Gene's Footnotes

I have never been impressed by the messenger and always inspect the message, which I now understand is not the norm. People prefer to filter out discordant information. As such, I am frequently confronted with, "Where did you hear that...." Well, here you go. If you want an email version, send me an email.

December 14, 2009

Re Mrs. Obama's Staff

This is a posting in lieu of an entry. I stopped email replies without going through me so as to stop viagra ads.


From Ray




The Canadian press may not be an American source but turns out to be just as sloppy when it comes to checking facts. As verified by factcheck.org - 
http://m.factcheck.org/2009/08/michelle-obamas-staff/ Obama may have up to 24 staff members as reported by the White House.

But where they really went wrong was on previous First Ladies. Turns out Hilliary had 19 and the Washington Post reported that Laura Bush had 24:

Laura Bush’s Staff UPDATE WASHINGTON POST
2008 White House Office Staff List – Salary
Published Thursday, July 24, 2008


bunch of names and salaries followed


-------------------



Though this is from factcheck.org doesn't mean it is wrong.  Of interest is they cited the Washington Post, so short of looking it up, lets assume it is true.  

I mentioned to Ray that the papers in Toronto would NOT be right wing mouthpieces, so there report must be a screw up. I would more rely on them than any US paper for research.  

Then again, the Financial Post ran a series on "The Deniers" last year, perhaps two, I lost track of time, where some 21 scientists were interviewed. One could hardly say the paper was onboard with the true believers.

Mr. Solomon of that paper was on CSPAN yesterday, a replay, discussing his book the Deniers.  He mentioned something I have never heard before:  the 2,500 scientists who are touted as signing off on the IPCC report were not a peer review or did they approve of the document or its findings. 

What happened was small parts of the document were sent to appropriate scientists for "review." They are listed as "reviewers." This explains why Dr. Mindzen blew his top when he read he was a supporter of the propaganda. 

Another overt distortion of reality.




0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home