.  History records that the push to censor the other side in the media has been a constant and uniquely leftwing goal for decades.  Such proposals, exhortations, and admonitions continue at all levels in our country with such regularity that they can be taken as a litmus test for correctly identifying a person as a collectivist.

The First Amendment holds that in our republic all ideas should be exposed to public purview so that they may sway the thinking of its educated and informed citizenry who can then decide which ones will carry the day.

Let me finish by saying again that I appreciate our local newspaper’s role in binding and informing our little foothills community.  As a conservetarian I also acknowledge that The Union is a business and a private enterprise which can hold and promote whatever social and political views it sees fit to print.  I don’t want anyone to censor its work product, nor in response to the Niblocks of the world do I want it to censor itself as a purveyor of ideas.

Comments

[Todd Juvinall]

I don't think it is a blatant bias because conservatives are usually working at their business while the liberals are home watching for navel hair and lint. They have more time and are more easily outraged against anything. The woman today on AGW is a fine example. I have been trying to engage with these authors at the comments level of the Union on line. Even if no one reads them at least I know the lies have been met with the truth.

[Todd Juvinall]

Here is the link to the Nibblets woman screed and check out the ludicrous response from a guy that is now posting on the FUE's cesspool. Another man gonna make us believe with page after page of BS. Just like Frisch and Ben Emery.

http://www.theunion.com/opinion/letters/19002973-113/angelica-niblock-global-warming-hoax-ad-irresposible?show=comments

[George Rebane]

ToddJ 1220pm - Thanks, but apparently you missed the link in the post to Ms Niblock's letter.

[Todd Juvinall]

?? I guess it went over my head. What link?

[Todd Juvinall]

Oh, wait. My point is the comments after the letter. Not the letter.

[George Boardman]

I'm curious to know how the Republican ladies rated my column. Did they judge it in the aggregate, or did they rate each column individually?

And what set of conservative standards did they use to make their judgments, since there seems to be at least two or three versions of what constitutes a conservative.

[Jon]

George B, I always look to the science on this one. Come on now, clearly yours are 51/49.

[Don Bessee]

Look to the science? Starting early eh.

[George Rebane]

ToddJ 1242pm - The links are underlined. The link for her letter is "19nov15 letter".

GeorgeB 342pm - I understand that each piece was judged independently on its own merits. From what I have seen of the data, it looks like a pretty good job of ascribing the categories. Your contributions were by no means uniformly liberal.

Actually, the job of a conservative making such admittedly subjective judgments about the published material is no more difficult than for a liberal doing the same task. You speak of 'sets of conservative standards' as if these were in a published and broadly accepted manual that presumably contained equivalent guidance for the 'liberal' and 'neutral' categories. I am not aware of such a document nor do I know of anyone who is; perhaps you could be of help.

[Ben Emery]

George,
What you or the Republican Women's club would call liberal I would most likely call conservative. Is Affordable Care Act liberal? The way the Republican Party talks about it a person would believe it is almost communist take over of our health care system. For the record Richard Nixon administration health care plan was more liberal than the ACA and the Heritage/ Republican Party plan in the early 1990's were very similar to the ACA.

Is the ACA the GOP health care plan from 1993?
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2013/nov/15/ellen-qualls/aca-gop-health-care-plan-1993/

Nixoncare vs. Obamacare: U-M team compares the rhetoric & reality of two health plans

http://ihpi.umich.edu/news/nixoncare-vs-obamacare-u-m-team-compares-rhetoric-reality-two-health-plans

[Walt]

Ben.. Nice try. The "GOP" health care "plan" didn't make anyone sign up at "gun point".
(You will sign up or get fined....HEAVILY) And now many if mot most Gov health care systems are going under, despite the huge premiums, and co-pays.
Only those who fall into the "no pay" zone love it.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/11/19/unitedhealth-group-earnings-downgrade-obamacare-affordable-care-act/76040322/

http://cjonline.com/news/business/2015-10-20/coventry-pulling-out-kansas-insurance-exchange

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/blue-cross-aetna-united-humana-flee-obamacare-exchanges

[fish]

Posted by: Walt | 20 November 2015 at 07:10 AM

Much to my surprise the GOP was smart enough to not implement it.....and Bens reversal of his earlier position is interesting. I remember when Ben thought O'Fascistcare was thuper duper when it benefited him personally.

