Roberts slams Ingle for irresponsible journalism

by: Jason Springer

Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 12:00:00 PM EDT

For the past two weeks, Gannett New Jersey's Trenton bureau chief, Bob Ingle, has devoted his Sunday column to the kind of rumor-mill nonsense one generally associates with celebrity gossip rags - not some of New Jersey's largest newspapers. His latest doses of nonsense (Sept. 13 and Sept. 20) would have been laughable if there wasn't a chance someone would take them seriously.

Like most people, I generally ignore Ingle's inconsequential diatribes. But his latest assertions are so over-the-top inaccurate that a response is warranted.

Ingle professed to have "word on the street" knowledge of my motivations for stepping down as Assembly speaker. I'm not a journalism scholar, but I'm certain "word on the street" isn't solid sourcing. I'm surprised the editors of the Gannett newspapers would allow such irresponsibility.

What "BIG" government looks like

by: Scott Weingart

Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 11:04:21 AM EDT

The Star Ledger isn't kidding when they call the governor's budget "draconian.". Indeed, the proposed cuts in this year's budget cut dwarf anything seen in the past 60 years. In only five years since 1952 has state spending decreased, and never have cuts exceeded 2.21% of prior year's spending. Corzine's budget literally decimates spending; the $29.8 billion he is proposing for 2010 represents a cut of more than 10% from estimated 2009 expenditures of $33.2 billion. In fact, Corzine's cuts blow away the other five years combined, both in absolute dollars and in percentage:

State budget cuts since 1951

Year	Spending cut
	$ billion	percent
2010	$  3,403.5	10.2%
1976	$  61.0	2.2%
1993	$  258.3	1.7%
2009	$  375.0	1.1%
1955	$  1.4	0.6%
2006	$  135.1	0.5%

All of those governors are Democrats, and "BIG government" Jon Corzine is the only one who makes the list twice. It seems Ingle could use a semester or two of remedial math.

Credit where credit is due: the APP on affordable housing

by: Scott Weingart

Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 10:26:05 AM EDT

Apparently, the conservative editorial board of the Asbury Park Press—a Gannett newspaper—agrees with me:

In New Jersey, however, affordable housing is not only a social good, but a matter of law. Thanks to a series of Mount Laurel court decisions, New Jersey is the only state in the union to enshrine access to affordable housing as a constitutional right. Whether you agree with that or not, it's the reality facing lawmakers today. Those making increasingly loud noise about wanting to dismantle COAH have failed to offer a better alternative ? at least an alternative that will pass legal muster.

The APP goes on to criticize "public officials and politicians" like Republican Gubernatorial candidate Steve Lonegan, who "demagogue the issue." While Ingle may not quite match up with Lonegan when it comes to shameless demagoguery, he is certainly throwing sucker punches in the same weight class.

Indeed, Ingle's irresponsible screeching stands in stark contrast with the APP editorial, which offers a well-reasoned analysis of affordable housing issues in New Jersey. The piece identifies several real problems with current affordable housing rules that have Republican and Democratic mayors alike fighting with the state.

Sadly, we don't hear many calls for reasonable reform of COAH from Republican leaders these days.  All they have to offer are images of impalement, policy pyrotechnics, and campaign promises inconsistent with the oath of office to "support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey."

Ingle Shreds the Constitution

by: Scott Weingart

Mon Mar 09, 2009 at 09:35:22 PM EDT

In his latest rambling screed against Governor Corzine and "big government," Gannett Trenton Bureau chief Bob Ingle channels Jackson:

The high court did screw [Mount Laurel] up, as it did the Abbott schools decision, but not without the Legislature's help. The court can tell the other two branches of government how to spend taxpayer money but it can't enforce it. Lawmakers...could say no."

Ingle would have the legislature and executive trample on the rule of law and the notion of checks and balances by disregarding a ruling of the Supreme Court. It is ironic that Ingle, who regularly rants about the evils of big government, would show such little respect for the one of the fundamental restraints on the power of government.

