The New York Times Wants Freedom of the Press but Suppresses ACORN Corruption. Liberalism in Action

Abstract: The New York Times advocates freedom of the press and the protection of journalistic resources but blatantly trashes their own concepts by covertly suppressing the ACORN atrocities in their own organization and omissions in news coverage.  Their political bedfellows can conspire to import children for sex and profits and the Times cannot seem to comment on this.  A former reporter for the Times did achieve some information about ACORN from a whistle blower inside one of their affiliate organizations and the Obama organization vocally abused Anita MonCrief and she was forced to drop the matter. The Times thus lies by omission of facts and makes a mockery out of their own article today that calls for their freedom “… to report news obtained from confidential sources.” This is disgusting and unethical, but standard fare for this ragzine that has stained the perception of journalism.  The Times is a literary and journalistic disgrace but remains loyal to any far leftist notions even if they are unethical or illegal or insane. Cancel your subscription to this ragzine.

The New York Times, aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]^[2] is a rough and ready propaganda machine that has a single focus: to form public opinion to support any far left-liberal legislation or policies that may arise from time to time and to redact and reconstruct history to show that such programs in the past have been successful and beneficial to our citizens or illegal aliens who squat here as hungry parasites. News or information that would compromise their allies, strangely, such as ACORN or the New Black Panthers is routinely suppressed and that political mechanism is, of course, a process of dishonesty by omission of the facts. This ragzine attempts to offer such things as ‘reasons’ why strict rules should apply for private equity firms who would buy failed banks. This encroaches on capitalism and free choice, a hated target of the far left. Alternately, much favor is bestowed with song and dance to the far left such as Cuba and some obscure but poisonous African Marxist countries and, currently, to curry the favors of Hugo Chavez and give every opportunity for another Marxist, Manuel Zelaya, to take over Honduras and reinstate this puppet. This paper is an example of a crass and mechanical political turn-the-crank tome that is always narrow and slanted and supports any form of perversion or illegal or immoral actions that would support one of their narrow leftist causes.

This nearly bankrupt (in both the moral and businesses usages of this word) newspaper exhibits exceptionally narrow and primitive views of grand but unsophisticated government in its analysis and endorsements of all legislation and government policies.  This paper is 100% behind socialized medicine of the one-payer monolithic sort, 100% behind state sponsored abortion on demand, and 100% behind the reduction in population growth in the US. They are 100% behind legalization of dope, sloth, sodomy with children or animals and want to give amnesty to illegal aliens [criminals] who steal Social Security numbers to get jobs then fail to file tax forms. The costs of healthcare cannot be contained politically without rationing and old white people are going to be the first to find out that their healthcare services has been truncated since they cost the most of all citizens as they reach the end of their lives.[3]

Today, the Times blunders with their tautological meandering through the notion of free speech and first Amendment rights. This is interesting because their lofty essay also encourages whistle blowers to transmit information to their political enemies [even from the Times itself!] and thus presents a political conundrum for the Times. We can fully expect dupliticious operations from the Tmes’ staff that would correct this position to their internal satisfaction and glee. Sleaze is their strongest intellectual attribute.

Mumbling about ‘rights.’

“The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to consider a proposed federal shield law that would protect the public’s right to learn vital information about the workings of its government. But some senators are trying to weaken the bill, and the White House has sent mixed signals.”—NYT Editorial Freedom of the Press Published: September 17, 2009  [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

The focus of this is, of course, the Bush Administration’s antics in the War on Terrorism and certain TARP matters and must be politically truncated to allow organizations like ACORN to operate without interference. This concept must be expanded to include both if crimes were committed. That concept puts the Obama organization in jeopardy.  We need info.

They step further into the literary latrine with this statement:

“It is critical that the committee approves a strong version of the law to ensure that the news media are free to report news obtained from confidential sources.”[4]—NYT Editorial Freedom of the Press Published: September 17, 2009

“…Many believe that the First Amendment and the right to free speech are all that are necessary to ensure a robust press[5] and the free exchange of ideas [What?? Ed]. But the right to collect important information, and to protect the sources who provide it, is also vital.”—NYT Editorial Freedom of the Press Published: September 17, 2009

I agree with this! We now must speculate, churlishly of course, with the notion that this leftist ragzine can throw their support to the whistleblowers in their own paper. They will cave on this one and enter into silence. They have no other way to explain their duplicity.

From Michelle Malkin--The Times was caught!:

“The Fishwrap of Record has finally seen fit to tell its readers about the latest ACORN scandals (the San Bernardino tapes, which don’t get a mention, are beyond belief). True to form, the New York Times commits grievous sins of omission that whitewash the paper’s own role in deliberately covering up ACORN’s illicit activities before Election Day last November.”[6]— What’s missing from the New York Times coverage of ACORN By Michelle Malkin  •  September 16, 2009 12:09 AM

Lies by omission—the Old Gray Lady perverts journalism in all forms.

“[Times quote] For months during last year’s presidential race, conservatives sought to tar the Obama campaign with accusations of voter fraud and other transgressions by the national community organizing group Acorn, which had done some work for the campaign.”— What’s missing from the New York Times coverage of ACORN By Michelle Malkin

That is blind allegiance to a fault.

“But it was a then-liberal whistleblower Anita MonCrief, formerly of ACORN affiliate Project Vote, who worked extensively with New York Times reporter Stephanie Strom last year on several investigative pieces exposing the financial shenanigans in the ACORN web of money-shuffling, non-profit, tax-exempt affiliates. Strom called MonCrief a “gold mine” in July 2008. One of the last stories Strom wrote — blowing the whistle on an internal report raising red flags about ACORN’s massive potential violations of federal law– appeared in the Times on October 21, 2008:”— What’s missing from the New York Times coverage of ACORN By Michelle Malkin

Anita MonCrief has much to say about these affairs in her blog, which is necessary to read to understand how much corruption there is in the leftist housing and voting fraud arenas that serve Democrats so very well. [Here: http://www.anitamoncrief.blogspot.com/]

Strom[7] had to give up after a blasting by Obama operatives.[8]

A reading of the e-mails posted on Michelle Malkin’s site gives us a clear view of how corrupt the Times is in this instance, just one of many. There is no journalistic excuse for suppressing such news given the phony mantra of “…the news media are free to report news obtained from confidential sources.” The Times can stoop not much lower than this to cover up criminal activity for their beloved political candidates and elected officials. But, this and the lies of Walter Duranty and his colleagues are well established in the history of this paper so we should not wait for them to share the vision of the free press as an ordinary citizen might think.

Now, we understand that such sleaze and nefarious journalism are standard fare for this ragzine, but this example of phony journalism gives us some antecedents to promote the identification and culturing and protection of whistle blowers within the Obama administration, or the Times itself, or in any other organization [left or right] that abuse the law and seek cover and coddling from the press.

Those who have information concerning criminal activities about the current political leaders or ‘czars’ of the Obama administration or their political affiliations  please think about finding an outlet for your information under the philosophy endorsed by the Times itself. The public has a right to know. The times itself may become a ‘gold mine.’ Contact me if you have to.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com