CNBC Blows It On Bowles-Simpson
CNBC isn't for everyone. But I've had it on it my office almost since the day it began, have been a frequent guest since it's earliest days, and think highly of a large number of its people in front of and behind the camera.
Which is why this story from Jeff Cox on CNBC.com was such a disappointment. Cox made the same mistake that others have made...or he drank the same Kool Aid the B-S Cult wants everyone to drink...when he said in his story that the commission had agreed to a report to reduce the deficit.
As regular CG&G readers know, the B-S commission did not issue or agree on a report. The two co-chairs recommended something but that wasn't even voted on let alone actually approved. Eleven of the commission's 18 members informally indicated they supported the co-chairs' recommendation, but there was no vote and the recommendation wasn't approved.
What was most disappointing was Cox's reaction when I tried to point out his mistake. His email back to me said that the fact that the recommendation (he called it a "report") didn't get the required votes was "a parliamentary issue" and that I was "overheated" about it not being approved.
No...I'm not overheated. What I am is is tired of B-S supporters claiming that it was a success and implying that the co-chairs' recommendation was accepted when the truth is that it was rejected and the B-S commission failed as badly as the hardly-super committee.
CNBC can do better. There was no B-S report and saying that there was... apparently intentionally...was a mistake that mislead readers.