Refuting the falsehood that The New York Times was “in the tank” for Obama during the campaign
December 1st, 2008 at 02:20pm Pat Cunningham
 
It’s an article of faith among conservatives that The New York Times, the nation’s most influential newspaper, shamelessly slanted its coverage of the presidential campaign in favor of Barack Obama.
To hear some people tell it, the Times had nary a word to say about Obama’s connections with Tony Rezko, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Bill Ayers or Rashid Kalidi, nor anything to say about his white ancestors having owned slaves, potential conflicts of interest regarding his campaign contributors, his “present” votes in the Illinois Senate, his use of illegal drugs as a young man, his “bitterness” speech about small-towners, the favorable comments about him from a leader of the Palestinian militant group Hamas, his failure on some occasions to wear a flag lapel pin, his breaking of an earlier pledge to take public campaign funds, his views on abortion and gun control, his cancellation of a planned visit to wounded troops at a hospital in Germany, or reports that a Kenyan relative of his was living in the United States illegally.
But, if the right-wing critics had actually bothered reading the Times, they would have found stories on all these matters and more.
HERE’s a list of 92 articles from the Times, including more than a few that Barack Obama probably would rather have not seen in print anywhere.
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
4 Comments Add your own
1. Juice | December 1st, 2008 at 6:44 pm
OMG, are you serious? And you reference the Daily Kooks as a source? Even Chris Matthews would laugh at this one.
2. Pat Cunningham | December 1st, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Juice, if you could actually read, you’d know that the source for the 92 articles from The New York Times is — get ready for it — The New York Times. Duh!
3. dave | December 2nd, 2008 at 6:33 am
New York Times salesa are 1/2 of what they were 10 years ago, just google New York Times and Obama and the same with McCain. You’d expect McCain to have many more hits, since he has been in the news since he was shot down. You will find that Obama gets nearly 15mmillion hits and McCain barely 9 million hits.
Totally unscientific method but anyone knows that the NYT was in Obamas cormer. I love it now that Obama is in, nearly all of his promises to the the left have gone out the window. Again, a Chicago politican never stands behinds his campaighn promies.
4. Juice | December 2nd, 2008 at 4:42 pm
I don’t click on the Daily Kooks hyperlink to raise their counters.
“HERE’s a list of 92 articles from the Times” you say but the link goes to the Kooks sight. Why don’t you link to the Times sight if they are the source? Do you get a nickle everytime someone clicks on your Kooks link?
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed