The one thing that all New York Times house "conservatives" are united on is their hatred of President Donald Trump. In fact, it is pretty much a job requirement. The New York Times will barely tolerate their slightly conservative (on a few topics) views but only if they express complete hostility towards Trump. Political diversity at the Times on the subject of Trump is absolutely taboo.
President Trump drew rave reviews on the right for a forceful address on global issues at the United Nations. But you wouldn't know that from the Week in Politics segment on Friday's PBS NewsHour. Liberal analyst Mark Shields gave it a "B for bombast and bullying and belligerence." Pseudo-conservative analyst David Brooks called it "self-destructive." Shields compared Trump unfavorably to JFK and Reagan...but three years ago, Shields suggested Barack Obama was Reaganesque.
On Friday, in an op-ed which made the paper's print edition, David Brooks, the alleged conservative commentator at the New York Times, surprised more than a few people by calling for Google CEO Sundar Pichai to resign over his awful handling of now ex-employee James Damore's "Echo Chamber" document. Brooks identified the five key players in the drama, and directed sharp criticism at three of them: Google's diversity officer, the press, and ultimately Pichai.
It appears that the mind of David Brooks has been infected with the image of Donald Trump and he needs to take extreme measures to quit thinking about him. Perhaps Brooks could hang a pair of Barack Obama's pants in front of him and stare at its perfect crease for hours on end to take his mind off the Trump demon that has infected him. Yes, David Brooks in his August 8 column described his main problem in life as Getting Trump Out of My Brain.
As expected, on Friday night the PBS NewsHour greeted the failure to repeal Obamacare as a happy "flame-out" by the Republican Party, and pseudo-conservative PBS pundit David Brooks insisted it's time for Republicans to "wrap their minds around the fact" that Americans want to preserve health care as a "right."
Here's why people hate the liberal tilt of public broadcasting. Both PBS and NPR buried the Scalise shooting in their "week in review" segments. When the PBS NewsHour arrived there, anchor Judy Woodruff couldn't even mention the shooter was a Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer, couldn't mention his favorite TV shows, and couldn't ponder if anyone on the Left could have provoked him with their outrageous statements. Instead, liberal analyst Mark Shields blamed it on Newt Gingrich, and his "clone" Donald Trump:
For sheer hilarity and hyperbole it's hard to beat a recent headline on a Washington Post editorial opposing President Trump's decision to remove the U.S. from the nonbinding and unenforceable Paris climate agreement. "Trump turns his back on the world," it screamed. A close second goes to the headline on a New York Times piece by columnist David Brooks: "Donald Trump Poisons the World."
It was a high-drama week of big, anonymously-sourced anti-Trump scoops, and taxpayer-funded National Public Radio was ready to built momentum for impeachment. Its "Week in Review" panelists presented Trump as a crappy criminal, his team a "crew of vipers," and the American people by a "vast majority" wanting to end Trump's days in the White House. All this unanimity about Trump's extreme awfulness came on Friday's All Things Considered [Fakest Title Ever].
Ross Douthat, the "conservative" David Brooks mini-me at the New York Times, wants President Donald Trump removed from office pronto. Although Douthat admits in his May 16 column that Trump has probably not done anything actually impeachable, he still wants him out of office because his supposed "childishness" offends him.
It seems as if New York Times columnist David Brooks has crawled back from the Antifa ninja play warrior resistance limb he went out on just after the last election and has decided that he can now just barely tolerate the crease in the pants of President Donald Trump. His April 28 column has announced that he is dialing back his "Outrage Level 11" Trump derangement syndrome down to a mere level 3 or 4 on the outrage scale.
The New York Times version of political diversity is that even if you are a scorned "conservative" you can still be tolerated on their pages but ONLY if you are resolutely anti-Trump. A supposed conservative was recently hired by the Times but read this description about him in the very first sentence of this April 12 Politico story:
In a ridiculous discussion that sounded as though it belonged in a forum of a left-wing website, the panel on Sunday’s Meet the Press bemoaned how the country’s attitude towards women cost Hillary Clinton the White House. Moderator Chuck Todd read from the recent NYT column of Nicholas Kristof, who described Clinton’s idea of Trump voters as “I don’t agree with him, I’m not sure I really approve of him, but he looks like somebody who’s been president before.” Paraphrasing Clinton, Todd suggested that “she believed misogyny played a much larger role in this than it’s been analyzed by many of us.”