Skip to main content

View Diary: Is Max Baucus Writing the White House Bill? (268 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If WH Had Nothing To Do With It (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenearth

    Why is the WH standing up for PhRMA?

    •  Who said they were? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, greenearth, Egalitare, Micheline

      One quote out of context from Jim Messina proves nothing.

      Sometimes I think we believe everything we read in the NY Times, even after the demonstrable example of Judy Miller.

      •  Show The Full Context Then (0+ / 0-)

        You assert this was quoted out of context, so back up your assertion.

        •  The quote I quoted (0+ / 0-)

          ...was the only one in the article directly from someone in the White House. The rest of the article was quotes from Billy Tauzin.

          The piece was sourced almost exclusively from Tauzin.

          Go read the NY Times article.

          I don't know what the context was but the quote from Messina was not sufficient to draw the conclusions drawn in the article.

          It had all the earmarks of lobbyist-placed propaganda trying to claim the Obama has sold out.

        •  Sorry (0+ / 0-)

          Here's the only on-the-record quote and the context:

          A deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed Mr. Tauzin’s account of the deal in an e-mail message on Wednesday night.

          "The president encouraged this approach," Mr. Messina wrote. "He wanted to bring all the parties to the table to discuss health insurance reform."

          The quote attributed to Mr. Messina does not justify the interpretation that introduces it.  It implies that there was more to the e-mail, but it is equally possible that the quoted statement is the entire email and is being read by the reporter as confirmation.

          •  So You Can't Say It's Out Of Context (0+ / 0-)

            It implies that there was more to the e-mail, but it is equally possible that the quoted statement is the entire email and is being read by the reporter as confirmation.

            So you can't say without having seen the email yourself. Unless there's proof otherwise - like seeing the full email - I tend to believe the NY Times even if they don't provide a PDF or MP3 file of every document and every conversation they had for each of their stories. Trying to undermine the NY Times without any proof just makes you look ultra-defensive.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site