What, pray tell, does Bob Ingle think the courts are actually for? How should a judge arrive at a ruling on issues like school funding and exclusionary zoning, if not by interpreting statute and constitution? Does he believe, as his fondness for judicial elections seems to indicate, that judges should consider public opinion in deciding a case? If not, then he at least ought to offer some argument supporting his contention that Abbott and Mount Laurel were wrongly decided. And in any case, he must offer a better justification for shredding the State Constitution than the fact that he and a former legislator think the court "screwed up."

Bob Ingle's Corzine Hate Blinds Him To Truth

by: huntsu

Sun May 13, 2007 at 06:49:25 PM EDT

How about this one, where Ingle accused the Governor of New Jersey of caring more about media corporations outside the state instead of our great New Jersey-owned media.

Drumthwacket's 15-minute mini news events were absent electronic media like 101.5 FM radio newsman Kevin McArdle. That's because NBC's "Today" show wouldn't allow the governor to talk to Matt Lauer unless the Corzine people agreed to delay all other electronic media.

Corzine let an out-of-state corporation make his decisions to the detriment of N.J. media.

We'll leave aside the fact that Bob Ingle's checks don't come from the Asbury Park Press or the Home News Tribune, but from the Gannett, an "out-of-state corporation" that owns quite a few newspapers.

But how about the fact that Ingle is standing up for the great 101.5 (home of the Jersey Guys show Ingle appears on every Friday) as if it were " N.J. media" and NBC - which broadcasts to all of NJ, too -- is not. 

New Jersey 101.5, also known as WKXW (FM), is owned by Millennium Radio Group, LLC.  According to a press release from June 6, 2001, Millennium is owned by both UBS Capital Americas and Mercury Capital Partners, neither of which is owned or operated out of New Jersey.

So Ingle is slamming the Governor for dealing with an out of state media corporation that broadcasts to New Jersey and the rest of the country instead of dealing with an out of state media corporation that broadcasts only to New Jersey.

If that strikes you as a bit of a stupid stretch, then you are about spot on and get 50 points.  Points are, of course, worth nothing but you can still use them to keep score if you want.

Garden State Goober

by: huntsu

Mon Apr 09, 2007 at 09:18:10 PM EDT

Today's edition has to do with the almost year-old ban on smoking in workplaces, including restaurants and bars.

Here's what was written in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Deborah Dowdell, president of the New Jersey Restaurant Association, says hundreds of restaurants, bars and taverns have seen sales decline, by as much as 50 percent; others have closed in the last year.

Here's how Ingle chose to interpret that remark:

Deborah Dowdell, president of the New Jersey Restaurant Association, says the result is hundreds of restaurants, bars and taverns have seen sales cut in half while others will be forced to close.

In the Inqy version, Dowdell says "sales decline, as much as 50 percent" and in Ingle's version it says "seen sales cut in half."  See the difference?

Ingle should go back to high school to learn some basic math about sets.  "As much as 50 percent" includes everything from 1 percent to 50 percent.  "Sales cut in half" includes 50 percent only.

The difference between one percent and 50 percent may not mean much to Bob Ingle, but I am pretty willing to bet that a business owner could tell the difference.

What makes it worse is that this is exactly what the Restaurant Association wanted to happen, and they knew they could rely on the Bob Ingles of the world to either intentionally or incompetently spin the issue their way.

More Christie Mythology From the Punditry

by: huntsu

Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 08:16:09 PM EDT

This is Spiderman?

In today's column The Trentonian's Jeff Edelstein has nicknamed Chris Christie Spiderman.  Edelstein envisions Christie in blue and red tights swinging over the streets of the Garden State, because "Christie, much like Spider-Man, spins a web, any size, catches thieves, just like flies."

Seriously.  Not kidding.

Of course to get to this disturbing image Edelstein decided to make up facts instead of researching them.  It seems to be an endemic problem with columnists in New Jersey, with Edelstein standing at or near the top of the heap.

Now, as you know, Christie is the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, and under his watch, 105 politicians and political appointees have been charged and convicted.

And he's never lost a case. He's 105-0. And it doesn't matter if it's water board members or the biggest fish in the scummy New Jersey political pond, Christie goes after them and gets them.

Sorry, Jeff.  But Christie only claims 125 cases including investigations, indictments and convictions as of yesterday, and not the 105 convictions Edelstein claims.  If this weren't a column in the Trentonian a retraction would be in order for such a wild exaggeration of fact.

