Times Immunizes Dems Against Foot In Mouth Disease

The MSM's continued activities as the propaganda wing of the fascist Democrats are discussed by Byron York at The Huffington Post.

Does the New York Times have a policy against publishing verbatim quotes of outrageous statements by Democrats? This morning, the paper ran a small (176 word), unsigned item on page A-18 headlined, "Apology Demanded for Remark on U.S." It reported that Republicans are demanding that Sen. Richard Durbin apologize for comments in which Durbin, in the words of the Times, "compared abusive treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay to the war crimes of oppressive regimes like the Nazis and the Khmer Rouge."

The Times's characterization is not inaccurate, but why couldn't it just quote what Durbin said? For the record, during a floor debate on Tuesday, Durbin read from an FBI report on allegations of mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo and then added:

If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others - that had no concern for human beings.

A number of people, not all of them Republicans, have felt Durbin's remarks were at the very least over the top, but the Times has spared its readers his exact words.

That might not be significant except that the paper has done the same thing with a number of comments made by Howard Dean (here's my column in The Hill on that very issue). For example, the Times has never reported that Dean said, in January, "I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for." The paper did not even mention his remarks until May, when Tim Russert asked Dean about them on "Meet the Press." And then, the Times published Dean's defense of himself -- in which he said, "I hate what the Republicans are doing to this country, I really do" -- but never his original remarks. To this day, the Times has not published them. And the same is true for other Dean statements, like his description of the competition between Democrats and Republicans as "a struggle of good and evil, and we're the good," his description of Republicans as "brain dead," and his suggestion that "Tom DeLay ought to go back to Houston, where he can serve his jail sentence down there courtesy of the Texas taxpayers."

If you read only the New York Times, you literally would not understand why there was a fuss about Dean's comments -- statements that not only angered Republicans but worried some of his fellow Democrats -- because the Times a) did not report most of them at the time they were made, and b) did not actually quote Dean when they were reported. Why can't the Paper of Record just report what Dean says?

It was bad enough with Al Jazeera and Al Queda trying to kill us, now we've got the Dems and the Times acting as domestic cells in concert with them?

We're f*cking doomed as a republic unless we wake up and start fighting back!