« Spider Salley: All of White America Hates Moonbat Messiah | Main | Here's One for Dr. Laura »
September 28, 2009
New York Waste of Times: "We Covered Up ACORN's Lies Because We Didn't Want to Make Them Look Like Liars"
Posted by Gregory of Yardale at September 28, 2009 11:31 AM
The "Public Editor" of the New York (Waste of) Times has an explanation for their failure to report in a timely and accurate manner on ACORN's facilitation of tax fraud, immigration fraud, and child prostitution. First of all, he says it was no big deal that an organization that gets millions of dollars in taxpayer funding --- and was where Chairman Zero earned his community organizer street cred --- was involved in criminal activity. Second, they were afraid of making the criminals look bad.
The Times quoted a statement by Bertha Lewis, Acorn’s chief executive, saying that the two activists, James O’Keefe, 25, and Hannah Giles, 20, spent months visiting Acorn offices in San Diego, Los Angeles, Miami and Philadelphia before getting the responses they wanted. But the article left out one city Lewis cited: New York [link]. Between the time of her statement and the publication of the article, a new video surfaced, featuring an Acorn worker in Brooklyn advising Giles to bury money from prostitution in a tin.
Some readers saw a deliberate effort by the paper to help Lewis out of a tight spot. Scott Shane, the reporter, said he had been unable to reach Lewis and felt that including New York among the cities she mentioned would have implied unfairly that she was lying, something for which he had no evidence.
No evidence except for the fact that she was lying. A reporter that wasn't out to protect ACORN might have noted the discrepancy and added that ACORN had not responded to requests for clarification.
But that might have required even more grudging acknowledgment that Glenn Beck scooped them.
Hat Tip: Patterico
Comments
Posted by: TED at September 28, 2009 12:05 PM
New Moonbat vehicle? How soon until Obama has us trading in our cars for these beauties?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1215741/Honda-unveils-Segway-style-unicycle-travels-direction-want.html
"Honda makes the Asimo walking child-shaped robot and the U3-X uses some of the same technology.
Last year, Honda also unveiled a gadget that can support a wearer's bodyweight, made of mechanical frames attached to a pair of shoes.
Japanese rival Toyota Motors has shown machines that help people get around, including the Winglet, similar to the Segway, a scooter-like device that people ride standing up.
Japan is one of the most rapidly aging societies in the world, and concerns are growing about helping the elderly get around.
'Honda engineers are always thinking about people's dreams and wishes about mobility. We will continue to work hard to be a leader in that area,' Mr Ito said."
The ELDERLY? Good heavens! Can you imagine old people on these things weaving around before doing a face plant into the concrete sidewalk? Ouch!
Posted by: Bad Robot at September 28, 2009 12:11 PM
No evidence? WTF?
Posted by: Jay Guevara at September 28, 2009 12:17 PM
Gee, and Spider Whoever-the-hell-he-is wonders why people (of all races) can't stand the ACORN-trained POTUS and the crap he's trying to ram down our throats? Just can't figure it out, eh? Not too stooooopid, are you?
And the Slimes wonders why their circulation is way, way down, heading for bankruptcy (unless, of course, they get an Obambi bailout).
Posted by: jc14 at September 28, 2009 12:35 PM
ALL THE NEWS THATS UNFIT TO PRINT WE WONT PRINT IT
Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER at September 28, 2009 12:52 PM
This from the "newspaper of record". This simply tortures logic.
Posted by: Mr Evilwrench at September 28, 2009 1:30 PM
Ted:-
Where did you get those images from?
Or did you do them yourself?
Either way, brilliant.
Further comment is superfluous
Posted by: Jim at September 28, 2009 1:35 PM
The NYT website tells you all that you need to know about the paper's readership these days. Not long ago, the Slimes carried a story about a town in southeastern KS that's been contaminated by mining waste from government mining operations during the first half of the 20th century.
There were a slew of comments on the article. All except for one were in favor of leaving these people to die of cancer and lead poisoning (instead of the feds buying them out the way Senator Sam Brownback, R-KS has asked for) simply because they live in a "red" state and might be Christians or support the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools. It seems their compassion for people-in-need is selective.
Having read several of these disgusting rants, I began to wonder: Is this paper's left-wing readership simply blind to the bias, or do they actually approve of it? Are they myopic or dishonest? Which is it?
Posted by: Cylar at September 29, 2009 2:48 AM
