On Fox News this weekend, Jon Stewart famously denied that the New York Times pushes a liberal agenda. Perhaps the man from Comedy Central sees the paper as "moderate." After all, the Times itself apparently doesn't believe there are any liberals on the Supreme Court. In an editorial today, the paper described Ruth Bader-Ginsburg and every other member of her wing of the Court, as "moderate."
The Times' mind-boggling notion of what constitutes a "moderate" came in its editorial blasting the Supreme Court's decision of yesterday throwing out a huge class-action sex-discrimination case against Wal-Mart.
Here's the relevant excerpt from the editorial [emphasis added]:
"Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the four moderates on the court, dissented from Justice Scalia’s broader analysis and sought a much narrower holding."
So not only is Bader-Ginsburg not a liberal, neither is Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan.
Ruth Bader-Ginsburg: feminist activist. Former General Counsel of the ACLU. Pro-abortion rights crusader. Moderate.
If Bader-Ginsburg's not a liberal judge in the eyes of the New York Times, then no one is. How's this for an imaginary headline: 'Obama Nominates Moderate Michael Moore To High Court'?