Print
E-mail
White House Fires Back At 'NY Times'
By Michael P. Tremoglie, The Bulletin
The White House fired back at the New York Times yesterday for publishing what it said was a completely biased article using “selected quotes to support a story the reporters fully intended to write from the onset, while disregarding anything that didn't fit their point of view.”
The story titled, “White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire” appeared Dec. 21. It attempted to lay the blame for the mortgage crisis at the foot of the Bush administration.
The Bush administration criticized the Times not only for what it called biased reporting, but for sloppy journalism. It said the Times reporters were “completely unfamiliar with the president’s prime-time address to the nation where he laid out in detail all of the causes of the housing and financial crises.”
It said President George W. Bush mentioned a factor that “economists agree on,” which is the major element contributing to the housing crisis — cheap money flowing into the U.S. from the rest of the world. This resulted in lenders pushing risky loans. This was unprecedented and because it was there were no easy solutions.
The New York Times failed to mention President Bush’s admonishment of “the failure of financial institutions to perform normal and necessary due diligence in creating, buying and selling new financial products — a problem that almost no one saw as it was happening.”
The White House said ignoring this important speech on the economy “is gross negligence.”
The Bush administration also responded to an accusation in the story that they were not interested in regulating the market. It said that it “makes no apology for understanding the concept of regulatory balance.” They do believe in stringent regulation that protects the greater public good and safety but not so stringent that it “unnecessarily inhibits innovation, creativity and productivity gains that are the sole source of increasing Americans’ standards of living.”
They pointed out that the administration did want stronger regulation and oversight, greater transparency and housing reform.
But the White House reserved its strongest condemnation for what they said was a double standard and blasted The New York Times because they said they believe the story gave “kid glove treatment to Congress.” They emphasized that, “While the administration was pushing for more transparent lending rules and strengthening oversight and supervision of Fannie and Freddie,” these attempts were blocked by Congress for years.
According to the White House, “Democratic leaders brazenly encouraged Fannie and Freddie to loosen lending standards and instead encouraged (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to play a larger and larger role in the housing market — even while explicitly acknowledging the rising risks.”
They said that the Times story mentions political contributions by some banks to Republicans. But it neglects to mention that political donations by “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac overwhelmingly supported Democratic officials — in particular the chairmen of the banking committees.”
While the Bush administration did not mention it, the Times also found fault with the president’s successful efforts to increase home ownership among minorities. This criticism is the antithesis of the Times’ Sept. 22, 1999 story, which favorably reported on efforts by Freddie Mac to increase minority homeownership.
The Times quoted then Freddie Mac CEO Leland C. Brendsel as saying, “Increasing the pool of qualified minority home buyers will play an important role in future expansion of the home mortgage industry. This initiative is not only good for our nation, but makes good business sense.”
Mr. Brendsel was later fired and paid a $16.4-million fine for business irregularities.
Syndicated columnist Don Feder, editor of the Web site “Boycott the New York Times,” a project of the media watchdog group Accuracy in Media, launched in October. He said this leaves the New York Times open to accusations of hypocrisy.
“It is typical of the New York Times. They focus on Republicans and ignore Democrats,” said Mr. Feder. “They decided at the outset that Bush was responsible for the mortgage crisis and then they talked to people to support their case against Bush. The N.Y. Times operates this way generally. It is the most agenda driven newspaper in America.”
The New York Times could not be reached for comment as of press time.
Michael P. Tremoglie can be reached at mtremoglie@thebulletin.us.
The story titled, “White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire” appeared Dec. 21. It attempted to lay the blame for the mortgage crisis at the foot of the Bush administration.
The Bush administration criticized the Times not only for what it called biased reporting, but for sloppy journalism. It said the Times reporters were “completely unfamiliar with the president’s prime-time address to the nation where he laid out in detail all of the causes of the housing and financial crises.”
It said President George W. Bush mentioned a factor that “economists agree on,” which is the major element contributing to the housing crisis — cheap money flowing into the U.S. from the rest of the world. This resulted in lenders pushing risky loans. This was unprecedented and because it was there were no easy solutions.
The New York Times failed to mention President Bush’s admonishment of “the failure of financial institutions to perform normal and necessary due diligence in creating, buying and selling new financial products — a problem that almost no one saw as it was happening.”
The White House said ignoring this important speech on the economy “is gross negligence.”
The Bush administration also responded to an accusation in the story that they were not interested in regulating the market. It said that it “makes no apology for understanding the concept of regulatory balance.” They do believe in stringent regulation that protects the greater public good and safety but not so stringent that it “unnecessarily inhibits innovation, creativity and productivity gains that are the sole source of increasing Americans’ standards of living.”
They pointed out that the administration did want stronger regulation and oversight, greater transparency and housing reform.
But the White House reserved its strongest condemnation for what they said was a double standard and blasted The New York Times because they said they believe the story gave “kid glove treatment to Congress.” They emphasized that, “While the administration was pushing for more transparent lending rules and strengthening oversight and supervision of Fannie and Freddie,” these attempts were blocked by Congress for years.
According to the White House, “Democratic leaders brazenly encouraged Fannie and Freddie to loosen lending standards and instead encouraged (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to play a larger and larger role in the housing market — even while explicitly acknowledging the rising risks.”
They said that the Times story mentions political contributions by some banks to Republicans. But it neglects to mention that political donations by “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac overwhelmingly supported Democratic officials — in particular the chairmen of the banking committees.”
While the Bush administration did not mention it, the Times also found fault with the president’s successful efforts to increase home ownership among minorities. This criticism is the antithesis of the Times’ Sept. 22, 1999 story, which favorably reported on efforts by Freddie Mac to increase minority homeownership.
The Times quoted then Freddie Mac CEO Leland C. Brendsel as saying, “Increasing the pool of qualified minority home buyers will play an important role in future expansion of the home mortgage industry. This initiative is not only good for our nation, but makes good business sense.”
Mr. Brendsel was later fired and paid a $16.4-million fine for business irregularities.
Syndicated columnist Don Feder, editor of the Web site “Boycott the New York Times,” a project of the media watchdog group Accuracy in Media, launched in October. He said this leaves the New York Times open to accusations of hypocrisy.
“It is typical of the New York Times. They focus on Republicans and ignore Democrats,” said Mr. Feder. “They decided at the outset that Bush was responsible for the mortgage crisis and then they talked to people to support their case against Bush. The N.Y. Times operates this way generally. It is the most agenda driven newspaper in America.”
The New York Times could not be reached for comment as of press time.
Michael P. Tremoglie can be reached at mtremoglie@thebulletin.us.
 |
 |
|
| Bush Visited Wounded Troops | City Activist: Mummers Need Saving, Not Needles |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
Oliver wrote on Dec 24, 2008 1:42 PM:
At least papers like the Bulletin provide the other side of the story. "