The New York Times lead editorial Wednesday on the Orlando massacre, “The Threat to Gay Americans,” was notable both for the words it did contain – names of Republicans who the Times repugnantly held responsible for fostering the hatred that led to the mass murder – and for the words it didn’t contain: “Radical Islam.” That’s despite Omar Mateen, the actual mass murderer, calling a local TV reporter and stating “I did it for ISIS. I did it for the Islamic State." Meanwhile, Andrew Rosenthal accuses Trump of fomenting Stalinist genocide, and Jim Rutenberg and Frank Bruni indulge in some bias by omission.
The New York Times continued to evade the issue of Islamic terror in its reporting on the Orlando nightclub massacre. Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns targeted Donald Trump for his intolerance on the front-page under a lecturing headline “Branding Muslims as Threats, Trump Tosses Pluralism Aside.” Also, reporter Jim Yardley fretted about the bizarre aberration" of America's gun laws while finding threats among "evangelical Christianity" but not radical Islam. And the liberal Times apparently considers Mexico not to be an "advanced" country.
The New York Times reacted to the Islamic terror massacre in Orlando in predictable fashion, with muted gun control editorials in its news reports and warnings to Donald Trump not to “demagogue” the issue of radical Islam. Omar Mateen, who claimed loyalty to ISIS and went on a rampage at a gay nightclub in Orlando, killing 49, declared allegiance to the Islamic State in a 911 call. Yet some Times reporters did their best to downplay the Islam angle.
Pot, meet kettle: New York Times reporter Stephen Castle unwisely waded into a media bias debate in “’Brexit’ Vote Gives Tabloids Chance to Unleash Anti-European Tendencies.” It also gave the Times a chance to unleash its snooty anti-tabloid tendencies against right-leaning media outlets that support England leaving the European Union, while being blind to irony: "Britain’s freewheeling tabloid press has never been shy about pushing an agenda." As if that’s not precisely what the Times does every day of the year.
New York Times liberals don’t come any more knee-jerk than Andrew Rosenthal, son of the paper’s long-serving former executive editor A.M. Rosenthal. Rosenthal served nine years as the paper’s Editorial Page editor, and his first opinion column, "Why Republicans Won't Renounce Trump," plays on a seemingly deathless themes: Racist Republicans and the Willie Horton ad from the 1988 campaign, which Rosenthal has mentioned at least 16 times over the years to smear the Bush Sr. campaign and Republicans in general as racist.
The New York Times' Amy Chozick predictably celebrated Hillary Clinton as the Democratic victor (in a story filed even before Tuesday’s late night California primary results) in “Clinton’s Trek, Fueled by Grit, To Finish Line – Riding Steely Fortitude to Brink of History.” Meanwhile, an amazing Times headline on Thursday showed outrage at Sanders for having “Stubbornly Ignored” his Democratic opponent's “History-Making Moment."
The press is really trying to put the Democratic Party nomination to bed, on the eve of what might be a tricky vote in California for likely party nominee Hillary Clinton. At a press conference in Emeryville, Calif., Monday, New York Times reporter Yamiche Alcindor actually asked Bernie Sanders if he was being sexist for staying in the race. Alcindor jumped in with this gem: “What do you say to women who say that you staying in the race is sexist because it’s getting in the way of what could be the first female president?”
The front of the National section of Monday’s New York Times featured two race-and-ethnicity-charged reports from Minnesota and Virginia, one trying to corrode confidence in three Islamic terrorist convictions of Somalis in Minnesota, the other on a “Racially Charged Fight” over granting blanket voting rights to felons in Virginia, a move expected to benefit the Democratic nominee in November. Reporting from Minneapolis, reporters Jack Healy and Matt Furber’s story gave credence to far-left conspiracy theories right in the headline in “Fair or ‘Conspiracy’? Trial Divides Somalis in Minneapolis," while Sheryl Gay Stolberg happily followed a felon-turned-voting rights activist around Virginia helping enroll Democrats to vote.
Every year the New York Times tries to ruin the summer movie season with the pair of fun-deprived, politically correct movie critics Manohla Dargis and A.O. Scott, who solemnly count up and analyze female characters on screen before declaring the portrayals sexist and the numbers insufficient. The bean-counting joylessness has expanded to another artistic field, with theatre critics Laura Collins-Hughes and Alexis Soloski dueling to see who could be more astringently feminist in grading the current state of Broadway: “Broadway May Not Be So White, but Is It Woman Enough?” Plus an arbitrary dig at Ronald Reagan in the Sunday Books section.
