Progressive Journalism from Mother Jones

Here's Mother Jones magazine opening the predicted "progressive" storyline that Obama and Romney are not all that different
Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are bickering over who is the bigger fan of outsourcing. The Obama campaign has accused the private equity firm Romney owned and founded, Bain Capital, of "pioneering" outsourcing with its investments in companies that moved manufacturing overseas. Romney has claimed that he left Bain before jobs were outsourced and countered that Obama's the real "outsourcer in chief" for investing government funds in energy companies that went on to hire workers abroad. 
Nevertheless, neither candidate is actually outraged over outsourcing

What a great example of "he-says-she-says"  journalism, and get that "bickering" indicating that the journalist is above this petty partisan back and forth about something as trivial as a few tens of millions jobs. And it's great to see a "progressive" magazine like Mother Jones publish known false Romney accusations and known true Obama statements as if they were just equally valid. Why research and tell readers the truth when you have a story to tell? To see the truth of Romney's accusation you can do some heavy lifting and find an article on the very subject at Media Matters.
News outlets are uncritically reporting Republicans' efforts to label President Obama the "Outsourcer-in-chief," an attack outlined in a Huffington Post column by RNC chairman Reince Priebus, who says the administration outsourced jobs to "Indonesia, India, Mexico, Germany, Australia, Switzerland, Denmark" and more, "mostly in the form of stimulus funds." But a look at the fine print on the RNC's website ObamanomicsOutsourced.com reveals a pretty flexible definition of the term "outsourcing" -- so flexible, in fact, that it encompasses its opposite: foreign-owned firms coming to the U.S. to employ American workers.
 So great we have these progressive alternative media to also print RNC fiction uncritically.  As for Romney's claim to be not associated with a firm when he was sole owner, CEO, and managing partner, well that's a toughie innit? And neither candidate is outraged over "outsourcing" only if you accept the RNC's silly definition of outsource. In fact, the Obama administration has invested in and championed US manufacturing in a way not seen in many decades.  But, here is the "progressive" Mother Jones magazine telling us that both candidates are about the same and President Obama is faking commitment to US jobs - and citing a bunch of mostly "libertarian" economists to bolster the case.

Here's who is cited in this article:

  1. "Reason's Peter Suderman noted" - Libertarian
  2. Both candidates recognize that in globalization, offshoring happens," says Jared Bernstein, a former economic adviser to Vice President Joe Biden who is now a senior fellow at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. "Both candidates are generally favorable towards globalization. These are not protectionist people." - Former Obama Administration member.
  3. "I think their basic view is pretty much the same," says Dean Baker -  Anti-Obama, pro-"free trade" economist.
  4. Dan Ikenson, a trade expert with the libertarian Cato Institute, agrees.

So 2 libertarians, and one free trade "progressive" and one ex-WH economist who is quoted in a way that confuses "globalization" and "outsourcing". Amazingly, not a single person in the WH who works on outsourcing issues was quoted.   Even the Wall Street Journal cites the AFL-CIO now and then, but apparently not "Mother Jones". One does not have to be against trade to try to encourage local manufacturing.  Current US tax policies reward companies for moving jobs overseas - President Obama's administration has repeatedly tried to eliminate those tax breaks and actually has cracked down on some abuses. Current US tax policies reward the kind of corporate looting that made Romney so rich - President Obama's administration has repeatedly tried to eliminate those tax breaks. The US had no advanced electric battery manufacturing at all until the Obama administration provided startup funding and loans - as well as assistance to US makers of electric automobiles, exporters of machinery, and other core industrial enterprises. And Romney was willing to see America's auto companies liquidated. But there's no difference, just some "bickering" and political positioning - according to our progressive media - and NPR said the same thing just  few days earlier. 
Just coincidence, I'm sure.


Like what you read? Chip in, keep us going.