" FoxNews highlighted the extreme Left/anti-Bush bias spewing out of the parochial NYTimes."
The above quote is the lead line in the post you used to answer my challenge to you to show evidence in the NYT that it is biased.
You said,"The NYTimes, unlike the LATimes and WP, refused to report that because of Bush's leadership Japan secured provisions that made Kyoto essentially meaningless."
In fact neither the LATimes nor the WP reported that the new agreement made Kyoto "essentially meaningless". Those words were never used. The Post, in fact, called it a "breakthrough and a major diplomatic setback for the Bush Administration"
The LATimes headline reads, "Nations Adopt Climate Pact Without U.S."
Their coverage said, in part, "With the United States isolated, those seeking to combat climate change say the solidarity shown here should provide impetus for clean energy initiatives worldwide, even in the U.S. Congress. "
Then you said, "The liberal NYTimes refused to report the most important concession made to Japan: that penalties contained in Kyoto are not legally binding on signatories."
This, of course, is not true.....here is the statement from the Times article from the details printed on the right hand side of the article. It won't copy and paste so I'll quote: Under the section titled ENFORCEMENT, it says, ""Countries failing to meet targets must reduce emissions an added 1.3 tons for every ton above the target. Japan balked at making these penalties" legally binding" so such discussion was left out of the agreement.""
You further said "the liberal NYTimes turned Pres Bush's victory on Kyoto into defeat."
Perhaps I'm missing something here but how can losing a vote 178-1 be considered a victory?. How can being isolated and criticized by the rest of the world be considered a victory? If the agreement were a victory for Bush one would think he would have signed it, not so? So, dear Zoltan, you have failed to show the NYTimes bias you claim and you failed to turn a Bush defeat into a victory.... |
