2 Responses

1. Russell says:

   May 9, 2010 at 9:26 am

   You mean the whopping three-quarters of one percent of his donations? MY GOD!!! WHAT A WINDFALL! Please, ten people who work at Goldman have donated to Himes. Nine of them live in the metro NY area, 4 in Himes’ district. Look up the numbers, do the math.

   Here’s a shocking fact: Some Democrats work at Goldman. This is not a story.
2. Sean says:

   May 8, 2010 at 6:02 pm

   WNPR’s piece was a slimy hit-job against Himes. Take a look at the postings on My Left Nutmeg where it was debunked.

   The WNPR piece dishonestly implied that Himes still owns Goldman Sachs stock, which is a bald-faced lie. Then it exacerbated its sleazy reporting by simply reporting that Himes “says” he disinvested all of his Goldman Sachs stock. As if there is some dispute and it’s WNPR’s reporting versus Himes’ word. Take your pick. In fact, that’s an example of “balance as bias”: WNPR broadcasts a lie, connects it with Himes’ denial and suggests that there is a controversy when there is none. Again, sleazy.

   And WNPR never bothered to point out that Jim Himes has been in the forefront of the effort to enact stiff regulations of the investment and commercial banking industries, and voted for the bill that passed the House, a bill that Goldman Sachs is fighting every step of the way. And no perspective that would have pointed out that the $15,000 from Goldman employees is a tiny fraction of Jim Himes’ total fundraising for this campaign. Had WNPR done that, it would clearly would have thrown a spanner in that hit-job. So no mention.

   So WNPR dishonestly insinuates that Himes is doing Goldman Sachs’ bidding, then suggests that he holds Goldman Sachs stock. It’s as dishonest and biased a “news” report as anything that came out of Fox News. It would be typical of Fox, but it’s absolutely disgraceful of WNPR.

   Too bad that Hearst’s online blog didn’t bother to check the facts either. Now that would have been journalism if Hearst and Tom Baden had actually checked the facts and debunked that WNPR hit piece.

   Too bad that neither did what reputable journalism would requires.