Oct 28, 2014 - Ben Emery says: ... I plan on writing a book about my journey through cancer and how without ACA I would not of had health insurance ... The subtitle “How Obamacare saved my life!”.

I am digging seeing the wheels fall off this thing though!

[Todd Juvinall]

The Climate change group will be wandering the overpasses in a few days. They are so desperate they now meet in a CHURCH! They are trying to convince the churches they are with them. Cracks me up.

[Bill Tozer]

Oh Todd @ 7:55 am. In the days of yore in my vagabond years, I used to stop by a church and the Parson would let me crash on the floor for the night. Or they just left the places of worship unlocked for the rambling traveling men and their stray women they gathered along the path to happy destiny.. Great empty place to get drunk and play the piano in the dead of night. A safe place if you will. Nowadays, they lock up the Church doors at night instead of leaving it open for us rebels without a job. Unfair!
A Church is a good place for them banana heads. Cheaper than renting a building and have all that rent and overhead, which was the case when that wild and crazy gal from Nevada City had that Green Building in downtown that couldn't make the rent. Think the worm farm was in the back and costume jewelry was in the front.
Don't see why they just don't rent the big vacant downtown old Hedmen's furniture store. There is even a few parking spaces in the back and that wild and crazy gal has all the connections to open it up to resemble an European market, complete with willing greenies to pack it full.
Ah, who am I kidding. Money talks and bull lucky walks.

[Todd Juvinall]

So true BillT. These scofflaws spreading their pucky about the weather are cheapskates through and through. Even though they receive millions in taxpayers money, they still do the overpass gig. The money probably goes in their pockets.

[George Rebane]

BenE 712pm - Please don't think that I have ever given evidence of my blanket support for all policies of all Republican presidents. These pages testify otherwise. For example, Nixon turned into a very progressive president when he got into office.

And your "very similar to ACA" interpretation is far off the mark of what your citation reports and what happened historically. But your interpretation viz seeing current liberals as conservatives is again duly noted, and readers are reminded to keep this firmly in mind as they calibrate your comments.

You are still invited to assemble and share your socio-political credo. I cannot overemphasize the importance of such a document for RR readers as they compare a conservatarion credo (mine) with your (label please) credo. It would be illuminating beyond measure.

[Ben Emery]

I did a quick survey of Nevada County Greens and at 80% of Union editorials are anywhere from conservative to right wing bat shit crazy.

[Ben Emery]

Walt
Here is a excerpt from the polifact article. I know you guys hate quotes, facts, and links but us progressives kind of like to know where the information and opinions are coming from:

Republican Sen. John Chafee of Rhode Island was the point man. The bill he introduced, Health Equity and Access Reform Today, (yes, that spells HEART) had a list of 20 co-sponsors that was a who’s who of Republican leadership. There was Minority Leader Bob Dole, R- Kan., Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and many others. There also were two Democratic co-sponsors.

Among other features, the Chafee bill included:

An individual mandate;

Creation of purchasing pools;

Standardized benefits;

Vouchers for the poor to buy insurance;

A ban on denying coverage based on a pre-existing condition.

Here is another article pointing out the very sharp right turn our nation has taken on so many issues over the last 3 decades.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/health/policy/health-care-mandate-was-first-backed-by-conservatives.html?_r=0

[Ben Emery]

Here is the Heritage Foundation plan in 1989. I will cut and paste the portion about individual or household mandates.

