NYT Deceives on Dem Vote Dodge

NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Aren't the MSM and the Dems the "let every vote count" clan? But when the Dems snuff out a GOP win on the House floor in a manner that would send the New York Times into the mother of all snits were the shoe on the other foot, the Gray Lady camoflauges the facts, and even manages to place blame on the Republicans.

Take the headline from the Times' story on the way in which the Democrat wielding the gavel somehow transformed a 215-213 Republican win into a 214-214 tie resulting in the motion failing: "Partisan Anger Stalls Congress in Final Push." The Times neatly switches the focus away from the Dems' theft of the vote, and onto those angry old Republicans, who are letting their anger stand in the way of progress. To that end, the article worked in a quote from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) [file photo]: “Their party has been hijacked by people who don’t really have an agenda but to stop progress.”

What's more, the Times never bothered to divulge what the vote was about. The article merely refers to the GOP moton as "a plan to revise the agricultural bill." Big deal, right? Not so fast. What the Times didn't reveal was that the motion in question would have barred undocumented immigrants from receiving any federal funds apportioned in the agricultural spending bill for employment or rental assistance. That's right: the Dems resorted to this profoundly undemocratic chicanery in order to preserve . . . welfare for illegals.

No wonder the Times didn't want to its readers to know.

Contact Mark at mark@gunhill.net

[PajamaTruthMafia]

The Democrats are willing to destroy the very foundation of our Democracy to give money to illegal aliens.

Where is the outrage?

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Deceptive NY Times story on Dem House vote theft. Ping to Today show list.

[Congressman Billybob]

The Times lies so often, and so obviously, that it seems bent on chasing away all rational readers. Of course it is failing. It is writing only for a paradoxical but shrinking group. It is writing for well-educated but brain-dead people who will accept its lies without a second thought.

But there are a lot of such people. Think of the Gam=ng of 88 on the Duke Faculty, multiplied by a few million.

Congressman Billybob

Latest article, "It Bleeds, It Leads, It Deceives"

[Texas Eagle]

No wonder the Times didn't want to its readers to know.

The way the Times's readership is declining, that job is getting easier and easier.

[Califreak]

“Their party has been hijacked by people who don’t really have an agenda but to stop progress.”
Progress, huh? Isn’t progressive some kind of communist term?

[El Gato]

the motion in question would have barred undocumented immigrants from receiving any federal funds apportioned in the agricultural spending bill for employment or rental assistance

Which begs the question of what employment and rental assistance are doing in the ag bill in the first place.

[Lancey Howard]

Yep, that’s the NY Times alright. Thank God that paper has faded from respectability and is not taken seriously by even the handful of New Yorkers who still bother with it. As long as America’s “paper of record”, the Wall Street Journal, gets it right that’s all that matters.

[P-40]

Much of the Ag Bill seems to have little in common with Agriculture...

[Diogenesis]

[Paperdoll]

It amazes me that the NYT is still in business. Too many stupid people in the world, I guess.

[Stallone]

NYT Deceives on Dem Vote Dodge

Fixed!

[lilylangtree]

Don’t expect anything different from the corrupted NY Slimes.

[trek]

"The Times lies so often, and so obviously, that it seems bent on chasing away all rational readers."

That is why Murdoch was willing to pay $60/share for the parent of the Wall Street Journal. Pinch Sulzberger has so thoroughly compromised the NYT that building the WSJ into the new "paper of record" with all that means to the franchise is a no brainer.

What a hoot. Pinch and the NY Times is a text book case of Nature's Inheritance Tax at work. The socialist left ought to love it. Nature's Inheritance Tax is 100%!

[Huck]

Nature’s Inheritance tax? Never heard that one. Is that when ppl inherit a business fromt their parents and run it into the ground because they don’t have the necessary skills (not to mention they grow up in luxury and never learn how to huck and chuck and succeed on merit?)

[Robert A Cook PE]

I’m continually amazed how such vicious hatred (of republicans/conservatives/dead-white-male/Christian) of all things I hold dear can be so easily ignored by the MSM and liberals.

How can they NOT see this kind of bias, and at the same time and in the the same sentence declare the republican party “the source of hatred”?

How can they pretend the MSM is unbiased and neutral when CNN chooses 20 U-tube viewr-submitted question - EVERY ONE of which requires the republican to begin his answer with “You are wrong. The actual ... is .... and the premise of your question is wrong. If elected, I will do exactly the opposite of what you want.”

[trek]

You got it.

Nature's Inheritance Tax: Frittering, foolish children. That G-d guy was real smart. Much smarter than those feeble pretenders in Congress.

[Huck]

It’s a good term—nature’s inheritance tax. I like it.

[trek]

In fact, if your primary interest was in solving the problem created by huge multi-generational estates (i.e., the crazy foolish, frittering children, wit: Pinchy, Paris, Ted Kennedy et. al.) the most effective way to do it would be to limit private holdings of government backed debt to say $1,000,000. This would force the useless offspring of the truly productive to attain at least a minimum level of investing acumen or see their capital move into more capable hands.

Alas, it won't happen. And besides, the government needs the money!

[Jack Hammer]

“NYT Deceives...”

Dog bites man. When the NYT DOESN’T deceive, then print it up and it might sell.