New York Times

Just When You Thought the New York Times Couldn’t GET Any Worse

Posted by E!! on January 13, 2009
Random Bloggy Stuff / 3 Comments

O. M. G.

My eyes began to glaze over and my brain began to atrophy a short time into this, so I did some skimming in order to keep my synapses firing.

At each break and dot divider I thought, “whew, it’s over” – but then I scrolled down and, to my horror, there was more.

Bono’s penning is bad.  REALLY bad.  Like a bad writer trying to be all writery and write like (what he thinks makes) a great writer.  Or something like that.  It sure makes me feel better about all the crap I wrote in high school third grade.

And/but Bono is a grown man and ought to know better. 

And why didn’t the editors, well, edit…?  Or just nix it?  (I guess if you’re the NYT you don’t say “no” to Bono.)

Hat Tip:  John Schwenkler who called it “Absurdity, in Three Parts”

Tags: , , , ,

New York Times Fills Honest Reporting Quota Early

Posted by E!! on January 02, 2009
Cuba, Media Bias / No Comments

It seems the New York Times decided to fill 2009’s quota for poignant, truthful reporting on the very first day of the year. Having published a surprisingly straightforward and touchingly personal account of the Cuban-American story, they can now return to their regularly scheduled brainwashing.

(The online piece is dated Dec. 31, but the article appeared in the NYT print edition yesterday.)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ACORN Attorney Admits Possible Violations of Federal Law

Posted by E!! on October 23, 2008
ACORN / No Comments
.
Yesterday the New York Times ran an interesting story on page A17.  Excerpts and sum-up (it’s a pretty long piece):
.
Apparently an internal report by an ACORN lawyer admits the possibility that there have been violations of federal law in re: to the relationships among ACORN’s partners and affiliates. 
.
The June 18 report, written by attorney Elizabeth Kingsley, lists concerns about the improper use of charitable dollars for political purposes; questionable money transfers among the affiliates; and potential conflicts created by employees working for multiple affiliates.  In addition to these problems and all the inquiries into its voter registration efforts, ACORN also faces demands for back taxes by the Internal Revenue Service and various state tax authorities.
  
Ms. Kingsley’s concerns about the way ACORN partners work together are sure to fire up critics already upset over ACORN’s voter registration efforts which, as it has been pointed out, are largely underwritten by an affiliated charity called ”Project Vote.”  The group hires ACORN to do voter registration work, and the two groups claim to have registered 1.3 million voters this year.
 
The problem is that as a federally tax-exempt charity, Project Vote is subject to prohibitions on partisan political activity…but ACORN, a nonprofit membership corporation under Louisiana law, is not bound by the same restrictions.  Ms. Kingsley says that the close ties between Project Vote and ACORN make it difficult to document and show that Project Vote’s money has been used in a strictly nonpartisan manner.
 
Ms. Kingsley’s report also raised concerns about which organization actually controlled all the strategic decisions.  She said that the very same people were deciding which regions to focus on for both ACORN and Project Vote.   “As a result, we may not be able to prove that 501(c)3 resources are not being directed to specific regions based on impermissible partisan considerations,” Ms. Kingsley said.
 
Kingsley also took issue with the governance of ACORN affiliates including Project Vote. “Board meetings are not held, or if they are, minutes are not kept, or if minutes are kept, they never make it into the files,” she wrote.  Project Vote has had only one independent director and he worked for a short two year stint.  Since then the board has consisted of ACORN staff members and two members who pay monthly dues. 
 
But two people listed as board members for 7 and 8 years, respectively, say they were not aware they were on the Project Vote board.  One of them, George Hampton, said he had never even heard of Project Vote.  And even though Project Vote recently assembled a new board, five of the six new members have longstanding ties to ACORN.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

David Brooks: Stop Drinking the NYT Koolaid

Well, we now have proof positive that hanging out at the New York Times will muddle up anyone’s brain.  David Brooks, once a semi reliable conservative thinker, has penned a lamentation (“Revolt of the Nihilists”) so full of hand-wringing angst that, as Laura Ingraham quipped this morning, “it makes my hair hurt.”

