NY Times Propaganda Writers Lead Way by Cribbing from Their Socialist Mentors

And the mainstreaming of Sixties New Left rhetoric continues apace...

Posted by at February 19, 2011 3:14 PM

I get my truth from Pravda.

Posted by Zardoz at February 19, 2011 3:48 PM

I diggeth this! Very good job, Mr. Vanderlize.

Posted by Webutante at February 19, 2011 4:10 PM

How ever will I tweet this post in 140 characters or less? I'll find a way, as God as my witness. I have to ask, was the Times always this way or has the zeigeist simply shifted? And I'm asking honestly. News, info-sharing has DEFINITELY changed. Readers are far more sophisticated, which is ironic because the Times was an icon of sophistication until now. It's too bad. It could be great again. Regarding the Wisconsin protest, I'm happy to have the same observation, that the zeitgeist has brought out a counter-protest, just as dedicated, just as passionate but authentic and organic and they will NOT get fake doctor excuses for their time away from work. They defend the governor and they do so for the sake of their kids' future, not their own bonuses and benefits. Common Sense has graced us at last. The Times missed the true story. I am amazed at how stubborn the established media has been in the trending conservative movement. It's bad business as is unionizing government employees. Very bad.

Posted by RedCarolina at February 19, 2011 4:11 PM

Before I sign off, here's a message to Red Carolina...how about a little less tweeting and little more reviewing history. The NYT was solidly behind Stalin even before I was born.

Good evening.

Posted by Webutante at February 19, 2011 4:41 PM

And, the NYTimes backed Castro and subverted US efforts in the VietNam War. They have always been leftist. It is just easier to see them for what they are because they no longer hide it at all, and there are more contrasting views out there.

Posted by Fat Man at February 19, 2011 5:13 PM

Red Carolina:

Whether tis nobler to wrap fish in its august pages or no, or to burn for the love of burning is the question. Our man Stalin yet reigneth.

139 characters.

Posted by Jewel at February 19, 2011 5:19 PM

"Workers of the world who make $100K with three month summer vacations, nearly free healthcare, and pensions for life at nearly full salary... i.e. American teachers who essentially live in France... unite!!"

Oh, the temerity!

Posted by sherlock at February 19, 2011 6:00 PM

I think the idea that Public-School Teachers Are Oppressed Laborers is going to be a very tough sell in 2011 America, especially since most of them are better off than their neighbors who are funding their remuneration.

Funny thing, though, the Leftists behind this don't seem to get that. When it comes to race, most of them seem to be stuck in about 1960; now, it seems that, when it comes to labor, most of them are stuck in about 1930.

Posted by ELC at February 19, 2011 6:16 PM

Comment of the week award to Sherlock!

Posted by vanderleun at February 19, 2011 6:20 PM

NEW YORK LEADS WAY AS NEWSPAPER GUILD FIGHTS TIMES CUTS

Posted by Gagdad Bob at February 19, 2011 6:43 PM

And here I was, thinking that Wisconsin's voters had led the way back in November. I could be wrong, but I think this may well be the straw on the camels back for 2012. Obama and the left never should have nationalized Wisconsin state politics. Bad visuals. Bad move.

Posted by GW at February 19, 2011 7:15 PM

As I said to Instapundit:

They got the year wrong: “Democrats think it is 1933 when it is actually 1773.”

http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/115303/

Posted by M. Simon at February 19, 2011 8:54 PM

I have to quote the commenter Lordhumongous from the Market Ticker:

Fuck these assholes. I am fucking sick and tired of entitled pieces of shit that think my tax dollars are their fucking birthright.

I have three fucking engineering degrees and almost two decades of private industry experience with outstanding reviews. Where the fuck is my pension? Where the fuck is my retirement medical? Where the fuck is my job security?

I'll tell you what. I don't have any job security because HALF MY FUCKING PAY goes to ungrateful assholes like these fucksticks in Wisconsin. HALF MY FUCKING PAY in taxes means I have to get paid TWICE AS MUCH as my competition in India and China, which is why ALL PRIVATE SECTOR TECH JOBS ARE DISAPPEARING.

FUCK THEM.

FIRE THEM ALL. NOW.

Posted by rickl at February 20, 2011 12:09 AM

I have to quote the commenter Lordhumongous from the Market Ticker:

Fuck these assholes. I am fucking sick and tired of entitled pieces of shit that think my tax dollars are their fucking birthright.

I have three fucking engineering degrees and almost two decades of private industry experience with outstanding reviews. Where the fuck is my pension? Where the fuck is my retirement medical? Where the fuck is my job security?

I'll tell you what. I don't have any job security because HALF MY FUCKING PAY goes to ungrateful assholes like these fucksticks in Wisconsin. HALF MY FUCKING PAY in taxes means I have to get paid TWICE AS MUCH as my competition in India and China, which is why ALL PRIVATE SECTOR TECH JOBS ARE DISAPPEARING.

FUCK THEM.

FIRE THEM ALL. NOW.

Posted by rickl at February 20, 2011 12:10 AM

Whoops, sorry about the double post.

But it needed to be emphasized. Yeah, that's it.

Posted by rickl at February 20, 2011 12:11 AM

That NYT headline is right out of Pravda or The Daily Worker ca. 1947. Really, very very funny in a pathetic sort of way.

