Who the $*@# writes those damn headlines for the NY Times?

[dolstein]

I suppose I shouldn't be upset, because only latte swilling pancypants elitists actually read the New York Times, but still . . .

UPBEAT REPUBLICANS REVIVE BUSH THEME OF COMPASSION

Let's see . . . Republicans are upbeat, Democrats are embattled, despondent . . . and what's this "revive theme of compassion" bullshit? It certainly hasn't been a theme of the administration, has it? Why is the New York Times simply parroting the BC04 talking points.

But wait, it get's better . . .

BUSH PROMISES: SOME FULFILLED, SOME THWARTED

Oh, I get it. If Bush hasn't fulfilled his promises, it's only because forces outside the administration (i.e., those nasty obstructionist terrorists --- oops, I mean Democrats) have prevented him from doing so. Bush wouldn't actually BREAK any of his promises would he? OF COURSE NOT, because unlike John Kerry, he's not a flip flopper.

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. And the right say that the NYT is liberal

:eyes:

[mimitabby]

2. Seattle Post Intelligencer too!!!

puke vomit.
first thing I had to see this morning was a much too close in your face color photo of the chimp and his lump..with this title
"Count on him in a crisis" at LEAST the headlines were in quotations...

ugh

[incapsulated]

3. If you expect the NYT

To be on the offense against the RNC for Kerry, forget it. Just be happy when they help with a positive or investigative article or good Kerry press. They still have influence. They were going to write positive stuff about the RNC, just like they were going write some positive stuff on the DNC.

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. okay, what exactly is wrong again?

UPBEAT REPUBLICANS REVIVE BUSH THEME OF COMPASSION

Let's see . . . Republicans are upbeat, Democrats are despondent, despondent . . . and what's this "revive theme of compassion" bullshit? It certainly hasn't been a theme of the administration, has it? Why is the New York Times simply parroting the BC04 talking points.

Well, they are upbeat, they're also smug and arrogant and cold-hearted.

They are Republicans.

They are reviving a theme. Because it hasn't been a theme of this administration, compassion is being revived (awakened) as a campaign slogan.

Compassion was the theme.

So I see no problem with that headline.


BUSH PROMISES: SOME FULFILLED, SOME THWARTED

Oh, I get it. If Bush hasn't fulfilled his promises, it's only because forces outside the administration (i.e., those nasty obstructionist terrorists --- oops, I mean Democrats) have prevented him from doing so. Bush wouldn't actually BREAK any of his promises would he? OF COURSE NOT, because unlike John Kerry, he's not a flip flopper.

Well, he has fufilled a lot of his promises, he's gotten lots of right-wing judges in, he's banned women's funding overseas, he's started two wars, he's made out like a bandit. In all honesty the only reason he hasn't gotten every promise he made done is because its been so outrageous that Democrats have actually banded together (never a small feat for this party) and worked with moderate Republicans to block things.

I think you're reading too much into these headlines and seeing bias everywhere. Bias exists, especially in cable news, but I'd never suspect for a second that the NYT has a pro-Bush bias.

[Triana]

5. Karl Rove...(n/t)

[Lefty Pragmatist]

6. Perspective, people.

If you read the NYT for any length of time, you would realize it's practically the official organ for the Democratic Party. They have their journalistic standards and they don't want to appear partisan, that's all.

They'll endorse Kerry; don't worry about. In any case, nobody in a swing state reads the NYT.