Politics

newspaper new york times 01

What The Hell Was The New York Times Thinking?!

I don’t say this much, because not a lot shocks me after all this time watching the media like a hawk (a surly Mexican hawk, whatever). But I am actually shocked by this un-effing-believable paragraph in the New York Times about the Virginia shooting.

Here’s the excerpt [emphasis added]:

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, when Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl, the link to political incitement was clear. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.

Conservatives and right-wing media were quick on Wednesday to demand forceful condemnation of hate speech and crimes by anti-Trump liberals. They’re right. Though there’s no sign of incitement as direct as in the Giffords attack, liberals should of course hold themselves to the same standard of decency that they ask of the right.

WHAT THE HELL MAN?!?!?

That the New York Times would push this absolutely discredited drivel is insane. Jared Loughner’s murders had absolutely nothing to do with politics, and there’s absolutely no connection between him and Sarah Palin, but the connection between THIS Bernie GOON is clear and obvious to ANYONE!!

I don’t say this a lot. I am shocked.

How the hell do you publish this complete crap presenting the most obscenely obvious lie and expect the world to just accept it stupidly when anyone with a memory longer than that of a goldfish knows better?!

Go and [politely] attack the idiots at the New York Times on Twitter, please. If you agree.

  • Pingback: SoOperPodcast #251 Trumptastic Tales of Shakespearian Tragedy!!()

  • Oliver Felts

    NYT has a death wish.

  • Ted Badami

    Let us clarify your point, if I may?

    You expect liberals to hold themselves to the same standards they demand of conservatives. Correct? Your premise is fair in deed. Good. We are on the same page. The preceding squabble solved allows diminished violence. Right? I like your style.

    However, if the above were to materialize due to your practice, then why in the fuck would you ask your people to attack?

    The shit spewing from your tiny mind is worse than both camps combined. Am I clear?

  • Ted Badami

    Let us clarify your point, if I may?

    You expect liberals to hold themselves to the same standards they demand of conservatives. Correct? Your premise is fair in deed. Good. We are on the same page.

    With the preceding squabble solved, we are blessed with diminished violence. Right? I like your style.

    However, if the above were to materialize due to your practice, then why in the fuck would you ask your people to attack? The shit spewing from your tiny mind is worse than both camps combined.

    Point clarified.

  • boocat

    The Bird-Cage Liner of Record