NYT = MSNBC on Paper
Two sentences from a recent New York Times article on Jared Loughner, the Arizona shooter, that you might find interesting:
[Mr. Loughner’s] anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush — a standard reaction among left-wing extremist groups.
Mr. Loughner said that he had paid for his courses illegally because, “I did not pay with gold and silver” — a standard position among right-wing extremist groups.
Just kidding. Only the sentence that incorrectly implies Loughner is a conservative nut actually made it into the article as represented above. The sentence about him hating George W. Bush is in the article, but without any implication that Loughner might be a left wing nut.
Classy! That is why I believe the New York Times is now just MSNBC in print. [read full article]
Heh.
The whole thing is wrong on 2 levels.
1st level: Claiming that right wing thought or punditry might contribute to violence.
2nd level: Claiming that this crazy kid WAS swayed by right wing thought or punditry.
Even upon clear elimination of this 2nd point upon which surely, any sane and rational individual could agree, the fact that major news and pundits still correlate Loughner with the right, or just are using it to facilitate a discussion about “heater political rhetoric” just shows them for the farce they are.
If nothing else, it indicates how badly they’ve wanted something like this to happen with an actual “link” to the right.
But I think more importantly and perhaps overlooked in this whole hoopla is the 1st level upon which this entire thing the left is pushing is flawed. An attempt to silence political speech from their opposition.
The great liberal inconsistency rolls on…
Come on – NYT has been at this since long before MSNBC!