Ben Pershing and the Washington Post Need to Retract Their Lie
The amount of journalistic dishonesty on display in the Jim Bunning Kicks Puppies and Unemployed People story is galling. Over and over again, MSM outlets have reported that the Senator opposed extending unemployment benefits, wanted to put government employees out on the street, or wanted to deny medical payments to hard-working physicians. None of those things are true and I, for one, am sick to death of hearing the lie. Ben Pershing of the Washington Post is the latest to push the lie and I’m drawing the line right here.
For five days, retiring Sen. Jim Bunning held his fellow Republicans hostage. He stood his ground, angry and alone, a one-man blockade against unemployment benefits, Medicare payments to doctors, satellite TV to rural Americans and paychecks to highway workers.
“Enough,” the Kentucky Republican thundered repeatedly, his face red, as he stood in the way of Washington spending more money he said it didn’t have on an extension of popular programs.
No, he wasn’t and Ben Pershing damned-well knows it, since he very clearly outlined Bunning’s objection to the bill in a post he wrote last night. Jim Bunning was not “against” any of those things. What he was “against” was violating a law passed by Democrats to pay for those things with IOUs. This is fact, easily learned and, believe it or not, occasionally reported by actual news outlets.
Think I’m being too hard on Pershing? Here’s a quote from Bunning himself.
“I support extending unemployment benefits, cobra benefits, flood insurance, highway bill fix, doc fix, small business loans, distant network television for satellite viewers. If we can’t find $10 billion to pay for something that we all support, we will never pay for anything on the floor of this U.S. Senate.”
He said that on the floor of the Senate not two days ago. “Support” is not synonymous with “blockade against”. The are opposites and, unless Pershing is incredibly stupid or incompetent (for the record, I do not think he is either one), he knows that. Obviously, he knows Bunning’s position. He simply chose to misrepresent it in order to write a more dramatic story with Bunning as the villain.
Notice also how, in the second paragraph, Pershing dishonestly summarizes the core of Bunning’s opposition with the phrase “…he said it didn’t have…” as if the fact that our nation is broke like M.C. Hammer was just a simple matter of opinion. That’s not lazy or ignorant reporting. It’s dishonest and it should be corrected immediately.
I’m sick and tired of seeing so-called objective journalists running Jim Bunning’s name through the mud in the service of Harry Reid and the left. Ben Pershing’s story is dishonest and it is wrong. He needs to retract it immediate and issue Senator Bunning an apology. Anything less is unacceptable.
UPDATE: The bill passed last night, after Democrats broke their word and failed to even consider an amendment that would have fulfilled the PAYGO law (via Jeff Goldstein). So, now you and your children are even deeper in the hole thanks in part to dishonest journalists like Ben Pershing and the Washington Post. Be sure to thank them.
Other Posts of Interest:
- Why Does Jim Bunning Hate Everyone, Including Puppies?
- Why Did the Washington Post Scrub an Obama Quote from a News Story?
- Sorry Mr. Raines, Under the Bus with You. You, too, Washington Post.
Category: Oh, THAT liberal media., The Economy and Your Money, The Republican Minority
