New York Times campaign reporters Amy Chozick and Ashley Parker played into Hillary Clinton’s campaign’s feminist theme in Friday’s lead story, “Trump’s Attacks On Clinton Have Calculated Risk – Gender-Based Criticism – Democrat, With Eye on November, Studies Ways to Parry." The original lead was even more slanted in favor of the Democrat, with Clinton called “a trailblazing woman” which was changed in the final to “the first woman to lead a major party.”
After Hillary Clinton won four of five East Coast primary contests on Tuesday night, the New York Times seems to be trying not so subtly to ease Bernie Sanders out of the race and clear the path for Hillary Clinton to waltz to the Democratic presidential nomination. Besides the front-page report on Hillary turning her sights to the fall campaign, Frank Bruni's column was titled "The Cult of Sore Losers," while Paul Krugman continued his surprising and sarcastic anti-Sanders crusade. "But never mind. As you know, I’m only saying these things because I’m a corporate whore and want a job with Hillary." Bruni still had time to call Ted Cruz "the Don Quixote of extreme conservatism."
The New York Times still has the racially hostile, bathroom-bigoted state of North Carolina on its mind and in its political crosshairs. Tuesday’s full-court front-page press coverage of the ongoing LGBT-rights and bathroom-access controversy was joined by some hand-wringing about a recent GOP court victory that will tighten previously loosened voting rules, an action that liberal groups (and the Times) consider racially motivated. The Times had a similar outburst earlier this month, with reporter Richard Fausset throwing around the “far right” label against North Carolina conservatives.
The NFL draft has become must-see-TV for a lot of people, and New York Times pro football writer John Branch does not approve. In fact, he implies that excessive public focus may have ruined Heisman Trophy winning quarterback Johnny Manziel's NFL career and life. Branch gained valuable space on the front of Monday’s New York Times with "In Manziel, a Draft Machine’s Human Cost.” Branch excoriated how "The N.F.L. draft -- our coverage of it and our appetite for it" shows how fans "are willing to dehumanize the games they love, turning people into products and lives into entertainment."
Class war returns to the front page of the Sunday New York Times, with business reporter Nelson Schwartz’s long jeremiad against special cruise ship packages which surely represent a new Gilded Age, “In New Age of Privilege, Not All Are in Same Boat." On the list of lamentables was a special $10,000 cruise option "hidden" on a ship offering less expensive choices. Yet for a paper which seethes at such Dickensian injustice, it doesn’t have a problem with sponsoring cruises to Japan that cost a minimum of $9,595. The paper has a history ofhypocrisy in slamming rich people while also avidly catering to its rich liberal readership.
New York Times reporter and reliable Democratic Party defender-Republican attacker Jackie Calmes valiantly defended that most reviled organization, the Internal Revenue Service, from unfair Republican attacks, under a battle-tinged headline in Friday’s edition: “I.R.S. Supporters Fight Back Against Republican Offensive.” She played the “reduced budget” card as an excuse for agency incompetence. Calmes even downplayed the IRS snooping into Tea Party nonprofits during an election year.
Confess! Confess! Curt Schilling, the Boston Red Sox pitching ace turned sports media personality, was canned by ESPN after sharing a post on his Facebook account against allowing transgenders to choose which bathroom they use. New York Times reporter Richard Sandomir wrote up “ESPN Fires Schilling Over an Offensive Post” for Thursday’s sports page, then put on his moralistic liberal columnist cap for Friday’s follow-up: “Contrition Continues to Elude Schilling.” The libertine liberals at the New York Times became positively moralistic in its own Facebook blurb promoting Sandomir’s column: “Curt Schilling’s response suggests he may not comprehend the ramifications of what he did.”
The New York Times had a mediocre Pulitzer Prize haul this week. Among the Times selections that didn’t win the prize for editorial writing (thought it made the final three) were a package of gun control editorials. Mark Hemingway at The Weekly Standard eviscerated one particularly ignorant, wildly hyped Times gun-control editorial in that package, while accusing the Pulitzers of “a pathetic attempt to further burnish the reputation of the New York Times." Hemingway wrote under the headline "New York Times Is Pulitzer Finalist for Wildly Inaccurate Gun Editorials."
Amy Chozick, chief Hillary Clinton follower and supporter at the New York Times, joined in the celebration of Clinton’s solid win in Tuesday’s New York primary on the front page: “Democratic Primary Triumph Is a Story of Love Rekindled.” Chozick went far beyond praise for a successful campaign, molding carpetbagging Clinton into a true blue New Yorker, dancing and playing dominoes all across the city and ending with Hillary triumphant: “'I love New York,' Mrs. Clinton said, squinting in the bright primary-day sun."
As the Supreme Court begins to debate whether President Obama's executive actions on immigration exceeded his authority, the New York Times lead National section story Sunday by Julia Preston, one of the paper’s most pro-amnesty reporters documented “A Family Anxiously Awaiting a Supreme Court Outcome – Justices Hold the Key To Immigration Mix.” Again, the Times skipped the clear formulation of “illegal immigrants” in favor of the longer “in the country illegally,” apparently to avoid hateful stigmatizing. The paper’s euphemism of choice was “unauthorized immigrants."
