New York Times’ Susan Chira, a “senior correspondent and editor on gender issues,” interviewed Anita Hill for some reason for Friday’s paper, “Hill Reflects: ‘Clearly the Tide Has Not Turned.’” Hill is seen by the press as a victim of both Clarence Thomas and the all-white, all-male Senate Judiciary Committee who brutally questioned her and has achieved secular sainthood, so there are never any inconvenient questions. Interviewing and citing Hill in the aftermath of sexual allegations against Republicans is a regular thing at the paper now. This one is keyed to the accusations hurled against now-Judge Brett Kavanaugh, whom the paper promises “we’re still investigating.”



On Thursday, The New York Times published an op-ed arguing that mental health professionals should abandon treating gender dysphoria, the condition most typically associated with transgenderism, as a mental disorder.



In a column she wrote over the weekend, Maureen Dowd of The New York Times joined a long list of media personalities who have used the death of President George H.W. Bush to trash President Trump. Dowd contrasted the “narcissistic, amoral, vulgar reality-TV president” with the “modest, principled, classy, old-world president.” She made similar comments Wednesday’s edition of MTP Daily: “in this era of covering white-collar crimes and porn stars and vulgarity...it was nice to look back to someone who was trying to represent decency and civility...that modesty is such contrast to Trump’s endless odyssey of narcissistic self-discovery.” One could just as easily say that Dowd’s descriptions of Bush in 2018 are in such contrast to her comments about him in 1990.  



New York Times reporter Astead Herndon had an unwelcome surprise for Times readers on the front of Friday’s paper -- a bit of actual scrutiny of Democratic 2020 presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren, based on her clumsy handling of a DNA test meant to prove she had Native American heritage: “Warren Facing Cloud of Anger Over DNA Test.” The story got some pushback within the mainstream liberal media -- no surprise -- but from an unlikely source: the paper’s own former opinion page editor Andrew Rosenthal (recently in the news for his 1992 fake news attack on George H.W. Bush over a supermarket checkout scanner).



The New York Times' lead story Thursday proved that its newish alarmist environmental reporter Kendra Pierre-Louis is a worthy successor to the paper’s previous alarmist environmental reporter, Justin Gillis, in “Emissions Surge, Hastening Perils Across The Globe – 2 New Warming Studies – Rising Greenhouse Gases Likened to ‘Speeding Freight Train.’” The lead sentence was even more histrionic than the left-wing Huffington Post’s take, which treated the carbon report as bad news but didn’t engage in wild extrapolation the way Pierre-Louis and her headline writer did.



New York Times reporter Peter Baker marked the ceremony for former President George H. W. Bush on the front of Thursday’s edition, but his main focus was on attacking one of the attendants: President Trump, through biased interpretation of body language and some light mind-reading. At a moment that promised bipartisan respect, the Times wants to deepen the very divisions it pretends to deplore. Baker condescended: "[Historian John Meacham] also essentially explained Mr. Bush’s thousand-lights phrase to Mr. Trump."



New York Times reporter Peter Baker tastelessly marked the beginning of the four-day commemoration of the life of former President George H.W. Bush by....whining about the “dog whistle” racist Willie Horton ads from Bush’s successful 1988 campaign against Democrat Michael Dukakis. For 30 years, media conventional wisdom has been appalled at the supposedly racist campaign ads from the Bush camp criticizing the irresponsibly lax prison program of Massachusetts, which featured the story of Willie Horton, a convicted murderer who raped and killed a woman in Maryland while on a weekend furlough.



To usher in the start of Hanukkah on Sunday, The New York Times published an op-ed by Jewish novelist Michael David Lukas arguing that the celebration of the religious holiday by urban, secular Jews is an example of gross “hypocrisy” because, as the subheading explains: “It’s a holiday that commemorates an ancient battle against assimilation. And it’s the one holiday that most assimilated Jews celebrate.”



New York Times media reporter Jim Rutenberg branches off into global warming alarmism (while still mocking conservatives)  with an oddity about a freelance environmentalist going viral with emotional videos of dead dolphins on the beach in Naples, Fla. that she blames on global warming: “Filling a TV News Gap With Just an iPhone.” The online headline: “News Networks Fall Short on Climate Story as Dolphins Die on the Beach.” Note how the Times steals a base, equating climate to the dead dolphins as if there is a clear, proven linkage (there isn’t).



Hypersensitive to any sign of Republican weakness, real or exaggerated, the New York Times used front-page space Monday to push political reporter Jonathan Martin’s “House G.O.P. Brushes Off Losses, Leaving Some Members Baffled.” The Democrats certainly had a good election in the 2018 midterms, gaining around 41 House seats (but losing two in the Senate) against a Republican president. But Republicans had an even better one in the 2010 midterms, gaining 63 House seats, and gaining six in the Senate against Democratic president Barack Obama. Between the losing Democrats in 2010 and the losing Republicans in 2018, guess which losing party the Times found to be more in mortal danger?



Since when it is controversial for a company to research a powerful billionaire calling for it to be regulated and who could potentially impact its stock price? Since now — if the company is Facebook and its opponent is liberal billionaire George Soros. The New York Times has become Soros’ press office now that Facebook has acknowledged looking into where his money goes. The paper has done 18 stories, columns or editorials about Facebook that also mention Soros since Nov. 15.



The media’s current appreciation for the 41st President stands in sharp contrast to how they covered his presidential campaigns and his administration. When George H. W. Bush was still in the arena, liberal reporters were among his most vociferous critics, who deplored his campaign tactics, accused him of exacerbating racial tensions, and bashed him for failing to adopt liberal policy positions.