In this issue of Dissecting the Corporate Media, we take a look at a story from the April 23 issue of the national "news" magazine known as Newsweek, and owned by media giant MSNBC who is probably owned by someone else...but we won't get into that here. Below is the actual text from the article in question. Text within the "[ ]" are our analyses of this corrupt article, everything else is the pure, untainted drivel printed and distributed to the masses as "news". Take a look and learn.

W's Green War

[Okay, this is known as the headline. George W. Bush is referred to as "W" so that we, the general public, can think of him not as the inhuman monster that he is, but as a cute cuddly teddy bear that one might let their child play with. As for the "Green War" that is just to trick people into reading the article.]

His early moves left him open to attack, but Bush is planning a pro-enviro push

[This is known as the sub-headline. It lets the reader know what the article is about more than the ever-so-catchy headline. Note that it is actually stating that George W. "I hate the Earth" Bush is planning on making a "pro-enviro push." Here, the "enviro" is short for environmental, and must be used because if they were to actually print that Bush was planning a "pro-environmental" push, that would be just plain silly and unprofessional.]

By Howard Fineman

[The author. We won't say anything about Mr. Fineman just yet, we'll let you judge for yourselves as you read his article.]

Environmental issues: Bush's policies have some people concerned

[Those crazy environmentalists. Always concerned about something. We here at PBBBS know that Bush isn't a bad guy, he would love to live in a place like the one pictured on the left, while the rest of the world enjoys beautiful sunsets like the one pictured on the right.]

[It should be noted that this is the picture that ran in the online version of the story. The picture that ran in the print version was similar save that it showed "Dubya" walking a fine line between the picture on the left and the picture on the right. We here at PBBBS News Corps would like to salute "Dubya" for his fine line walkin' style.]

As George W. Bush’s political right hand, Karl Rove likes challenges. He guided Bush to the Texas governorship and to the White House, and wrote the new president’s legislative game plan. So it was no surprise that Rove took on a crucial task last Friday: explaining why Bush was raising efficiency standards for central-air-conditioning units by only 20 percent. While others left for Easter, Rove chattered authoritatively about SEER ratings—”seasonal-energy-efficiency ratings” for appliances. Bill Clinton had proposed boosting air-conditioner standards from a 10 SEER rating to 13. Bush settled for 12. “Thirteen had huge cost implications,” Rove told NEWSWEEK. It would have driven companies out of business—”an anticompetitive meltdown.”

[This would be what is known as the introductory paragraph. Here, Fineman has written a nice little story about one of Bush's puppet masters, Karl Rove, who we are told "likes challenges." The key here is central-air conditioning units. Who could possibly be against good air-conditioning? Not our friend Bush. Good. Bill Clinton, that old bastard, wanted to make my air conditioning less powerful! I can't be sweating in front of my television...and so on and so-forth.]

[Get a load of this dude]

The real meltdown isn’t in the air-conditioning industry, it’s in Bush’s standing on environmental issues. Rove portrayed the AC decision as a Solomonic compromise; a trade group, after all, had sued to block any higher standard. Environmentalists were not impressed. They accused Bush of ignoring energy-starved California and of accepting a standard that, over 30 years, would require a dozen extra power plants. “We’re very disappointed,” said Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund. “The country has to save more energy, and the industry can help.”

[For those of you that don't know, a Solomonic compromise involves the cutting of children in half, so we are being told that Bush is as wise as the biblical king Solomon, and this is his strategy: he will pretend to destroy the environment, and then the real owner of the environment will cry, "no no, let the other have it because I would rather see it live, than own half of it." In this case, the real owner is the people, and the person claiming ownership is industry, so, after Bush slashes his way through enough of the environmental regulations, the people of the world will see his wisdom as they die from arsenic poisoning and drown in the rising oceans.]

Next Sunday is the 31st anniversary of Earth Day, but for the administration it is not likely to be a joyful occasion. Never mistaken for a green, Bush is being vilified as the most anti-environmental president since Ronald Reagan.

[Can't really argue with that.]

In a series of moves the administration has declined, for now, to toughen standards for arsenic in drinking water [scratch that: the administration has repealed standards already set in place by Clinton, in favor of the more industry friendly old standards]; reneged on a campaign pledge to require power plants to control emissions of carbon dioxide [pledge smedge...government coups don't need to keep measly campaign pledges, they need to repay the people who funded the coup]; withdrawn from talks on a global-warming treaty [this is America, we don't need to help the rest of the world, unless of course, we are bombing them into democracy]; imposed a ban on private lawsuits to add new entries to the endangered-species list [what's an owl?]; suspended a rule controlling toxic runoff from mining sites [The Arsenic Challenge 2001: A Race for a better glass of water]; decided to consider allowing the construction of new roads through 58 million acres of forest land [how do we know it's there if we don't drive there?]; floated a plan to drill oil wells in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge [Come on now, it is worth destroying a pristine arctic wilderness area for more than two days worth of oil for the US]; proposed cutting the EPA budget by 6.4 percent and taken steps that could abolish the White House Council on Environmental Quality [The EPA hasn't made my socks any whiter anyway].

Other actions are in the works, sources tell NEWSWEEK [Like drilling for oil in humpback whales and grinding up baby seals to test blenders]. Among them are rules that would allow dredging for gravel in protected wetlands, the continued use of snowmobiles in Yellowstone, more noisy overflights of the Grand Canyon and “boundary adjustments” to allow drilling and mining near new national-monument sites [Getting gravel out of a quarry is too damned easy, "Where is the challenge" is what this new generation of extreme-Mountain-Dew-drinking gravel miners is asking. And Bush is listening] Then there’s the energy plan, soon to emerge from a committee led by Vice President Dick Cheney [Who refused to attend a meeting in the Pacific Northwest if any delegates from California were present]. Environmentalists expect it to stress production over conservation [It's not like Bush claims to be a Conservative or anything]. “The worst is to come,” said Perry Plumart of the National Audubon Society.

