Here is proof positive John Kasich doesn't get this years voters...

Dude..

Proud to have the support of the @nytimes - Together we can make America safer & stronger -John #Kasich4Us pic.twitter.com/VfVRAOst72

— John Kasich (@JohnKasich) January 30, 2016

Cave: Ted Cruz book now on NYT's bestseller list...

It will take the NYT's a while to get all the egg off their face...

Five days after accusing The New York Times of bias, secrecy and foul play, Ted Cruz is finally getting what he wanted: a highly coveted spot on the paper's bestseller list.
Cruz's memoir, "A Time For Truth," will appear at No. 7 on the Times' list for hardcover nonfiction, reflecting its second-week sales, a Times spokesperson confirmed on Wednesday. The Texas senator's book had not been included on the list for its first week, on the grounds that its sales had been driven by "strategic bulk purchases."
Times spokesperson Eileen Murphy said that the newspaper made no changes to its selection process, and so the fact that Cruz's book is being included now suggests a rise in individual purchases, spurred by his public battle with the paper.

NYT's manipulates bestsellers list to keep Cruz off it...

Cruz’s “A Time For Truth,” published on June 30, should be #2.

Via Politico:

The New York Times informed HarperCollins this week that it will not include Ted Cruz’s new biography on its forthcoming bestsellers list, despite the fact that the book has sold more copies in its first week than all but two of the Times’ bestselling titles, the On Media blog has learned.
Cruz’s “A Time For Truth,” published on June 30, sold 11,854 copies in its first week, according to Nielsen Bookscan’s hardcover sale numbers. That’s more than 18 of the 20 titles that will appear on the bestseller list for the week ending July 4. Aziz Ansari’s “Modern Romance,” which is #2 on the list, sold fewer than 10,000 copies. Ann Coulter’s “Adios America,” at #11, sold just over half as many copies.
Keep reading…

Stupid: NYT's Op-Ed claims ISIS attack on Ramadi was "act of desperation"

"The attack on #Ramadi was a sign of desperation, not strength” - Really? I’m not so sure… http://t.co/ud2KbZVfFZ pic.twitter.com/KEi6XUnm3w

— Charles Lister (@Charles_Lister) May 22, 2015

NYT admits Pigford series of legal settlements likely enabled massive fraud..

I know who is smili8ng now...

Via Breitbart:

The New York Timesreported Friday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has likely enabled massive fraud in the Pigford series of legal settlements, in which black, Hispanic, female and Native American farmers have claimed to be victims of past discrimination.

The cost of the settlements, which could exceed $4.4 billion, is the result of a process that “became a runaway train, driven by racial politics, pressure from influential members of Congress and law firms that stand to gain more than $130 million in fees,” theTimes notes.

Among those influential members of Congress was then-Senator Barack Obama, who made Pigford payouts a priority in exchange for political support for his 2008 presidential campaign among a coveted group of black voters in the rural South, the Timesreports.

Keep on reading…

NY Times: Mitt Romney victory will lead to Jim Crow laws or something...

Just when you think race-baiting can't be taken to a more despicable level,  you find this Colbert I. King NYT's opinion piece.

A Romney win would be worrisome, however, because of his strong embrace of states rights and his deep mistrust of the federal government — sentiments Andrew Johnson shared.

And we know what that Johnson did once in office.

His sympathy for Confederacy holdouts, and his distaste for Washington, led him to retreat from Reconstruction and avert his gaze as Southern states enacted Jim Crow laws, many of which lasted until the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

There is nothing in Romney’s record to suggest that he would be any stronger than Andrew Johnson in resisting the blandishments of his most extreme supporters, especially regarding federal enforcement.

Johnson stood by as Southern states enacted “black codes,” which restricted rights of freed blacks and prevented blacks from voting.

Blame Game: NYT's Blames Bubba for Obama’s Drop In The Polls…

So, claiming Mitt Romney is Bush III wasn't a good plan? 

Via NYT:

When the histories of the 2012 campaign are written, much will be made of Bill Clinton’s re-emergence. His convention speech may well have marked the finest moment of President Obama’s re-election campaign, and his ads on the president’s behalf were memorable.

But there is one crucial way in which the 42nd president may not have served the 44th quite as well. In these final weeks before the election, Mr. Clinton’s expert advice about how to beat Mitt Romney is starting to look suspect.

You may recall that last spring, just after Mr. Romney locked up the Republican nomination, Mr. Obama’s team abruptly switched its strategy for how to define him. Up to then, the White House had been portraying Mr. Romney much as George W. Bush had gone after John Kerry in 2004 – as inauthentic and inconstant, a soulless climber who would say anything to get the job.

