Yes, the way they come accross as liberals is that they cover liberal issues only, are sympathitic to democrats and cynical towards repubs on the same acts. For example, if a democrat is caught using ethnic slurs, it is ignored and excused, if a repub do the same thing, it is highligted magnifide, exaggerated, and condemned calling for resignations.
2006-08-23 17:29:20 · 6 answers · asked by curious 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Sure, maybe.
But not only have you not asked a question, you've provided no evidence whatsoever to support your conclusion.
2006-08-23 17:36:42 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The New York Times was a cheer leader for the Iraq War which is very hard to square with what you are saying. I seems to me the NYT is trying to straddle the middle and or jump on one side or the other at any given time. But in reality I thing, It is out of control.
The Times is not Republican or Democratic in it's coverage, buy is apolitical in the worst possible way. I panders to both sides. That is not helpful in our world at this time. Pandering is the last thing America's need at this time or any time.
2006-08-24 00:37:21 · answer #2 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Thats funny, they weren't liberal when that right wing shill Judith Miller was writing pro Bush articles about WMD's in the run up to the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2002-2003.
2006-08-24 00:54:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the NY times has become a rag sheet the only good part is the science section because it deals with reality not opinions.
2006-08-24 00:38:44 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, you are right, but what is your question?
2006-08-24 00:32:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Indeed !!
2006-08-24 00:36:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