New York Times Becomes Bush-Hating Paper of Record

[American Patriot]

New York Times Becomes Bush-Hating Paper of Record
Fox News ^ | Tuesday, July 11, 2006 | John Gibson

The New York Times has morphed from the newspaper of record — "All the News That's Fit to Print" — into the Bush-hating newspaper of record — any Bush bashing that fits.

Take the deficit, which is coming down because tax revenues are going up. It was our big story right at the top of the show.

It's a good story because it shows that the Bush policy of tax cuts isn't in place simply to give his rich friends some extra cash for bigger yachts.

Money in the economy instead of in the treasury produces more economic activity which produces higher tax revenues. It's called growing the economy.

On Sunday The New York Times ran this story with a headline that said: "Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Is Curbing Deficit."

OK, maybe a little snarky in the word "surprising," but otherwise it sounds like the writer and editors got it.

Well, then a few days pass and the editors at The New York Times evidently say, "Hey, good news for Bushie. Can't have this."

So Tuesday an editorial appears on the op-ed page at The Times with the headline: "Another Mission Accomplished."

This time The Times' take on the deficit reduction is that it's more Bush smoke and mirrors. Now The Times says the extra tax revenue really isn't that much, and the deficit isn't down that much, and Bush was overstating the deficit this year anyway just so he could show it was down when the tax revenue picture actually kicked in.

This sounds to me suspiciously like Bush-hater and Times columnist Paul Krugman got to write the unsigned editorial Tuesday.

Krugman is the Princeton economics professor whose academic credentials are as solid as his Bush-hating credentials.

Just for instance: From the start of 2005, Krugman has written

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

[Brian Baldwin]

This really isn't surprising. Nor is the major decline in their subscriptions. No one wants to be forced to eat someone else's viewpoint. Does anyone else here still remember when the news was just that and not some giant Op-Ed?