A review of the NJ US Attorney's Office press releases provides just 59 convictions, 21 of Republicans, 37 of Democrats and one we could not determine a party affiliation for.  That leaves another 46 for Edelstein to find.  Or retract.

But Edelstein's number was about investigations, so let's see if that proves the point.  A review of all available investigations - the US Attorney likes to quote numbers of cases but doesn't return phone calls of people seeking to find out what they are - finds a much greater disparity between parties.  Of the 150 people we found who have been investigated, indicted or convicted only 33 are Republicans and 112 are Democrats. Five are unknown.

We'll do a more in-depth analysis in a later post, but the preliminary review shows that Democrats are 300 percent more likely to be investigated than Republicans, a number far out of whack with the true ratio of party identification or elected officials.  Dems are only 175 percent as likely to be convicted.

Edelstein goes on to hero-worship Christie's speeches, and use Christie's own assertions as defense of Christie:

For instance, he twice highlighted the word "Republican" when discussing putting members of the GOP behind bars. He also recounted a conversation he had with then- U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, who told him to "check your politics at the door."

And as far as I can see, Christie has done just that.

We've already demonstrated how far Edelstein can see, and how accurately.  But leave that aside and note that he is impressed that Christie said the word "Republican" twice while talking about ? Republicans.  Somebody out there has got to help me with this one, because I just don't get it.

The Ashcroft thing is just as ridiculous.  Attorney John Ashcroft was a master at telling us he was non-partisan in his effort while engaging in partisan activities, and using him as a paragon of virtue that Christie follows is laughable at best.

Ashcroft changed hiring practices in the Department of Justice program that hired new law school graduates to remove it from the civil servants and put it under political appointees, with the result being far more members of the arch-conservative Federalist Society getting interviews and being hired. (Washington Post, 1/12/2003)

The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette noted that Ashcroft turned his "front-line federal prosecutors into a politicized lobbying team" in support of the Patriot Act, using them for political support rather than catching criminals.

And then, of course, there were the politically convenient terror alerts that were always ready to distract from bad news for President Bush or to remind the voting public of the threat just before an election.  Terror alerts that shockingly stopped coming after the 2004 Presidential election.

No, if Christie is using Ashcroft as his measure of how to run a non-partisan prosecutor's office then he is in deep trouble.

Bob Ingle: Blinded By Corzine Hate Or Just Dishonest?

by: huntsu

Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 06:57:32 PM EDT

The only problem is that, like with his Chris Christie love affair, Ingle has to make up facts out of whole cloth in order to make the case.

In today's blog post Ingle tries to equate Corzine's reaction to receiving subpoena's from Chris Christie in the Christmas Tree investigation to Bush's press conference threats last night regarding the US Attorney kerfluffle.

Why is it when people get elected to high position they assume an air of arrogance? President Bush, under fire on all fronts but lately because of firing prosecutors of what looks like political reasons, says he will make White House aides available to Congress for questioning but only in secret and not under oath. What good is that? When the federal prosecutor in New Jersey, Chris Christie, sprinkled subpoenas on the Legislature and the Governor's Office, Gov. Corzine questioned why Christie just didn't ask for documents without the formal subpoena.

Let's look at these two issues.  Back in February when Corzine received the subpoenas from Christie, here was the immediate reaction:

Anthony Coley, a spokesman for the governor, said that Mr. Corzine's office would comply with the subpoena and that Mr. Corzine had directed Attorney General Stuart Rabner and his own counsel's office to oversee that compliance.

Here's Bush's reaction from last night to the possibility that Congress may issue subpoenas to Karl Rove and Harriet Miers if they do not agree to testify on the record and under oath:

I will oppose any attempts to subpoena White House officials.

Corzine will comply, Bush says - before any subpoenas are issued - that he will fight.  See the difference?  Bob Ingle doesn't!  Why?  This line from Corzine on the day after he got the subpoena:

"The only question I have is, `Why are we doing this?' We'd be more than happy to give this without a subpoena," Corzine said.

For some reason, Ingle thinks it's damning that Corzine would have given Christie whatever he wanted without a subpoena, but Christie had never asked for it.  Corzine is hiding nothing, and is willing to hand over whatever Christie wants. 