You guys live in your own little bubbles, I am not sure if I envy or feel sorry for you.

http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/assuring-affordable-health-care-for-all-americans

Heritage Plan section 5

"2) Mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance. Many states now require passengers in automobiles to wear seatbelts for their own protection. Many others require anybody driving a car to have li a bility insurance. But neither the federal government nor any state requires all households to protect themselves from the potentially catastrophic costs of a serious accident or illness. Under the Heritage plan, there would be such a requirement. This man d ate is based on two important principles. First, that health care protection is a responsibility of individuals, not businesses. Thus to the extent that anybody should be required to provide coverage to a family, the household mandate assumes that it is t h e family that carries the first responsibility. Second, it assumes that there is an implicit contract between households and society, based on the notion that health insurance is not like other forms of insurance protection. If a young man wrecks his Pors c he and has not had the foresight to obtain insurance, we may commiserate but society feels no obligation to repair his car. But health care is different. If a man is struck down by a heart attack in the street, Americans will care for him whether or not h e has insurance. If we find that he has spent his money on other things rather than insurance, we may be angry but we will not deny him services - even if that means more prudent citizens end up paying the tab. A mandate on individuals recognizes this impl i cit contract. Society does feel a moral obligation to insure that its citizens do not suffer from the unavailability of health care. But on the other hand, each household has the obligation, to the extent it is able, to avoid placing demands on society by protecting itself.

[Ben Emery]

For the record I am opposed to the health care mandate without a public option. Without the public option it is text book corporatism and crony capitalism. Being forced to purchase services from a for profit private sector company, wtf!

Outside of that and a couple other smaller issues I support what is in ACA. Hopefully within my lifetime we as Americans will see having access to health care as a human right not a money making scheme.

[George Boardman]

Re Dr. R's Thursday 4:27 p.m.:

Evangelical conservatives who give a high priority to social issues like same-sex marriage and abortion are likely to judge the popular media more harshly than Wall Street conservatives who would rather discuss trade policy, immigration, or taxing of the rich and corporations.

If the findings were published with an explanation of the methodology, then people could judge for themselves the validity of the study.

[fish]

Posted by: Ben Emery | 20 November 2015 at 09:50 AM

Hopefully within my lifetime we as Americans will see having access to health care as a human right not a money making scheme.

Hopefully within your lifetime will will be able to grasp the concept that if others are forced to provide it for you that it isn't a "right".

[Gregory]

"I did a quick survey of Nevada County Greens and at 80% of Union editorials are anywhere from conservative to right wing bat shit crazy."-Master Ben

That's because 80% of NC Greens are bat shit crazy.

[George Rebane]

GeorgeB 951am - The 'bookends' you cite are not orthogonal; a person could be both an evangelical and rather discuss more secular things. But that does not matter. In this audit I can assure you that no such extreme perspectives were involved. Nevertheless, the subjective assessment of the political leaning of published items on their individual 'merits' has to my knowledge never been formally methodized. If I am wrong, please cite an example of where "an explanation of the methodology" was offered for such an audit.

Political orientation is much like 'profanity'. Its dimensions are complex and many, and no algorithm has yet been developed that would allow us either to lock-step follow or program a computer to categorize products of human expression. I believe that demanding such a prerequisite before 'judging the validity' of this audit is a bit specious. Nevertheless, as a useful proxy, I recommend that you apply my credo and the long record of RR commentaries to convey the standards applied. I know the individuals who performed the audit (which continues), and you would not be far off in your subsequent decision to accept/reject the above posted stats. I hope this helps.

(As an illustration of such subjective variability, consider Mr Ben Emery who informed us in his 712pm how his belief system would have skewed such an audit. Nothing as extreme as that is involved with the Union audit. BTW, our local leftwing continues to call RR a "hard right" blog and me an "extreme rightwinger". I have asked those of such opinion to point out any published belief of mine which would warrant the use of 'hard' and 'extreme'. The response has been delivered by their cricket corps. As a man with an analytical mind and a keen observer of the human condition, can you shed some light on what specific standard they apply to use such appellations?)

[George Boardman]

You're asking me to explain why Pelline calls you a "hard right" political blogger?

He puts me in the same group, but then there are the righties who think I'm a Commie. I know I'm in the right spot when I'm getting whacked from both sides of the political spectrum.

[George Rebane]

GeorgeB 1058am - No doubt you are in the correct (don't want to say 'right') spot Mr Boardman since you advertise yourself as a middle roader like my friend Bob Crabb. But I would still like your view as to what criteria the Left (more than Pelline) use to so label me. I don't know how you place me in the political spectrum that may have more than one dimension, but would be interested to know.

