Personalize Yedda, (And make Danny Happy)
People ask & answer about almost everything. Tell us what you're interested in... So we can personalize Yedda especially for you
I'm interested in:

GOD  

FAMILY

SELF

COUNTRY

 

In that order!                                                                                      

Why is the NY Times So Corrupt?

The New York Times was less than truthful in an editorial yesterday on ACORN's involvement in the 2010 census.

After pontificating that Republicans' fears were overblown about Robert M. Groves, the statistical voodoo practitioner who was recently confirmed by the U.S. Senate as census director, the Old Gray Lady opined

Still, some Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate are clinging to an even bigger red herring, that the Census Bureau is inviting manipulation of the 2010 count through its partnership with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

The group, Acorn for short, is one of tens of thousands of census partners - including state and local government agencies, community groups, business clubs, corporations, media outlets and churches - that voluntarily promote the importance of being counted. First used in the 2000 census, such partnerships were credited with reducing the undercount of hard-to-count groups, like African-Americans, Hispanics and the poor.

In 2008, some Acorn workers were fired and prosecuted for submitting false voter registrations. And in 2009, the organization was charged in Nevada with violating that state's voter registration law. Acorn is fighting those charges. The bad registrations, most of which Acorn says it flagged as problematic before turning them over to election officials, never resulted in any known fraudulent votes being cast. But Republicans who flogged the voter fraud angle in 2008 are now raising fears of census fraud. That's overblown. Census partners promote the census; they do not fill out forms or collect personal information. [...]

New York Times editorial writers, it's worth noting, are also adept at throwing out red herrings.

An entirely justified concern that some Americans have is that ACORN is actively involved in the 2010 census planning process (including hiring decisions) and that the Obama administration lied about it. This was proven in the document dump ably engineered by Tegan Millspaw of Judicial Watch . Of course the NYT ignores this issue altogether.

We've come to expect this kind of behavior from the New York Times

In the days leading up to last Election Day it spiked a politically sensitive news story involving corruption allegations that might have made the Obama campaign look bad. The story concerned possibly illegal coordination between the Obama campaign and ACORN.

And as far as I know the Times hasn't even bothered to report on the fact that authorities in Cuyahoga County, Ohio , are investigating ACORN --the organization itself-- in connection with actual voter fraud (as opposed to voter registration fraud) after a man registered to vote multiple times by ACORN was indicted by a grand jury for casting a fraudulent vote in an election.

Then there's the newspaper's woefully inadequate coverage of its business partner Bruce Ratner's ACORN-assisted land grab related to the taxpayer-subsized proposed Atlantic Yards project right in the newspaper's own backyard in Brooklyn, but perhaps I digress.

It's common sense that ACORN shouldn't be anywhere near the census but the Old Gray Lady will never say that.


Share Send to a friend Watch Report
 
 

2 Posted Answers
Order by

 
1007 helpful answers

Lets play ball JoeAnimated MonkeysThrow the ball back Biden

 

 

I hope the browbeaten GOP grows a pair and starts raising hell about this.   They should be suing ACORN for election fraud (exhibit A is Al Franken,) and calling for investigations into whether government funding for an activist group is even legal.

Even if there's nothing there they should still investigate, because we don't know that there's nothing there...in fact we know by nature of the very mission and practices of ACORN that their whole purpose for existence is to cheat.

Helpful?(2)
Rated as Best Answer
 
1 helpful answer

The thoroughly corrupted New York Times

By Michelle Malkin  •  September 24, 2007 09:21 AM

MoveOn.org says it will make up the ad rate difference. This was the most snort-worthy sentence in the Times’ coverage of itself. Via the NYTimes’ Caucus blog :

We try not to let any business force influence our reporting and judgments. That’s just a journalistic standard. You may not believe it, but it’s true.

Coffee spew in 3, 2, 1…

***
Blogger Bob Owens was right all along when he smelled a NYTimes rat lurking in the MoveOn.org “Betray Us” ad deal. He reacts to the NYT ombudsman’s admission that the paper violated its ad policies in giving MoveOn.org a special, military-bashing discount here .

The paper says it was an innocent “mistake .”

Mistake, my a**.

Did MoveOn.org get favored treatment from The Times? And was the ad outside the bounds of acceptable political discourse?

The answer to the first question is that MoveOn.org paid what is known in the newspaper industry as a standby rate of $64,575 that it should not have received under Times policies. The group should have paid $142,083. The Times had maintained for a week that the standby rate was appropriate, but a company spokeswoman told me late Thursday afternoon that an advertising sales representative made a mistake.

The answer to the second question is that the ad appears to fly in the face of an internal advertising acceptability manual that says, “We do not accept opinion advertisements that are attacks of a personal nature.” Steph Jespersen, the executive who approved the ad, said that, while it was “rough,” he regarded it as a comment on a public official’s management of his office and therefore acceptable speech for The Times to print.

By the end of last week the ad appeared to have backfired on both MoveOn.org and fellow opponents of the war in Iraq — and on The Times. It gave the Bush administration and its allies an opportunity to change the subject from questions about an unpopular war to defense of a respected general with nine rows of ribbons on his chest, including a Bronze Star with a V for valor. And it gave fresh ammunition to a cottage industry that loves to bash The Times as a bastion of the “liberal media.”

The last few, lefty defenders of the New York Times continue to delude themselves that its liberal bias is relegated to its editorial pages.

No, the bias has reached full-blown metastasis.

Sign in to participate

Got an answer for MarineReconDad? Would you like to comment on the posted answers, or vote for the one which you think is the best?

Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).

Explore Related Questions

Other people asked questions on similar topics, check out the answers they received:


Q:

Congressional Testimony: NY Times Killed Article Tying ACORN And Obama In October Because It Would Be A Game Changer!

“Congressional Testimony: ‘Game-Changer’ Article Would Have Connected Campaign With ACORN A lawyer involved with legal action ...
Submitted by MarineReconDad   8 months ago.
  • viewed 82 times
Last answer posted 2 months ago by American Patriot


Q:

ACORN to Play Role in 2010 Census

The U.S. Census is supposed to be free of politics, but one group with a history of voter fraud, ACORN, is ...
Submitted by News Views   6 months ago.
  • viewed 455 times
Last answer posted 2 months ago by American Patriot



» More...

Feed - Subscribe to changes to this Q&A Blog
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
AOL Health Q&A is powered by Yedda an AOL Company
Copyright © 2006-2009, Yedda Inc. and respective copyright owners