NewsBusters has long maintained that immigration is the issue that brings out the most egregious bias from the New York Times. As a significant case comes before an evenly split Supreme Court, the Times set the table with a collection of liberal clichés on Saturday. Reporters Michael Shear and Julie Hirschfeld Davis, both with a long pattern of sympathy toward Obama, fretted over whether the president could "redeem his legacy" on immigration through amnesty in “Ruling May Change Immigration, Not the Tone -- Justice’s Decision Is Unlikely to Ease the Debate.”
The New York Times has been accused of slanting its 2016 political coverage toward Hillary Clinton while stiffing Bernie Sanders. Well, in Thursday’s edition, there was balance: the paper’s coverage was equally effusive for both Democrats. While Hillary Clinton got a mawkish front-page celebration of her supposedly personal, secret work with black mothers whose children had been killed in confrontations with police, Sanders also made the day's front page, with a reverential report by Patrick Healy on the candidate's crowd-getting abilities in progressive Greenwich Village in “Sanders Carries Fight on ‘Status Quo’ to Village.”
Amy Chozick, one of the New York Times’ chief Hillary defenders, made Thursday’s front page with an evident attempt to boost Clinton’s sagging appeal among blacks, while assuming bad faith on the part of police, in “Black Victims Mothers Step Forward for Clinton.” Both Chozick and liberal Clinton embraced the current liberal media conventional wisdom that President Bill Clinton’s crime bill was grievously flawed and harmed blacks, never mind the former president's own passionate defense of the law.
The New York Times marked the one-year anniversary of the death in Baltimore of Freddie Gray, a 25-year-old black man who died of a spinal cord injury a week after being arrested. With a mayoral election and the trials of six police officers charged in Gray’s death looming in May, reporters John Eligon and Sheryl Gay Stolberg took a biased look back at last year’s looting and violence in Baltimore, praising Black Lives Matter and seemingly impatient with the fact that the cops held responsible (without evidence) for Gray's death had not been convicted yet.
As Obama’s final term dwindles down, New York Times reporter Gardiner Harris made a celebratory defense of First Lady Michelle Obama’s supposedly newfound political voice on Monday: “Addressing Graduates, First Lady Speaks Out.” The text box read: “Displaying a personal side by highlighting issues involving race, gender and class.” All the liberal buzzwords went unchallenged by Harris. The NYT did the same thing for the First Lady during last year's commencement season.
The New York Times can’t get enough of a new study published in Science suggesting door-to-door canvassing can enlighten troglodyte citizens into supporting progressive policies like gay marriage, abortion (alongside Planned Parenthood), and gun control. The Times had just embraced the study in its news pages a few days before, and now contributing writer Benoit-Denizet Lewis devoted 5,000 words to the study helping liberals push their social issues.
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman might be fresh out of friends before this campaign season is over. While his sanctimonious and classless attacks on Republicans have rendered him an unreliable political analyst, his recent assaults on the “Bernie bros” -- supposedly sexist Hillary-bashing Bernie Sanders' supporters -- have earned him new enemies on the left. On Friday, Krugman went for a direct hit on the candidate himeslf: “Sanders Over The Edge," and showed a complete lack of self-awareness as he accused both Sanders and his supporters of "petulant self-righteousness."
Last week the New York Times, proving its social liberal bona fides, crowned North Carolina as the home of bathroom bigotry against transgenders. On Friday, it was Indiana’s new abortion restrictions that were up for vulgar mockery. Yet the same day, the Times also showed how to sell people on transgenderism, door to door. Reporter Mitch Smith celebrated feminist activism in the form of a rain of coordinated hostile tweets sent to Indiana’s Republican governor Mike Pence after he signed pro-life legislation: “Women Irked by Abortion Law Make Governor the Butt of Social Media Ridicule."
New York Times San Francisco bureau chief Thomas Fuller embraced a major shift toward European-style social policy in that city in Wednesday's “No Pay Cuts for New Parents in San Francisco – City Becomes the First in the Country to Approve Six Weeks of Fully Paid Leave.” As shown by that headline, the Times got really excited about the local liberal ordinance, with a full story on the front of the National section, including two large photos with parents and cute toddlers. (Conservative legislation protecting religious freedom wasn’t welcomed with the same enthusiasm.) The paper clearly saw the socialist-style measure as an indisputable good thing, and Fuller himself questioned on Twitter why it took so long for America to get with the program of becoming more like European social democracies.
New York Times reporter Jackie Calmes got a prominent Sunday front-page spot for a rather humdrum story on economic recovery in a blue-collar Indiana town and why President Obama wasn’t getting the credit he deserved for it. Racism, perhaps? The puzzled headline: “Political Discontent Festers in Indiana Town Despite Jobs Surge.” Online it was more explicit: “Obama Gets Scant Credit in Indiana Region Where Recovery Was Robust.” Calmes, an Obama fan who in 2015 devoted 16,000 words to the corrosive effects of conservative talk radio in a report written on sabbatical at Harvard, acted disappointed that the blue collar denizens of Elkhart, Indiana weren’t sufficiently grateful to the king.