This Week in Conservative Media: 'ClimateGate' and a Media Cover-Up

The Gaggle

RSS

Author

Katie Connolly

Ben Adler

Jonathan Alter

Columnist Page

Eleanor Clift

Columnist Page |
Email

Eve Conant

Howard Fineman

Columnist Page

Sarah Kliff

Email |
Twitter

Andrew Romano

Daniel Stone

Featured Postings

A GOP Plan for Deficit Reduction

9:00 AM, February 9, 2010 | Comments (5)

I've been hard on congressional Republicans recently for pandering to voters' ignorance by offering politically appealing but irresponsible slogans instead of a credible conservative vision of how to meet America's challenges, even those they harp on...

The Press Evinces Soft Bigotry Against Republicans─By Not Expecting Them to Govern

1:05 PM, February 1, 2010 | Comments (21)

Conservatives React to State of the Union With Sneers and Jeers

11:50 PM, January 27, 2010 | Comments (18)

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

Eve Conant

Hundreds of private e-mail messages and documents by climate-change researchers were stolen from a server at a British university and circulated among global-warming skeptics last week, fanning the flames of the debate over global warming just ahead of negotiations in Copenhagen to hammer out an international climate accord. The scandal over the e-mails, some of which appear to show scientists trying to manipulate data to strengthen the case for man-made global warming and cover up data of declining temperatures, “keeps going–and growing,” writes Michelle Malkin. “There are calls on both sides of the pond for an investigation into data manipulation. A former British lord is demanding an independent inquiry.” The British lord she writes about is Lord Lawson, who is already a leading climate-change skeptic, but she lists off others who are going for the jugular.

Michael Goldfarb on the Weekly Standard blog assails The New York Times for not printing the news he and skeptics say is fit to print. Goldfarb writes that the Times wouldn’t publish the e-mails because “it might hinder the liberal agenda.” He adds: “Of course, when the choice is between publishing classified information that might endanger the lives of U.S. troops in the field or intelligence programs vital to national security, that information is published without hesitation by the nation's paper of record. But in this case─ the documents were 'never intended for the public eye,' so The New York Times will take a pass.” He’s referring primarily to the writing of Andrew C. Revkin and grabs a quote from him about how the hacked e-mails won’t be posted in Revkin’s article. However, Golfarb doesn’t include Revkin’s immediate next sentence, which says, “But a quick sift of skeptics’ Web sites will point anyone to plenty of sources.” In addition, Revkin updated his blog Monday to point out that quotes and inflammatory sections of the e-mails have appeared in the Times's reporting of the story and are being further investigated.

Chris Horner, in the National Review’s blog Planet Gore, compares the media’s response to ClimateGate to the Monica Lewinsky scandal. “It turns out that the BBC has for over a month had the information constituting 'ClimateGate'— the latest one, anyway, and one that should serve as the global-warming industry’s 'Blue Dress Moment' when the media can no longer ignore the fraud we have been detailing for years to scribblers and producers largely uninterested in pulling the curtain back on this most politically desirable and useful of all story lines.” The media, he writes, sat on the story, and, conservative bloggers argue, continue to sit on it.

Tag(s): Environment, Conservative media

You must be a registered user to comment. Click here to register. Already a user? Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: jlgab (December 29, 2009 at 1:29 PM)

Amazing Obama has not even had ONE year to lie and talk stupid like Bush got to for EIGHT YEARS yet OBAMA is being bashed for just trying to get out country out of the mess that the Cheney/Bush Administration left us in. Radical fanatic right-wingers like Fox News, O'Reilly and Limbaugh just twist Obama and Congress's bills to LOOK unfair and too liberal. What goes wrong in someone's life to make them so hateful? Bushwackers are idiots, they were asleep the past 8 years so they should do the human race a favor and go BACK to sleep. What kind of upbringing did they go through as children?

During W's 8 years of horrible leadership, about 64 species were listed to the Endangered Species Act. During his father's 4 years, 235 were added. Even the old Bush knew better. Plus, W proposed allowing federal agencies, instead of scientists, to decide whether to protect a species. Because we certainly don't want a QUALIFIED person deciding important things like we did for 8 years!

Report Abuse

Posted By: jlgab (December 29, 2009 at 1:27 PM)

The Fanatical Extremist Right-Wingers are killing America. They don't care about right or wrong, good or bad, all they care about is their political party winning. For Bush to lie to start a war in Iraq and not be held accountable, furthermore then getting RE-elected after all his lies, corruption, and ever embarrassingly stupid speeches, is truly beyond comprehension and a warped sense of Patriotism. They also don't care about helping people in need, they are selfish and only want to further themselves. Why do Republicans hate the environment so much? Can't we put them on a space ship and send them to live on the International Space Station? Why do Republicans just hate so much? Why are they anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-tolerant, anti-environment, anti-trees, anti-polar bears, anti-government, anti-female, anti-peace, etc.? What kind of upbringing did they go through as children?

I am sure ALL GOP's, who supported Bush's corrupt war in Iraq, made their children join the military. Otherwise, I can't imagine how disappointed Bushwackers must be in their children who decided to go to college and not join the military.

Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld - Weapons of Mass Destruction, Weapons of Mass Destruction Well, where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction? You get ONE guess where the Weapons of Mass Destruction are NOT located. The basis for why we invaded Iraq yet there are NO Weapons of Mass Destruction, yet WE are still there. We got Weapons of Mass Destruction drilled into our heads by those idiots because of all the media coverage those idiots got. Biased liberal media coverage - You have got to be kidding! If Bush would have stayed focus on Afghanistan, the Taliban would not be terrorizing the world.

Report Abuse

Posted By: Davole (November 29, 2009 at 6:55 PM)

drewand -

In the mere span of 5 supposed words, your quote "incrsurating people, war and polution" reveals 2 fantasy words which are not in any dictionary.

You have aptly demonstrated that you're not "BEST" at anything worthwhile, especially forming and offering opinion!

Report Abuse

Show All Comments (26) »