In Wake of Scandal, Clear Evidence of New York Times Clinton-Bias Emerges!!

The New York Times played a crucial role in starting the "bitter" controversy. It ran nearly a dozen different headlines and articles about the comments Obama made at a fund raiser in San Francisco on April 6 in just Saturday and Sunday alone.

Those articles, combined with everything that the Times has printed since, including shocking quotes from the editors, reveal a pattern of obvious and--more dangerously--subtle bias against Obama.

Item #1: Written by Jeff Zealously Jealous Zeleny. "McCain Joins Fray on Obama." April 15th 2008.

In "McCain Joins Fray on Obama," Zeleny printed the word "elite" three times and the phrase "out of touch" once for good measure...in an article that was about 8 words long. The other word was "Obama."

Hey, Zeleny? Can you help me understand the many uses of the word elitist in your article?

1. "[McCain] said at a gathering of news executives that comments by Mr. Obama about working-class voters were 'elitist' and a 'fundamental contradiction of what I believe America’s all about.'" -Jeff Zealously

2. "Mr. McCain stopped short of calling Mr. Obama an elitist, although he did not show great warmth for him in a question-and-answer session..." -Jeff Zealously

3. "Asked [probably by Jeff Zelously] whether Mr. Obama’s comments made him an elitist, Mr. McCain replied, 'I don’t know, because I don’t know him very well.'"

Wow! That is SOOOOO newsworthy! Jeff Pulitzer-Prize Winner Zissou, ladies and gentlemen.

4. "The comments on Monday reflected the strategy...to portray Mr. Obama as out of touch..."-Jeff Z

Jeff Zealous might want to add the etymological root of the word "elitist" in a sentence with Obama's name nearby. For instance: "Obama might be running for president, but the root of the word 'elitist' can be found in the Latin word..."

Item #2: "The Mask Slips." Written by William Kristol. April 14. "He’s disdainful of small-town America," Kristol writes. "He's usually good at disguising this. But in San Francisco the mask slipped." Wow. Absolutely unbelievable.

Each time an Obama detractor wants to rip into Obama they have to deliberately ignore the woods and see Obama's comments merely for the trees. Kristol zeroes in on ever word. Look at the way Kristol breaks down Obama's impromptu answer.

Kristol claims that polling data, which he doesn't cite, shows that "Americans have become far more tolerant and respectful of minorities who are not 'like them.'" Obviously Kristol hasn't visited someone in a small town and struck up a conversation about illegal immigration. So its very well for him to spend his time in elite America and claim to know something about working-class Americans, but he's plain wrong. And he uses this inaccurate claim to write, "Was he simply flattering his wealthy San Francisco donors by casting aspersions on the idiocy of small-town life?"

This scandal has exposed the elitism and ignorance of so many of my former populist heroes at the New York Times.

 1  |  2  |  3