BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU
THE LAST TIME THE NYT WAS CONSIDERED A LEGITIMATE SOURCE OF NEWS BEFORE IT BECAME A WHORE FOR THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.
So, I'm visiting DKos, right? And I stumble upon this ironic post:
I think the NY Times should be condemned
But not for what the republicans want to condemn them for. They ought to be condemned for lying and manipulating stories in order to sell the Iraq war for the administration. It shows you how loyal republicans are. They want to beat up the same institution that helped them sell the war to the American people. Shows you not to do them any favors, doesn't it?
by tazz on Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 06:22:11 AM PDT
How ironic that the paper that used Judy Miller to lie, cheat, and slut around to sell the American People this war - the U. S. Congress wants to waste the tax dollars you and I pay them to draft real legislation, and in essence, do their friggin' jobs - to go after the New York Times by drawing up resolutions to condemn them for leaking the truth that Bush is spying on "Amuricans" he dearly loves and fights the "terrarists" to protect us from.
The Times is a rag, and has been since the Jayson Blair incident. After slinging him under a journalistic bus, it seems they still don't get it, with regards to reporting the truth.
They can rail about the blogsphere all they want, but you know what? I'd rather get my news from Kos, Gilliard, Atrios and the Rude Pundit before I turn on CNN or Faux Network. With the exception of Olbermann, MSNBC has also become a joke as well as any news organization who allows their news anchors to spew political opinions rather than report the plain, unvarnished truth, like Cronkite and yeah, Dan Rather used to do back in the day.
Talk about biting the hand that fed you. I wonder if they NYT will cave in or stand up for protection of their industry and First Amendment rights? Or are they so beholden to the Bush juggernaut, and drunk on its kool-aid to the point they have been rendered immobile?