The liberal Euro-philes at the New York Times are at it again, mocking ignorant Britons for resenting the grand European Union trading bloc. London-based reporter Sarah Lyall made gentle mockery of the right-of-center push for England to exit the EU (a proposal known colloquailly as "Brexit") on Friday’s front page by evoking Monty Python, especially John Cleese: “On ‘Brexit’ Vote, British Ask If It Would Be Silly to Walk.” Lyall opened her news story with an editorialist anecdote: "Jackie O’Neill, a 54-year-old administrative assistant, was explaining the other day why Britain should vote to divorce itself from the European Union in this month’s referendum. As she enumerated her many grievances, I couldn’t help thinking of the scene in Monty Python’s 'Life of Brian' in which a bunch of disaffected Judeans sit around, complaining about the Romans."
What’s the real danger to the First Amendment? Trump! the New York Times shouts in its Saturday lead. Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak gathered up opinions from left and right for “Trump Declarations Seen As Threat to Rule of Law -- Scholars Finds Disregard for Constitutional Rights in Remarks That Raise Alarm." Yet after going after Trump for disrespecting the First Amendment, another story on Saturday’s front page dismissed the violent attacks on Trump supporters in San Jose.
New York Times coverage of the anti-Trump violence committed by left-wingers outside a Trump rally in San Jose was distinctly underwhelming, with reporter Alan Rappeport having the gall to blame Trump for failing to condemn the violence instigated by anti-Trump protesters, while letting the Clinton campaign pose as above it all.
The headline in Thursday’s New York Times captured the melodrama: “Political Climate of Fear Galvanizes Muslims to Vote.” Carol Pogash, a freelance writer and editor who once compared Trump to murderous Communist dictator Mao Tse-Tung and who finds her own inspiration in Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Larry Wilmore, continued the paper’s never-ending search for Islamophobia with her report about Muslims in Oakland.
In her lead story in the New York Times, White House reporter Julie Hirschfeld Davis took on Obama from the left in “Obama Is Pressed to Speed Effort to Add Migrants -- Target: 10,000 Syrians. Lag in Admissions Is at Odds With Pledges as World Watches.” Davis found not a single voice of caution, and not a single mention was made of the sexual assaults by migrants in Germany last New Year’s Eve, while protecting the homeland was portrayed as a mere bureaucratic bother.
New York Times Paul Krugman once again poked a stick into the Bernie Bros hive with his column “Feel the Math.” Bernie's fellow socialists do not approve of Krugman’s constant attacks on Hillary’s opponent for the Democratic Party nomination, as shown in this fun read from last month on a socialist website, attacking Krugman as “an intellectual bagman for Wall Street and its favored candidate,” Hillary Clinton. He's also extremely confident that Hillary will pull out victory in the California primary, absent "the equivalent of a meteor strike."
New York Times veteran liberal columnist Nicholas Kristof is usually good for one or two iconoclastic columns a year that make his usual fans petulant and his conservative critics grin. This year the two are on the same subject: Liberal intolerance in academe. His latest column in the Sunday Review is a follow-up to his May 8 surprise, which drew outrage from liberals aghast at the idea that conservative should have a voice in academia, in the name of diversity of thought. On Sunday Kristof confirmed that liberals were prey to the same "cocky...narrow-mindedness" they accuse their conservative opponents of.
ESPN Magazine comes with a bonus dose of dubious liberal piety from “The Truth” columnist Howard Bryant, the mag’s moral authority/scold on social issues, especially what he sees as systemic American racism. His latest column is on a familiar topic: the scourge of “authoritarian” patriotism and militarism infecting the ballpark. The subhead: “Why don’t more athletes speak out on behalf of their communities? Perhaps more of them would if there wasn’t a chilling force looming over them.” A chilling force preventing multi-millionaires from speaking their minds?
The New York Times filed some disturbing facts about what happened outside a Trump rally in New Mexico: “Protesters Throw Rocks at Police Horses Outside Trump Rally in Albuquerque.” But the troubling story of left-wing protestor violence against police and property -- a story that would seem to justify the anxieties of Trump supporters -- didn’t make the print edition. Instead, the reporting from New Mexico that actually made it into print was about Trump slamming the state’s Republican governor Susana Martinez, under an ethnically loaded headline: “Trump Takes a Female, Hispanic Governor to Task.”
New York Times Hillary-beat reporter Amy Chozick matter-of-factly compared Whitewater special prosecutor Ken Starr to Inspector Javert, the fanatical pursuer of Jean Valjean in Les Miserables, while blaming him for bringing “a new intensity to partisan warfare” in his prosecution of Bill Clinton, in Wednesday’s “Starr, Who Tried to Bury Clinton, Now Praises Him.” Chozick even suggested Starr's investigation was responsible for the Clinton administration being distracted from the threat of Osama bin Laden.
Former president Jimmy Carter gave a lecture to journalists about racist Republicans and Trump supporters, and New York Times religion reporter Laurie Goodstein lapped it up religiously: “Seeing Resurgence of Racism, Carter Plans Conference to Promote Unity.” The text box to Tuesday’s story paraphrased Carter’s words of wisdom: “Saying the country has ‘reawakened’ in a bitter political climate.