No points for “compassion” for a Republican from the New York Times, even when the party’s presidential candidate makes a big move in a liberal direction, as Donald Trump did with his proposed child care mandate. Wednesday’s front-page story emphasized the cynical political aspect of the move, while indicating the subsidies were feeble. A related story from Italy treated as bizarre the idea that mothers could be expected to bear and raise their own children without subsidies from the state: "The problem is not a lack of desire to have children, critics of the campaign say, but rather the lack of meaningful support provided by the government and many employers in a country where the family remains the primary source of child care."
The New York Times has covered Hillary Clinton’s botched attempts to hide her illness in two successive lead stories. But as if to undercut that journalistic skepticism, Tuesday’s front page also included a short essay by reporter Susan Dominus (disguised as a “Reporter’s Notebook”) painted Hillary as a sexism victim: “A Resilient Figure Stumbles, And Her Fans Wince in Turn.”
Hillary Clinton may be slipping in the polls of late, but she has one huge asset in her corner, according to Monday’s New York Times: Michelle Obama. Reporter Julie Hirschfeld Davis profiled the First Lady in “Michelle Obama to Lend an Asset to Clinton: Voters’ Trust.” The text box: “Putting the first lady’s popularity to work for the campaign.” In 2014 Davis bragged about Obama’s intellectual dinner talks in Europe, summed up in a text box as "Freewheeling events, with conversations about architecture, art and literature,” and sent him into 2016 brimming over with “accomplishments.” This time it was the First Lady’s turn for the soft pillow treatment:
New York Times “public editor” or ombudsman Liz Spayd is probably not making many friends inside corporate headquarters (and Dan Rather doesn’t approve either) after her latest Sunday Review piece attacked a liberal assumption: “Here’s the Truth About ‘False Balance.’” The text box reads: “For some critics, stories are deemed fair only if they serve their cause.” Paul Krugman, call your office.
On the front of Saturday’s New York Times, reporters Jonathan Mahler and Maggie Haberman shed hypocritical tears over the risks to Rudy Giuliani’s “legacy” -- one the paper has spent over a decade doing its best to slur. The former New York City Mayor oversaw a record plunge in city homicides, led the city through 9-11, and currently advocates for Donald Trump. That last detail was the key to “Giuliani Role Risks Legacy To Aid Trump.” Post-9-11, the Times has rarely acknowledged the “legacy” of the former mayor to be anything but Hillary-hating and race-baiting
In Thursday’s New York Times, sports columnist Juliet Macur followed in the dubious cleats of ESPN’s Howard Bryant in being highly disturbed by displays of patriotism in professional sports -- a subject that’s gotten new life in the wake of San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s petulant flag protest: “Protest Leaves N.F.L. Necessarily Uneasy.” The text box portrayed patriotism as negative: “A league imbued with patriotism must confront some issues."
The networks finally notices the presidential candidacy of Libertarian Gary Johnson, when it can show him stumbling. The New York Times jumped on to his "Aleppo" flub with two left feet -- only to fall flat on its face as well. Times reporter Alan Rappeport filed the giddily hostile “‘What Is Aleppo?’ Libertarian Presidential Candidate Asks in an Interview Stumble.” The text box was unyielding: “Gary Johnson revealed a lack of foreign policy knowledge that could hurt his campaign.” Rappeport even suggested the flub was disqualifying, and played the unlikely role of conservative prude by bringing up Johnson's "acknowledged use of marijuana."
Those oh-so-objective journalists at the New York Times went after a fellow journalist, NBC’s Today show host Matt Lauer, for being unfair to Hillary Clinton and not sufficiently attacking Donald Trump, both during and after the MSNBC/NBC Commander in Chief Forum Wednesday night. Reporter Maggie Haberman was particularly perturbed: “Clinton basically got a two-by-four equivalent in the questions, well beyond emails. Trump got tapped on the cheek.”
New York Times obituary writer Douglas Martin penned Tuesday’s front-page goodbye to conservative legend Phyllis Schlafly, who died Monday at the age of 92: “‘First Lady’ of a Movement That Steered U.S. to the Right.” The Times and other media outlets generally file glowing obituaries for liberal figures, but Schlafly, the winner of the 2015 William F. Buckley Jr. Award for Media Excellence from the Media Research Center, received a hostile farewell -- a literal “hatchet job,” with Martin likening Schlafly to “ax-wielding prohibitionist Carry Nation” in the third sentence
“Islamophobia” at home and abroad is a recurring focus of the New York Times. Even after multiple reports of sexual assaults by Islamic refugees, and the problems of assimilation and cost, the Times can only see one reason for opposition: Racism. In his sycophantic report on the meeting of the Islamic Society of North America, “Muslims Forum Laments ‘Normalization of Bigotry’ In Current Political Scene,” Ron Nixon had to steer clear of some embarrassing facts, with federal prosecutors linking the group to Hamas and other anti-Israel terrorist groups. Elsewhere, reporter Alison Smale tried to cram as many "far-right" labels into a small space as possible, and David Zucchino fretted whether "a longstanding but latent racial hostility is being unearthed" in Denmark for the nation having qualms about admitting Islamic refugees.