Ingle does have a point that Corzine's refusal to talk about his financial connections to Carla Katz is fishy, and is right to bring it up as a potential conflict of interest.  But Corzine also has a point that, assuming he is telling the truth, the relationship was personal and predated his term in office so may be out of bounds.  Either way, however, only the press has been interested in seeking answers and the Governor has the right not to answer questions from the press.  If a subpoena is issued, my guess is that Corzine will comply.

But my guess or Ingle's guess on the Katz conflict issue is immaterial to the Christmas tree investigation or the Bush Fires US Attorneys imbroglio.  Ingle is twisting and spinning and misleading his readers into making connections that are not and have never been there.

Sounds to me like Bob Ingle has a case of Corzine hate, or he's just plain lying to sell newspapers.

How Chris Christie Got His Reputation

by: huntsu

Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 10:21:09 PM EDT

As recently as July [2004], it appeared that the governor himself was in danger of being indicted. ...

Mr. Christie stoked the speculation during a speech in September by declaring that corruption in the state was pervasive, "from the governor's office to the local school board, and every level in between." Mr. Christie said that he was not accusing Mr. McGreevey specifically of corruption.

Why is this bad?  Because the US Attorney accused the Democratic Governor's office of widespread corruption just before an election though he had not indicted or convicted anyone in that office.  And still hasn't.  US Attorneys shouldn't be implicating people or specific groups unless it's in court, yet Christie felt free to use the papers to smear the whole Governor's office.

Christie has been able to get away with this kind of thing with little impact on his "reputation" because he gets a lot of cover from a media that is sometimes willing to accept his surface image without digging.  Sort of like the beltway media did for Bush from 2001 until recently.

Some in the media are even willing to stretch the truth and make up facts to give Christie his image as a bipartisan crusader.  Some of them like Bob Ingle of Gannett.

Back in March 14, 2005 Ingle counted three arrests among Christie's count of public officials nailed:

Three more busts in Monmouth County brought the score this week to U.S. Attorney Chris Christie 79, Harvey 4.

A year later -- today -- Ingle is now changing the way he describes Christie's record, including all arrests, indictments and convictions under the same category:

Christie has more than 100 convictions and guilty pleas.

Suddenly arrests and indictments have become convictions and guilty pleas.  In one of the most widely read columns in the state.  Out of some weird kind of hero worship, normally reserved for inflating a batting average or ERA of your favorite ballplayer.

When the media starts just accepting "common knowledge" as the truth, and then starts exaggerating to the point of fibbing, then the powerful can get away with using their offices in ways they weren't meant to be used. 

Were a US Attorney looking to use his office for partisan gain -- subtly -- this cover would be of immense help. 

Again, the evidence is not there that the office has been used improperly, though the more we look the more smoke gathers.  The more smoke gathers the more likely there actually is a fire.

Can Bob Ingle Do Math?

by: huntsu

Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 10:26:14 AM EST

No, really.  Read it yourself.

This kind of knee-jerk anti-Corzine (and anti-Democrat) falafel has gotta be the influence of hanging out on 101.5 with the "We Aren't From and Don't Live In Jersey Guys" every Friday.

Bob Ingle Debunks The Spin

by: Brian McGinnis

Thu Nov 09, 2006 at 10:49:58 PM EST

The administrsation is so arrogant it refused to face reality. Now Bush is worried about how history will see him. A little late for that.

Ingle also slaps a huge chunk of Republican talking points right in the face. Here's what he has to say about congressional oversight and the Democrats' new mandate:

Republicans are spreading propaganda about how wrong it would be to use subpoena power to investigate those in charge. No it wouldn't. Americans have a right to know what's been going on from Iraq to Katrina and who's profiting. The Democrats also have an obligation to use their ideas and energies to get us back on the right track.

Sounds good to me!

Bob Ingle's Blog

by: Martin

Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 03:34:42 PM EDT

Further, it seems as if I am the lone progressive who posts on Ingle's blog, and he has just written a piece critical of Bush's foreign policy.  The Corzine administration reads his blog, and Ingle is highly influential.  It would be nice if some of you joined me on his blog and fought back some of the irrational and even racist allegations some of the posters make there against Menendez and the Democratic Party.

http://bobingle.blog...