[Todd Juvinall]

The left has tried to make "conservative" an epithet all my life. But, they lost. We however have made "liberal" one.

[Bill Tozer]

George B. Well, sir, are you a Commie? If so, you should be teaching at the university, or, heaven forbid, some state college. :). That is where you can catch a glimpse of a real Pinko outside of working for the current Administration. Heck, if you are a Commie Bastard, then I can save some of my carbon footprint by bringing the tour bus by the Union to show the visitors what a real Commie looks like. That sure would be a time saver and yours truly could even drive the happy sightseers to Reno for a buffet after our GV stop. Hope you aren't camera shy as some folks have never knowingly seen the Real McCoy up front and personal. Let me know. Thanks Mr. B.

[Michael R. Kesti]

It seems clear enough to me that reasons the FUE uses the term hard-right include his intent to insult a hope that it might make him appear to be more middle of the road than he actually is.

[Michael R. Kesti]

Make that, "...and a hope..."

[Ben Emery]

Gregory,
It is all about perspective big guy. I feel the republican party, not its voters, has gone insane. The party line voters in both the democratic and republican party's are held hostage by the fear of the other.

[Todd Juvinall]

So Ben Emery, are you saying (without saying it) that the Green Party voters don't vote party line?

[Todd Juvinall]

Here is the latest fraudulent "science" ahead of the Paris talks. What a load of crap the "climate Change" fools are spewing.

http://realclimatescience.com/2015/11/record-crushing-fraud-from-noaa-and-nasa-ahead-of-paris/

[Jon]

But 90+% of the world's population understands and supports the efforts of the climate change leaders.
Todd, you are in a very small minority. No matter- the world will move ahead anyway without your ignorant and antiquated views. You are free to cling to them for the remaining days of your life. Bitter clingers are very interesting, but utterly irrelevant, people.

[Michael R. Kesti]

Jon | 20 November 2015 at 10:03 PM

"90+%"

Can you support that statistic, Jon, or did you pull it out of your ass, too?

Either way, there were times when a very large minority of the world's population knew that Earth was flat and at the center of the universe, too, but they turned out to be incorrect. It is your proof by majority opinion that is truly irrelevant.

[Gregory]

Only half (well, 52%) of the professional membership of the American Meteorological Ass'n (Michael Mann is an AMS Fellow) think more than half the warming of the last century was man made; we know this because the AMS actually asked a year or so ago.

This is the only actual poll of scientists I know of. It would have been interesting had they asked if they believed co2 driven warming was a crisis; I assume they didn't want to find out.

[Gregory]

Ben Emery, feel less,think more.

I realize that's a practical impossibility for you.

[fish]

Posted by: Michael R. Kesti | 20 November 2015 at 11:23 PM

I'm guessing he got it (90%) from Ben who trots it out at every opportunity to "show" just how much support he has for his progressive views.

You'd think with that level of support we would be well into the Soviet style show trial phase for the "crimethinkers" who frequent this blog.

[fish]

Now this cracks me up.....Russia even plays the PR game better than President Ward Heeler!

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-gives-france-puppy-replace-police-dog-killed-112930593.html

[Michael R. Kesti]

Gregory 21Nov15 01:46 AM

It is easy to be rude when one lacks the courage and integrity to identify oneself.

[Russ Steele]

Jon@10:03PM

Here is some bubble breaking news from the UN. Despite the ‘urgency’ of Paris climate talks, a U.N. sponsored global poll rates climate change dead last.

From the United Nations “MY World” initiative, which has recorded the opinions for All Countries & Country Groups with votes of 7,679,273 at the time of this writing. They describe it as:

MY World is a United Nations global survey for citizens. Working with partners, we aim to capture people’s voices, priorities and views, so world leaders can be informed as they begin the process of defining the next set of global goals to end poverty.

The data collected so far is telling, at least about opinions surrounding global warming aka climate change. It is dead last in the list of concerns queried:

(A graphic presentation of the results can be found here)

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/un-poll-agw-dead-last.png

[Bill Tozer]

Bitte clingers, jon? That is what toilet paper is used for. This public service announcement should get rid of your bitter and crusty clingers.