The front of the New York Times Sunday Styles section featured a novelty: One of the paper’s political reporters interviewing that noted expert Cher: “Campaign Sighting: It’s Cher – She is going all out for Hillary Clinton, and her Twitter followers are along for the ride.” From the tone it was clear that NYT’s Jeremy Peters was talking both to a rabid Trump-hating Clinton supporter, and a personal heroine: Last month, at a rally for Hillary Clinton, Cher colorfully compared Donald Trump to Hitler and Stalin as fellow “despots.” But Peters ignored that dark link to Hitler in favor of reminiscing about the time he dressed up as Cher for a school talent show. He also celebrated a young Cher trashing her own family’s Republican campaign signs and hailed her present “reputation as one of the more effective and entertaining Trump neutralizers on Twitter.”
The New York Times is spending its Labor Day holiday plotting the Democratic takeover of Congress and the overthrow of "far-right conservatives." The Sunday Review devoted its entire front page and two inside pages (three out of the section’s ten pages) for “Getting America Back In Gear,” consisting of two essays by two liberals devoted to strategizing how Democrats can take over the House of Representatives in November, while mitigating the “far-right” Republicans already there.
ESPN Magazine’s Howard Bryant: insightful on sports, but prone to suffocating liberal piety when he starts talking politics. As a special treat for fans, ESPN posted online Bryant’s “The Truth” column for the upcoming September 19 NFL Preview II Issue: “Response to protest shows the power of the sports machine.” That would be the protest of infamous San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, whom Bryant predictably hailed as a hero for failing to stand for the National Anthem at a preseason game last week, citing United States “oppression” while collecting a $19 million annual salary in that same oppressive country. Bryant portrayed the quarterback, whom many criticize as hypocritical and ungrateful as well as anti-police (his workout socks featured pigs in cop hats), as “awakening” into brave dissent despite the pile-on of intimidation by the "predominantly white media."
Post-Brexit, the liberal media lashed out with myriad hysterical predictions of economic meltdown and threw around bitter accusations of xenophobia, with the New York Times leading the charge. Well, those dire predictions of crisis have not exactly panned out, but the Times is back trying to pump some life into the libel, by labeling any violent crime against any immigrant in England as Brexit-related. In Friday’s New York Times, Dan Bilefsky wrote: “Fatal Beating of Polish Man Fuels Debate Over Xenophobia in Britain.” The text box read: “Fears that the ‘Brexit’ vote has unleashed a wave of violence.” More like fear among sore losers in the press, who still can't grasp how they could have lost an election where everyone they knew voted the morally correct way.
Friday’s New York Times featured wall-to-wall scare-mongering over Donald Trump’s opposition to illegal immigration, and placed the perfectly respectable term “sanctuary cities” in scare quotes, as if was somehow out of bounds. Reporter Julia Preston, perhaps the paper’s worst offender when it comes to producing biased, pro-amnesty stories (and that's some stiff competition), struck twice in Friday’s edition. “In Immigration Enforcement Debate, a Split on the Role of the Police” featured “sanctuary cities” enclosed in unnecessary scare quotes, something the Times does with phrases popular with conservatives, like “death tax.”
The New York Times absolutely hated Donald Trump’s relatively successful (or at least gaffe-free) stop in Mexico to meet with its president, and the paper took its slightly panicky hostility out on President Enrique Peña Nieto in Thursday A1, two lead stories under the banner headline “Mexican Leader Disputes Trump On Border Wall.” Patrick Healy shared the top slot over a headline that used Mexico's President Peña Nieto to bash Trump, who used his "usual bullying tone" when he got back from Mexico, while Azam Ahmed and Elizabeth Malkin reported with snark from Mexico City: “Invitation Is Viewed as ‘Historic Error.’” (One guy said it, so it must be true.) The Times lead editorial, “Mr. Trump Plays Mexico,” also showed hostility to Peña Nieto for daring to meet with the Republican nominee for president.
New York Times economist-turned-liberal-hack-columnist Paul Krugman has a habit of accusing his political opponents not of being misguided, flat wrong, or even dumb, but actively wicked. Cruel rule is what Krugman thinks is going on in the red states of Texas and Kansas, as their limited-government approaches make them “States of Cruelty.” The text box: “Some ugly politics is local.” Krugman also spouted that it’s cruel to women to be pro-life, no matter how many baby girls might be saved, because he has made an unsubstantiated link between deaths of pregnant women in Texas and defunding Planned Parenthood abortion clinics
What does it take to make left-wing CNN contributor Van Jones sound moderate and reasonable? Have him interviewed by Ana Marie Cox of the New York Times for the paper’s Sunday Magazine: “Van Jones Can Empathize With Trump Voters.” This Sunday, Van Jones sounded more sensible than Cox when it came to respecting those with different political beliefs, jabbing at his own side to be more tolerant of Trump voters and conservatives in general.
The New York Times’ obsession with concealed-carry laws on campus in Texas continued, with reporter Dave Philipps, fresh off his celebration of a sex-toy anti-gun rally at the University of Texas in liberal Austin, conducted sober interviews with four people at UT to see how they felt about guns. Three of the four hated the idea, and their reasoning was pretty ridiculous, like the professor who claimed, "She is also worried that the presence of guns might impinge free speech by making some students too fearful to speak their minds in class. Some professors have resigned rather than teach in the environment."
The New York Times pro-Hillary campaign coverage leaves much to be desired, but the paper has been decent recently on at least one issue important to conservatives: Free speech on college campus. Saturday’s off-lead story covered the surprisingly strong welcome letter the University of Chicago sent to its incoming students: “University of Chicago Rebels Against Moves to Stifle Speech.” The text box: “Rejecting ‘trigger warnings’ and ‘safe spaces.’”