THE NYT LAYS DOWN FOR THE GOOPERS AGAIN!
I haven't written here in a long while - a really long while - but it's time to start again. The world just keeps getting weirder and the US just keeps getting stupider (good word, that). If you want proof, all you need to do is look on the front page of the NYT and then look on the list of breaking stories on the online front page of the NYT.
Just look at the headline of this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/politics/15cong.html?hp&ex=1132117200&en=1b0f7720627f5fd3&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Senate Republicans Pushing for a Plan on Ending the War in Iraq
Okay, that makes you think the Repubs are actually pushing for a plan to end the war in Iraq. Great; except that they're getting out ahead of the Dems in this. That sucks, right?
Only that's not the story. If you look down to the right on the AP and Reuters column of breaking news, you get this headline:
Senate Approves G.O.P.-Backed Iraq Proposal
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Congress-Iraq.html
Again, it looks like the Repubs are out in front of the curve on this. But read the first three lines of the AP story, and you get a whole 'nother interpretation! Here they are for your viewing pleasure:
"The Republican-controlled Senate on Tuesday easily defeated a Democratic effort to call for President Bush to outline a timetable for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq."
Now, I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but if you're calling for a plan to end the war in Iraq, doesn't that by necessity also call for a timetable for that plan. And if you're a Repub and you're voting against a timetable, aren't you in essence also voting against planning to end the war?
So what appears exceedingly obvious is that the headline writer for the Times (an editor, probably) is a GOOper apologist who doesn't even read the stories he writes headlines for or does and just ignores the information contained in those stories. This is just the worst kind of jingoist journalism! Whatever happened to the truth! AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!
I haven't written here in a long while - a really long while - but it's time to start again. The world just keeps getting weirder and the US just keeps getting stupider (good word, that). If you want proof, all you need to do is look on the front page of the NYT and then look on the list of breaking stories on the online front page of the NYT.
Just look at the headline of this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/politics/15cong.html?hp&ex=1132117200&en=1b0f7720627f5fd3&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Senate Republicans Pushing for a Plan on Ending the War in Iraq
Okay, that makes you think the Repubs are actually pushing for a plan to end the war in Iraq. Great; except that they're getting out ahead of the Dems in this. That sucks, right?
Only that's not the story. If you look down to the right on the AP and Reuters column of breaking news, you get this headline:
Senate Approves G.O.P.-Backed Iraq Proposal
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Congress-Iraq.html
Again, it looks like the Repubs are out in front of the curve on this. But read the first three lines of the AP story, and you get a whole 'nother interpretation! Here they are for your viewing pleasure:
"The Republican-controlled Senate on Tuesday easily defeated a Democratic effort to call for President Bush to outline a timetable for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq."
Now, I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but if you're calling for a plan to end the war in Iraq, doesn't that by necessity also call for a timetable for that plan. And if you're a Repub and you're voting against a timetable, aren't you in essence also voting against planning to end the war?
So what appears exceedingly obvious is that the headline writer for the Times (an editor, probably) is a GOOper apologist who doesn't even read the stories he writes headlines for or does and just ignores the information contained in those stories. This is just the worst kind of jingoist journalism! Whatever happened to the truth! AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!
posted by George at 12:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home