But it was Mr. Clinton who forcefully argued to Mr. Obama’s aides that the campaign had it wrong. The best way to go after Mr. Romney, the former president said, was to publicly grant that he was the “severe conservative” he claimed to be, and then hang that unpopular ideology around his neck.

The reason Obama is struggling is he has failed these last 4 years...

NYT’s Charles Blow: Mitt Romney “does not have a soul” (Video)

No mainstream media bias here... /sarc

BLOW: Listen, he would renounce being a sentient being on the planet if it would get him into the White House. This is the kind of man that Mitt Romney is. This man does not have a soul. If you opened up, you know, his chest, there’s probably a gold ticking watch in there and not even a heart. This is not a person. This is just a robot who will do whatever it takes, whatever he’s told to do, to make it to the White House. And he will take whatever push in the back from whatever nasty person is pushing him and move him further in that direction.

NYT’s Friedman Says GOP "Has “Become A Radical Party” (video)

Via TheDC:

“I think it is the fact that in my view the Republican Party is no longer a conservative party. It’s become a radical party on a lot of these key issues. That’s number one. And number two, I just came back from New Zealand, OK. You have people living in the outback of Australia who would look at Mitt Romney, say, ‘Haha. Not authentic.’ I mean, it is just so obvious. I mean, you know this is a guy who’s running against everything he’s believed his whole life. And it’s just so staggeringly [obvious].”

Obvious: NYT columnist David Brooks on Obama, "he’s certainly more liberal than I thought he was,”

It took David Brooks three years to come to this conclusion?

(Politico) — Center-right New York Times columnist David Brooks opined a few months ago that President Obama, whom he once supported, was governing like a liberal.

Today, Brooks doubled down, telling Laura Ingraham this morning that Obama is not only governing that way, he is that way — or at least more that way than Brooks once thought.
“I still like him and admire him personally, but he’s certainly more liberal than I thought he was,” Brooks said.

“He’s more liberal than he thinks he is. He thinks he’s just slightly center-left, but when you get down to his instincts, they’re pretty left. And his problem is that he can’t really act on them, because it would be political disaster. And so that means, I think right now he’s doing very little, proposing very little.”

NYT's Op-Ed: Crusade against Sharia undermines American democracy

The cheese has finally completely slipped off the cracker over at the New York Times. America is a nation of one laws. The only exception is treaty obligations to various Indian tribes. Any other set of laws, good or bad, must be rejected. This is especially true for a legal system that proscribes chopping off body parts and stoning women to death for minor moral infractions.

(NYT) — MORE than a dozen American states are considering outlawing aspects of Shariah law. Some of these efforts would curtail Muslims from settling disputes over dietary laws and marriage through religious arbitration, while others would go even further in stigmatizing Islamic life: a bill recently passed by the Tennessee General Assembly equates Shariah with a set of rules that promote “the destruction of the national existence of the United States.”

Supporters of these bills contend that such measures are needed to protect the country against homegrown terrorism and safeguard its Judeo-Christian values. The Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has said that “Shariah is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and in the world as we know it.”

This is exactly wrong. The crusade against Shariah undermines American democracy, ignores our country’s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation, and creates a dangerous divide between America and its fastest-growing religious minority.

Did the NYT's inadvertently admit Muslims are dangerous? What is the nature of this "dangerous divide" they refer to in the op-ed? If we are all governed by one set of laws, how are we divided? I doubt non-Muslim Americans will be rioting if Sharia isn't implemented.

NYT Still Trying to Spin Gifford's Shooter as Right-Wing

The American public isn't buying it. He was a pot smoking loner who read the “The Communist Manifesto" and thought he could control his dreams.


NYT reported:

…He became an echo chamber for stray ideas, amplifying, for example, certain grandiose tenets of a number of extremist right-wing groups — including the need for a new money system and the government’s mind-manipulation of the masses through language.

…A few days later, during a meeting with a school administrator, Mr. Loughner said that he had paid for his courses illegally because, “I did not pay with gold and silver” — a standard position among right-wing extremist groups. With Mr. Loughner’s consent, that same administrator then arranged to meet with the student and his mother to discuss the creation of a “behavioral contract” for him, after which the official noted: “Throughout the meeting, Jared held himself very rigidly and smiled overtly at inappropriate times.”

Unbelievable! Obamacare Champion NY Times Tells Greece To Abandon Socialized Medicine.

After shilling for Obamacare for months, the New York Times is now telling Greece getting out of the health care marketplace would allow health care costs to come down. The hypocrisy of the left is simple astounding.

