SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Neocon who wrote (163997)7/24/2001 2:43:58 PM
From: Zoltan!  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769667
 
Right, which isn't what you characterized it as.

THe NYTimes has a parochial, Manhattanite, Socialist viewpoint that it impresses on its readers.

Heck, the natives see it:

EMAIL OF THE DAY: "Couldn't agree with you more on your comments regarding the Times being on the "razor's edge of credibility." I would label myself as a fiscally conservative, culturally moderate, Southern White Male. I'm comforted and encouraged by what seems to me to be George W. Bush's over-arching decency, and shudder deeply at the thought of Al Gore in the White House.
I've lived in Westchester, New York for the last 5 years, and have subscribed to the NYT for that entire time; it has always seemed an "important" paper to me, perhaps THE important US paper--and, even when I disagreed with it, I at least felt challenged by the thought and hard work that had obviously gone into the editorial product. I've tried to never be a knee-jerk conservative, I don't mind having my beliefs challenged, and I always felt I could at least count on the Times for a well-done, coherent and . . . responsible statement of its beliefs and positions.
Not anymore. The current editorial page seems mindless, knee-jerk (Bush "bad," anti-Bush "good), and frankly contortionist in its efforts to slant everything . . . EVERYTHING . . . against Bush and all Republicans. And, more than ever, this slant has moved full-scale into its reporting. It's no longer even camouflaged. It's sad . . . but will almost certainly mean good things for other honest, balanced voices, as interested citizens like me look for meaningful, useful content and comment about the things that interest us."
- 7/17/2001 02:28:00 PM
andrewsullivan.com