Above: Joe Scarborough

Media Matters catches MSNBC talking head and former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough pulling “facts” out of thin air on Morning Joe today, along with co-host Mika Brzezinski, New York Times reporter Andrew Ross Sorkin and guest Jim Cramer:

The Morning Joe crew was on an anti-union tear this morning, claiming the union label on a company means “sell.” Mika Brzezinski went so far as to say of unions: “They cripple the system that makes a company work.” Collectively, the journalists on Morning Joe couldn’t name a single “successful” unionized company.

This says more about their qualifications to discuss public policy and labor relations than it says about unions. To pick just one obvious example, UPS is unionized — and the company made more than $3 billion last year. That’s “billion” with a “b,” and those are profits, not revenues.

Oh, what the heck, let’s take one more example. GE is one of the world’s largest companies; in 2006, its revenues were greater than the gross domestic products of 80 percednt of UN nations. The company made more than $18 billion in 2008 — again, billion with a b, and again, those are profits, not revenue. All that despite (or, perhaps, because of) the fact that 13 different unions represent GE workers.

Oh, and GE owns NBC-Universal, which owns MSNBC, which pays Joe Scarborough a handsome salary (and the unionized workers who help get his show on the air considerably less.)

Does Joe Scarborough think NBC and GE are not “successful” companies? Does Mika Brzezinski think the unionized workers she no doubt interacts with every day are crippling her ability to do her job, or her employer’s ability to be successful?

The crew over at Talking Points Memo was inspired by Scarborough & Co.’s ignorance to start compiling a list of unionized companies that turned a profit in 2008. Want to suggest one that’s not on the list yet? Hit ‘em at talk@talkingpointsmemo.com.

UPDATE (2:50PM): Teamsters General President James Hoffa responds to Scarborough:

Sorkin and the Morning Joe crew just showed their complete failure to understand how unions contribute to the success of the American economy by blindly assuming that unionized companies haven’t been profitable in the last year,

Off the top of my head I can give you several Teamster-represented companies who continue to thrive, despite the economic downturn, but there are thousands more: UPS, Eight O’Clock Coffee, Coca-Cola Enterprises, PepsiCo, Anheuser-Busch and MillerCoors. The Morning Joe team really should be embarrassed for showing their lack of knowledge on the subject.

UPDATE (3:45PM): Media Matters points out that this is not the first time Sorkin (who works for the New York Times, remember) has been found pushing anti-union BS:

If Andrew Ross Sorkin’s name sounds familiar, that’s probably because he’s the reporter who started the myth about the average GM worker being paid $70 an hour. MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann named him “Worst Person in the World” for that bit of blatantly false anti-union, anti-worker propaganda.

I guess the New York Times has no problem with employing reporters who refuse to let the facts get in the way of a good story.

I wonder what Clark Hoyt, the Times’ “public editor” (a.k.a. ombudsman), would say about that? Why don’t you ask him and find out? His email address is public@nytimes.com, and his phone number is (212) 556-7652.

UPDATE (June 4): Sorkin apologizes! Sort of:

I did not mean to suggest that there are literally no successful companies that employ union workers. Of course there are! [TPM’s] readers have provided a good list (though I might quibble with some of the names.)

I made the unscripted comment with my financial columnist hat on in the context of the problems at GM. That’s what the discussion was about on the program. And when you look at some of the once great iconic American industries that have faltered — automobiles, airlines, steel, apparel, etc — there is a fair question worth asking about whether those industries were helped or hurt by their unions. But let’s leave that debate for another day.

Meanwhile, one of those TPM readers asks why so many journalists’ perceptions of unions (and the world in general) are “frozen in amber”:

I was seven in 1980, Sorkin was three. This view of the world is frozen in an era that’s been gone for three decades. Its as if nothing has happened since, like a major opening in the wealth inequality gap, the rise in competition from heavily unionized Western Europe, the failure of supply side economics, or the shift in the economy from heavy manufacturing of goods to the provision of services.

To marry yourself to this narrative for all time no matter what happens in the world seems to be, well, pretty bad journalism for starters.