Ignorant and antiquated views? Guilty! Yep, I believe in paying as you go, nothing put on credit cards, and if you cannot afford something, you don't buy it. Very old fashioned. When it comes to the grand schemes of all things green, I have to ask at what price does your brave new world come neatly packaged in? What is the cost? Do you have enough to cover all costs imposed, or are you part of The New, which means let other people pay for your wants. We already cover your needs, but The New never have their needs satisfied.

Helpful hint #72. Contentment is not having what you want. Contentment is wanting what you have. I be old school. Pay-go rocks. Have you got enough of other people's money yet??? Got enough people believing you are The Good? Hmmmm.

[Todd Juvinall]

Todd Juvinall | 20 November 2015 at 08:01 PM

Still waiting Ben Emery. Crickets as usual from the left.

[Gregory]

Kesti, Gregory is my first name and Ben knows my last name.

[George Boardman]

Re Bill Tozer's 11/20 at 5:54 p.m.:

Don't bother driving the tour bus past The Union. I'm a freelancer who works at home; I email them four or five columns, they mail me a check.

If you want to see me up close and personal, you'll have to penetrate the outer perimeter defense of Lake of the Pines. But then, the LOP cops aren't armed or dangerous.

I am not now, and never have been a Commie, although I certainly had the opportunity to become a comrade when I was a student at San Francisco State in the early '60s. One of the more popular items on campus was "People's World," the official newspaper of the American Communist Party. I read it for laughs over the contortions its writers went through trying to explain the latest anti-democracy nonsense coming from the Kremlin.

My wife and I joined some friends at an anti-war rally about 1970, but it became a turn-off when a Black Panter said it was time to "off" Richard Nixon. I was no fan of Nixon, but I was even less of a fan of the idea that we should assassinate a president.

I guess I never really got into that radical lefty stuff.

P/S.: If you insist on a buffet in Reno, I recommend the Atlantis.

[George Rebane]

Jon 1003pm - I'm afraid that you and yours again turn out to be sorely out of touch with reality. Please see RussS' 802am and my next post 'The Other Paris Tragedy'.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2015/11/the-other-paris-tragedy.html

Then again, such information has not had a noticeable impact on you in the past.

[Don Bessee]

For the 'jons' of the world the 90% talking point is much like a Buddhist chant. 90% of the scientists , 90% of the people. 90% of the scientists, 90% of the people. 90% of the scientists, 90% of the people. If their talking points don't take hold they just figure they need to chant harder and more often. 90% of the scientists, 90% of the people into infinity even if that myth has already burst. ;-)

[Account Deleted]

"But 90+% of the world's population understands and supports the efforts of the climate change leaders."
Sure they understand:
lots of free stuff and money from rich white boys.
That is the sum and total of what 'world leaders' have in mind.
Just follow the money.

[Bill Tozer]

Oh Scott, it's not free stuff. It's called compensation.

George B, way back at 9:45am.
Freelance writer?? Well, golly snurd, I thought you were someone impotent. A Big Wig, The Man we love to stick it to, the 4th Branch Of Government. But, noonooo, just another guy who figured how to sit at home, watch the game, and hit send on the electronic devise. Sure, I am jealous. Has the Internet changed the way you communicate?
BTW, "5 6,7,8.....Nixon ordered Watergate." "Jail to the Chief, Jail to the Chief". Haven't chanted those words in awhile. Last time I cut the sleeves off the fatigues and found myself quite by accident walking along the curb and got the in your face view of the Presidental Limbo pulling up where I was standing, lol. Boy, they sure photographed that freaky looking guy in fatigues that day 20 feet from Dick and Pat getting out and waving. Crowd was mixed with American flags waving and the hippies, Yippies, and whatever came out of tents and VW buses doingg the protest chant and boo thing... Unfortunately for an unknown person, the fatigues I wore that day I bought at a thrift store cause mine were long gone. Always wondered if the Secret Service put him on the enemies list. I feel bad about it now, never crossed my mind then. Alas.
Just might need to bring out the "Jail to the Chief" chant out again if My Gal moves back into the Presidential Residence.