We have been neglecting a member of The Telegraph’s staff.

We have been neglecting a member of The Telegraph’s staff. For this we wish to apologize.  He is a relatively recent addition to the pages of The Telegraph. We are talking about Business Editor Harold Goodridge.

Like a good soldier he has marched lock step with the Administration in Washington with the unemployment numbers farce. Some of the more reliable news sources are beginning to come clean about the way this administration is manipulating the unemployment numbers. We do not look for that to happen at The Telegraph.

The job numbers usually come out on a Friday and after a period of time they are revised, this has been more time than not downwards, but we do not usually see the revised figures.

Another thing we have noticed the articles used by The Telegraph usually include a go to, for instance Mark Zandi.  Zandi is the chief economist for forecaster Moody’s Analytics. We have to watch him carefully sometimes it looks as if he is a little disingenuous, most “go tos” are.

In a recent article seen here he tells us that; “Underlying job growth, abstracting from the temporary effects of the weather, is over 175,000 per month. This isn’t boom times, but it is solid enough to bring down unemployment further.”

We have to ask if it takes 125,000 a month to keep up with population growth how long will it take to bring honest employment figures to an exceptional level.

The Telegraph’s Editorial Page Editor Charles E. Richardson tried for a while to sell the idea that high unemployment such as 8 and 9 percent was the new norm.

It has become clear the sole purpose of The Telegraph is to help reelect Obama.

We know that some of the people at The Telegraph have been known to dine on the taxpayer’s dime and heatedly defend Government officials who recently have provided employment for their wife. That was the Editorial Page Editor Charles E. Richardson.

The Telegraph’s President and Publisher George C. McCanless rushed to print with an editorial defending Richardson’s conduct.  The editorial was titled “In The Pocket” and you can see it here.

  

The Telegraph’s President and Publisher George C. McCanless tells us that; “To think you could ever have Charles in your pocket, much less for the price of a lousy lunch, is ludicrous to those who truly know him.”

McCanless appears to be blaming “a lousy lunch”. This reminded us of The Telegraph’s defense of Bill Clinton back on Tuesday, January 28, 1992. The Gennifer Flowers story had just broke and The Telegraph in an editorial titled “Can one sleazy story destroy Clinton Candidacy?  Their defense is that Clinton’s “…problem stems from allegations in a sleazy supermarket tabloid that pays big money for its muck.”

The Telegraph to this day has not explained the difference between “a sleazy supermarket tabloid that pays big money for its muck.” and a “sleazy” newspaper which charges “for its muck.”

Since then the story that some of the government officials which The Telegraph’s Editorial Page Editor Charles E. Richardson has hotly defended have hired Richardson’s wife to the tune of, as one source put it “70,000 reasons”  we have to wonder if McCanless has changed his mind.  Folks this is not chump change in this part of the country, especially with the economy like it is.

You can read about that at wearepolitics, courtesy of Bill Knowles. We are not implying this but this but knowing the media this figure leaves room for a little spread around money. You can read about it here.  http://www.wearepolitics.com/1/post/2012/04/what-the-bibb-boe-isnt-telling-you.html

We have to remember the millions George Soros is spreading around for Media Matters, etc. You can read about it here.

But back to our friend Business Editor Harold Goodridge, today in The Telegraph he included an article on the business page titled.  “Graduates find it hard to wash away college debt” We find this somewhat puzzling. Everyone knows you cannot wash away debt when it is a government loan and Obama’s administration has taken over the student loan business.  Read about it here. No bankruptcy permitted to wash it away.  

We think that Goodridge chose this article because it tells us the following about Student loan interest rate increases that we are hearing about.  

The article tells us that:

“Things could get worse in July, when interest rates on federal student loans for low-income students are set to rise to 6.8 percent, from 3.4 percent. President Barack Obama is fighting the increase, while Republicans in the U.S. House of representatives are supporting it. “

With serious doubts about the validity we Googled it and found the following in the first two web sites we checked.

The first was the AJC (Atlanta Journal Constitution) and here is what we found;

“Republicans want a vote on their own bill, which like the Democrats' would freeze today's 3.4 percent interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans for one more year. It would be financed by eliminating a preventive health program established by President Barack Obama's health care overhaul”.

The second was the web site politico and here is what we found in the first paragraph.

“Barack Obama, Senate Democrats, House Republicans and Mitt Romney all agree that student loan interest rates shouldn’t go up this summer -- but he's still pushing the issue.”

What do you think, was the Business Editor Harold Goodridge being a little devious or just plain dishonest?

Have a nice day.