Brooks says the failure of the “rescue package” (that’s an Obama-ism, BTW, and does nothing to endear me to the concept since I abhor victim mentalities of all kinds) means our political leaders have ”failed utterly and catastrophically to project any sense of authority, to give the world any reason to believe that this country is being governed.”

Apparently for Brooks, defeat of this bill equals de facto anarchy in America.

Brooks then makes a few apt remarks (ok, so he has not completely lost it), but quickly disappoints again:

And let us recognize above all the 228 who voted no — the authors of this revolt of the nihilists. They showed the world how much they detest their own leaders and the collected expertise of the Treasury and Fed. They did the momentarily popular thing, and if the country slides into a deep recession, they will have the time and leisure to watch public opinion shift against them.

No:  they showed the world that they were willing to listen to the people who elected them, the constituents in their own districts, who bombarded their offices with variations of “vote no” via email and telephone because they (we) don’t trust the “leaders,” and the “experts” at the Treasury and the Fed.  And why the heck should we, after a colossal failure of social engineering the likes of which this nation has never seen…?!

House Republicans led the way and will get most of the blame. It has been interesting to watch them on their single-minded mission to destroy the Republican Party. Not long ago, they led an anti-immigration crusade that drove away Hispanic support. Then, too, they listened to the loudest and angriest voices in their party, oblivious to the complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds.

Good freaking grief, Mr. Brooks!  These House Republicans (and the 95 Democrats who voted with them) are the ONLY people standing up for proper conservative principles, including taking a careful, pragmatic approach to complex problems rather than giving people like Paulson a blank check. 

And nobody on the right led an “anti-immigration crusade”:  they just asked the U.S. government to enforce its own laws (what nerve, ay?!)  As for your take on the ”complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds,” stick with the op-eds because a gifted psychoanalyst you’re not.  The only anxiety we’re having is over whether this bill will really fix what’s wrong, and whether anyone in D.C. is willing to do the hard work of making sure it does.

Now they have once again confused talk radio with reality. If this economy slides, they will go down in history as the Smoot-Hawleys of the 21st century.

So now we’re all just mindless sheep who totter zombie-like after Rush and Laura who are themselves out of touch with real life?  Do you have any idea how elitist and left wing that sounds?  Perhaps you’d like to come out in favor of the Fairness Doctrine also so we can get a dose of “reality” and not be hypnotized by the likes of the evil Limbaugh?

I can’t quote the rest of your op-ed, because frankly, my hair hurts.  My advice to you is stop wringing your pretty little hands and give it some time.  A bill will be passed; the markets will not collapse; and all will be well, if a little dicey for a time. 

And please stop calling it a “rescue” because that’s one of the words that is turning us off out here in Sheepville.

 

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rabid Tabloid Media

Posted by E!! on September 03, 2008
Media Bias, Not Good / No Comments

We live in strange times.  The term “Tabloid Media” used to mean publications like the National Enquirer and The Star.  Now it means the New York Times and all the major news networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) as well as cable news stations MSNBC and CNN. 

Just to be clear, I rarely read/watch any of these.  And when I do, it is with a critical eye and ear.  These newspapers and media channels have become positively smarmy in their coverage (eg what we’ve seen this week with coverage of the pregnancy of Palin’s teenage daughter).  They are overtly biased and downright rabid in pursuit of the political agendas of their editorial staff and/or respective publishers. 

In short, they are not to be trusted.  Primarily because they claim to HAVE no bias, which is so laughable it ends the whole debate right there.  I’d rather read/watch a biased account from a publication/station that makes no attempt to hide the political views of its editors/producers than read/watch a biased account from a publication that claims to be neutral. 

In the first case, I know what I’m getting and can more easily separate the wheat from the chaff.  In the second case, well…  I can’t even take them seriously enough to read/listen to their sensational, fundamentally dishonest headlines and story lead-ins.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,