You don’t have to be a tree-hugger—or a Democrat—to be concerned [Democrats being the most progressive and liberal political party ever reported on in NEWSWEEK]. In the latest NEWSWEEK Poll, Bush gets his most tepid job-approval marks for his handling of the environment (a 39-42 percent positive rating) and energy policy (38-41 percent). Only 41 percent think he is “committed to protecting the environment.” [These 41 percent live in underground caverns where the "environment" consists of dark stagnant air.] A survey by Lake Snell Perry found 61 percent of independents support strict enforcement of existing laws.

Republican strategists generally applaud Bush’s first at-bats [They have to, or the coup would fall apart], but worry that his anti-green image will jeopardize their chances in suburban areas of the East and West Coasts, which the GOP generally lost in 2000. “Environmental issues matter most in the suburbs,” said Rep. Tom Davis, who heads the GOP’s House campaign committee. “People see a clean environment as part of the good life they moved to the suburbs to find.”

Bush is a risk-averse pol who doesn’t like to make enemies. So what’s up? [This is "hip" lingo, letting the reader know that the author is a very "hip" person. We at PBBBS aren't quite sure what is up.] For one, he’s been knocked off stride in a regulatory minefield left behind by Clinton. The former president approved dozens of stringent last-minute rules designed to burnish his own reputation and create havoc for Bush, who’s been required to act quickly to “suspend” them if he wanted to review them at all.

[You can always win points by roasting the old guy. Sure Bush may seem insane, but it isn't his fault: Clinton left antitank mines in the oval office, and the rose garden won't be safe for months.]

The administration wasn’t ready to deal with the collateral damage [Bush almost had his waist blown off]. Only now, for example, has it begun to make the scientific case on arsenic. There is, in fact, widespread disagreement about the justification for Clinton’s decision to reduce the allowable levels in drinking water from 50 parts per billion to 10 [The disagreement is as widespread as this: scientists in the employ of mining companies and other industries that use arsenic, disagree that arsenic is bad. They recommend three servings a day. Everyone else tries to steer clear]. But even environmentalists predict Bush will eventually approve a reduction, probably to 30ppb. In the meantime, he’s become the guy who wants to put arsenic in your water.

[See, Bush isn't such a bad guy, he is just compromising here. I mean, we can't expect companies to take a financial loss just so people can have clean and safe drinking water. Anyway, people can drink Coke instead right?]

Bush (and Rove) [Because even NEWSWEEK can't print that the guy decides anything on his own] may have a case of political myopia on environmental issues. Texas is hardly a hotbed of environmental activism. Being green isn’t a requirement to get elected governor, or to live with the legislature. Much better to have come out of the Oil Bidness [they actually wrote Bidness], which Bush and his vice president did. Corporate contributors to the GOP generally despise the EPA more than any other agency.

[It is much better to come out of the Oil Bidness: they have more money.]

Bush worked the energy-producing states with abandon. He won in part by adding (often Democratic) West Virginia, Louisiana, Kentucky and Tennessee to the GOP column. Some GOP critics fear the White House wants to win with the same map in 2004. “They’re drawing to the same inside straight,” said John Weaver, Sen. John McCain’s consigliere. “But Florida is at risk—environmental concerns are rising there—and they’re limiting options elsewhere.

While Democrats attack [small children] (“Their actions are extreme,” says Sen. John Kerry), Rove remains calm. He points to a number of pro-environmental measures in the Bush budget, including an increase in funding for national parks [for the pavement of roads, and the removal of those pesky bears]. Bush is focused on the budget and taxes (and the China Sea) but will soon turn to selling and explaining his stands on environmental and energy issues. Though the administration abandoned the Kyoto Accord, sources tell NEWSWEEK that the president—prodded by Secretary of State Colin Powell—is likely to find a way to endorse some kind of action on global warming. Indeed, Cheney last Thursday called a Seattle newspaper to say that the administration was “concerned” about the problem.

[So finally, in an article that is claiming Bush to be "pro-enviro," we get to the good stuff. His plan? He will do two things. First he will "increase funding for national parks" and then he will, after rejecting a perfectly ligitimate plan agreed upon by the world, "endorse some kind of action on global warming." I mean, Cheney did call a Seattle newspaper to let them know he was "concerned" and Seattle is a very hip place.]

And then there will be a charm offensive. As proof, Rove took note of a story in that morning’s USA Today, describing Bush’s new ranch home in Crawford, Texas, as an “eco-friendly” haven. "What matters are his actions over time,” said Rove. “The public will see that he is an outdoorsman who cares about clean air [if there isn't carbon dioxide, the plants will die] and water [with plenty of good American Arsenic] and has innovative ideas [he is a very learneding man].” In fact, the new home is a model of green efficiency, with a water-recycling system and a geothermal heat pump. The cooling system is far more efficient than traditional central-AC units. But don’t look for the Bush administration to require anyone to use it.

[We at PBBBS News Corps would like to apologize to George Bush. It seems we had him all wrong. So thank you NEWSWEEK for setting us straight, and allowing us to see the error of our ways. We look forward to visiting our new friend leader in his home that is a model of green efficiency (only the most efficient green paint was used) and are very excited about the water recycling system (we hear you can hardly even taste the urine!).]