Media fun

by: Media In Trouble

Fri Jun 23, 2006 at 01:07:25 PM EDT

Now I didn't tell anyone at PoliticsNJ that I was getting married, but they gave me a gift anyway.

They used to have a link under "Reporter Blogs" to the oft-tosser Bob Ingle there. In honor of my wedding, they took it down! When I saw it, I thought one better would be to have Bob Ingle stop blogging. Alas t'was not to be.  Anyway Kudos to PoliticsNJ. Ingle doesn't deserve to be put up there with real reporter bloggers like Snowflack and Jackson.

Speaking of Herb Jackson. Apparently, the DC media is so screwed up they can't even get the basics of reporting right. Go read how Herb Jackson edits George Will. Yes that George Will. The one that gets all that face time on TV. Pesky things those facts.

Anyway I will try not to let my newly acquired subsidies get in the way of my opinions on government.

Gannett, PoliticsNJ.com to 13th CD race: yawn

by: thecontrarian

Wed Jun 07, 2006 at 02:56:52 PM EDT

In the end, Sires thumped Vas, 3-1.  The story was big news in Hudson County, garnering the lead story in today's Jersey Journal plus some election night coverage from Vas HQ by Journal reporter Jarrett Renshaw.

How about Vas's hometown paper, the Gannett-owned Home News Tribune?  The good folks who bring us reasoned and enlightened commentary by Bob Ingle penned a generic "staff and wire report" (read: we were too cheap to send a reporter to Hudson County so we tried to do it by telephone) story that doesn't even include a comment from the local candidate.

PoliticsNJ.com once again failed to link to any of today's Jersey Journal coverage of the race (wow, there really is a paper in this state called Today's Sunbeam). 

Maybe the site has an anti-Hudson bias.  Despite my constant nagging dating back a few years, PoliticsNJ.com has consistently ignored my e-mails asking when it will start linking to Al Sullivan's fantastic 'Between the Lines' political column in the Hudson Reporter weekly newspaper.  Sullivan has been covering Hudson politics since the late 1990s and has inherited the esteemed mantle as the county's best political writer since the 2003 passing of longtime Jersey Journal columnist Peter Weiss.

I'll Take That Post Down in 2 Comments

by: Media In Trouble

Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:34:26 PM EDT

I left the same argument in a comment on Bob's blog, adding that it was a fundamentally dishonest post because it didn't take the Federal Tax brackets into consideration.

He walloped back by saying blah blah property taxes. Then I walloped back saying that in his post he said:

What about New Jersey government is worth the extra days all your income goes to the state treasury in Trenton?

The result?

Bob took down the entire post.

I guess he finally saw how intellectually flawed his argument was. I am impressed, usually whinny ass hats like Bob Ingle require much more in the way of argument to persuade them.

The post de-publishing, however, is no surprise. Typical right wing lunacy, remove evidence of wrongdoing, rather than admit error.

In fairness, I would have contacted Bob asking for the real reason he took down the post, but the intrepid blogger that he is doesn't post his email address on his blog.

Tosser of the Day: Bob Ingle

by: Media In Trouble

Tue Apr 25, 2006 at 10:57:39 AM EDT

Today's Tosser is Bob Ingle. Who has a blog over at the Assbury (sic on purpose) Park Press, in which he states the following:

Tax Freedom Day is the date that marks the end of the time since Jan. 1 that all of your income goes for federal, state and local taxes. It's April 26 most places in 2006 but in New Jersey it is May 6. That's an example of how much more expensive government is here. What about New Jersey government is worth the extra days all your income goes to the state treasury in Trenton?

Someone tell Bob Ingle, that the reason NJ's tax freedom day is a bit later than everyone elses has little to do with how expensive government is in this fair state, and has much more to do with the fact that NJ is top 2 (with Connecticut) in all categories of Per Capita Income, and in fact leads the league in Median (that's average Bob) Household income.

So it takes us longer to be free of taxes because we are on average in the highest tax brackets.

Tosser!

Below the fold I award yesterday's Tosser of the Day award.