Hot Mic

Omakase

Amazon Search

Stings a little, duddn’t it?

Having spent the last six and one-half years determinedly attempting to achieve through shaded narratives and biased reporting a reversal of the 2000 Supreme Court decision that installed George W. Bush as president – or, failing that, at least minimizing what it apparently regards as that decision’s pernicious effects, the New York Times comes face to face with the results of its own inveterate malice: Reviewing yesterday’s destruction in the Democratically-controlled Senate of a presidentially-sponsored immigration bill the newspaper had favored, the paper of record labels the fiasco a “failure of leadership.”

Well, there you are.

Share

6 comments to Stings a little, duddn’t it?

  • SJBill

    Just gotta love their compassion for the opposing view.

    “Many of its hard-line foes are celebrating, but their glee is vindictive and hollow. They have blocked one avenue to an immigration overhaul while offering nothing better, thwarting bipartisanship to satisfy their reflexive loathing for amnesty, which they define as anything that helps illegal immigrants get right with the law.”

    GAWWWWD! Why is legally entering our country disdained where the immigrants in question can begin right with the law?

    Does the increasingly senile Gray Lady believe these immigrants will boost circulation and save that newspaper? All I see our Home Depot hangers-on reading are free weekly local rags written in Spanish.

    Now I have to go and clean out the NYTimes cookies cookies from my machine. Don’t want to let anybody know I’ve been there.

    V/r
    SJBill

  • Curtis

    Lex,

    Thanks for reading that rag so I don’t have to!

    Curtis

  • Casca

    Yet somehow Lex, I suspect the irony is lost on them.

  • I read the NY Times daily on the web, usually skimming the stories and heading to the editorials. I can say that over the past five years or so they’ve been so consistently against the popular opinion, and generally wrong on most issues, that it’s sort of like looking at the playbook of a losing team. All one needs to do is find the opinion of the Times, do the opposite, and you’ll find yourself in good company.

    – Max

  • badbob

    Max- Shhhhhh! “loose lips sink ships”…

    I second the Curtis.

    b2

  • CPT J

    What Max, Curtis and B2 said.

    Reading the Grey Woman-Most-Decidedly-NOT-A-Lady so that we don’t have to deserves our thanks and gratitude.

    I wouldn’t let my talking parrot read the Times. If I had a talking parrot.

    Even though the bird would gladly and regularly ‘comment’ on the NYT pages placed beneath him, still I could not bring myself to let the Times take up any of his limited cage space over other saner reading matter.

    There is such a thing as mental cruelty to animals.

eXTReMe Tracker

View My Stats