Hot Air reported:

You know, this has to be one of the strangest stories of the weekend. The New York Times, ever a champion of Obamacare during the recent debates, is reporting on some rather compelling advice for the nation of Greece, which is currently teetering on the precipice of collapse. It’s part of a plan negotiated between officials of the European Union, the I.M.F. and the European Central Bank. What might help them? Don’t have nationalized health care… or any other industry for that matter.

Another reform high on the list is removing the state from the marketplace in crucial sectors like health care, transportation and energy and allowing private investment. Economists say that the liberalization of trucking routes — where a trucking license can cost up to $90,000 — and the health care industry would help bring down prices in these areas, which are among the highest in Europe.

NYT Admits Obamacare Will Drive Up Costs

Of course, the bill is signed into law now. Obamacre is going to create the same “adverse selection death spiral” New York insurance law has.

From the NYT:

Healthy people, in effect, began to subsidize people who needed more health care. The healthier customers soon discovered that the high premiums were not worth it and dropped out of the plans. The pool of insured people shrank to the point where many of them had high health care needs. Without healthier people to spread the risk, their premiums skyrocketed, a phenomenon known in the trade as the “adverse selection death spiral.”

NYT Scrubs Portion of Original Obama-Olympics Article

There doesn't appear to be any shame left at the "Grey Lady" when it comes to shilling for President Obama. The NYT did a major scrub of a largely unfavorable report from Copenhagen about President Obama's Olympic gambit. Then, they "deep-sixed" the original and posted a less "biting" edited version under the same URL as the older one.

NewsBusters reported:

The change in the dateline location is important to the point of this post. The Washington story is not an hours-later update of an older story; the location change means that it is a new story. Yet it carries the same URL as the older one out of Copenhagen (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/03/sports/03obama.html). There is no journalistically defensible reason for deleting the Copenhagen-based story. Yet it has indeed disappeared. Times searches on word strings deleted from the older item come up empty.

As if the Times needed any more blows to its allegedly still-existing journalistic integrity, this one can't help but beg the question of who at the White House put pressure on the Times to do what it did. Why would any journalist put themselves in the position of making people wonder if they bow to the wishes of the politically powerful? The answer may be that journalism, once thought to be at least lurking occasionally in its Manhattan hallways, is officially dead at the New York Times.

Here is a side by side comparison of the first five paragraphs. The original version is on the left.

The New York Times analyzes Obama's deficits and concludes they are Bush's fault

The New York Times analyzes Obama's deficits and concludes they are Bush's fault. From the NYT via CNBC:

The story of today’s deficits starts in January 2001, as President Bill Clinton was leaving office. The Congressional Budget Office estimated then that the government would run an average annual surplus of more than $800 billion a year from 2009 to 2012. Today, the government is expected to run a $1.2 trillion annual deficit in those years.

You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, President George W. Bush’s policies, policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.

This is despite the $2 trillion in new spending Obama and the democrats have passed in this year alone. More record spending is to come if 'Obamacare' is passed. Look at the graph and decide for yourself.

Graph from Gateway Pundit.

Karl Rove calls Maureen Dowd: "bitter, twisted and deranged" (video)

Karl Rove had a few choice words to describe leftist NYT columnist Maureen Dowd. Politico reported:

Former White House adviser Karl Rove lashed out at New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd on Fox News Channel Wednesday, saying Dowd was a "nasty, snarky person" with a "twisted, bitter little heart."

"I think Maureen Dowd is a bitter, twisted, deranged columnist for The New York Times who misses no opportunity to show her disdain for the conservative side of the aisle," Rove said on Fox News Channel.

"I actually went to an editorial board meeting at The New York Times and wasted a couple bucks on some flowers to give Maureen Dowd ... give her a smile on her face. And that didn't even work," he recalled. "This is a dour, downbeat liberal."

Ultra liberal NYT columnist Maureen Dowd accused of plagiarism

Maureen Dowd has been accused of plagiarism. The story is she plagiarized a blogger. Here are the details from Founding Blogger:

Daily Kos diarist SusanG is claiming the NYT plagiarized a blogger.

Maureen Dowd, Pulitizer Prize winner. Today. New York Times:

More and more the timeline is raising the question of why, if the torture was to prevent terrorist attacks, it seemed to happen mainly during the period when the Bush crowd was looking for what was essentially political information to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Josh Marshall. Blogger. Last Thursday. Talking Points Memo:

More and more the timeline is raising the question of why, if the torture was to prevent terrorist attacks, it seemed to happen mainly during the period when we were looking for what was essentially political information to justify the invasion of Iraq.

She nailed Joe Biden for the same offense in 1987.

Maureen Dowd has now credited the story to the blogger and made a partial confession.