Posted by Marty at February 20, 2011 1:24 AM

I tweeted. Jewel, you are a tweet poet! Had to sacrifice the poetry for the necessary "#" and "@" and "via". But it's out there, in the "twittersphere", crude as it is. Just doing my part disseminating the truth. Thanks again for the post and I agree, Sherlock nailed it. Making my day yesterday was seeing the Tea Party "cavalry" riding in to counter the union protesters but the icing on the cake was Breitbart openly asking for a fake doctor's excuse! Priceless! Before I sign off, here's a message to Webutante.. I framed my question humbly and fairly and deserved a humble and fair response. Your response was belittling and self-serving. How about a little less of that.

Posted by RedCarolina at February 20, 2011 9:05 AM

Man, I can't decide if you and your readers are more smug than gullible or more gullible than smug. I love how you can repeat the tired, fact-averse cliches of FauxNews, WND, Beck, Limbaugh, Palin and Breitbart and yet somehow the NY Times -- a serious newspaper doing ACTUAL journalism -- is derided as a "propaganda" organ.

Grow up, think for yourselves and stop regurgitating the simple-minded talking points of Obama = Evil, Tea Parties = Good.

In the real world, it just ain't so.

Posted by SaneConservative at February 20, 2011 9:44 AM

a serious newspaper doing ACTUAL journalism

Now that there is funny.

Google "Duranty, Walter".

Posted by rickl at February 20, 2011 9:53 AM

I posted this at Neo-neocon the other night, but it bears repeating:

The New York Times made their reputation with the Titanic disaster in 1912. A young wireless operator, David Sarnoff, listened to the radio traffic on the Atlantic that night and correctly deduced that the ship had sunk with great loss of life. He notified a friend who worked for the Times and the paper ran with that story.

Most of the other newspapers on both sides of the ocean were parroting official White Star Line sources and reported that the ship had been damaged but taken in tow to Nova Scotia with all passengers safe.

The Times has been coasting on that ever since.

Posted by rickl at February 20, 2011 10:08 AM

A couple of years ago a telemarketer called me, trying to sell me a subscription to the New York Times.

I politely replied, "I don't have a puppy or a bird, so I have no use for the New York Times."

Posted by rickl at February 20, 2011 10:18 AM

Red Carolina, I apologize for any real or perceived slight to you in my response.
Frankly, I thought you were a man until I went to your site a minute ago. In any event I was/am quite surprised that anyone is unaware of the
very long history of the extreme left leaning of the NYT. That's not meant to be insulting... just my observation. I will also say that in my opinion, tweeting for all of us often drowns us in a lot of superfiicial information and very little real knowledge and context. Rather than be insulted, let it say more about me than you.

Best wishes.

Posted by Webutante at February 20, 2011 10:55 AM

One other thing I'd like to say before leaving for a hiking trail the rest of the day and not directed to any commenter in particular: In my opinion, Gerard does a top-notch job on keeping us posted on many of the more egregious and outlandish indiscretions of the Gray Lady. For that reason alone, I diggeth his site.

As far as I'm concerned the only redeeming item for which I'm still thankful to the NYTimes for was the fabulous carbonara recipe from the Sunday Food section many years ago made with dozens of ingredients and lots of bacon and bacon grease! It was a smash hit with my family and at dinner parties for years and years to come.

Posted by Webutante at February 20, 2011 11:17 AM

"The Times has been coasting on that ever since."

Spoken like someone who's never actually read the Times. And probably doesn't even read a newspaper.

I only stumbled onto this site today, but it clearly attracts an audience of willfully ignorant dittoheads who've been conned into the "libruhl media" myth. Clearly you're not drinking tea at those parties of yours -- you're drinking Kool-Aid®.

Posted by SaneConservative at February 20, 2011 11:57 AM

Thanks Webutante. I managed to avoid the influence of the NYT. I only understood it as an elitist icon. It's the "ivy-league" of print. I was indoctrinated to respect the perceived order of things as pop-culture presented them to me in my youth. Not hard for you to believe that they failed to teach us such things in the 70's and 80's! haha. I am only just learning of the dominance of progressivism in our culture and in our icons. It's disappointing. I believe it was Ronald Reagan's policies (and my Christian upbringing) that subliminally set my internal compass, however. And the rest is history. My voting finger is pure red, as I was saved by Rush followers before I cast my virginal vote. Imagine my disappointment when Slick Willy won. So it's quite a shock to not only learn of the progressive history of icons like the NYT and the hijacking of education (not to mention recognzing my own level of naivety regarding my own near-indoctrination). Horrifying for me as a mother of young kids. Having said all this, I can't argue with you regarding American Digest! It's the best (thank you Gerard! It's the highlight of my day!) It's less frustrating being part of a growing resistance. Thanks for the kind explanation, Webutante.

Posted by RedCarolina at February 20, 2011 12:13 PM

Sane.. stumble on down the road, okay? the old "dittohead" went out about 20 years ago. If you have something to add regarding the topic of this thread, do it. Otherwise, shag off.

Posted by RedCarolina at February 20, 2011 12:18 PM

The NYT has it backwards with respect to the WI protesters. The protests in the middle east are, for the most part, the people against the state. While in WI, it is the state [workers] against the people.

Posted by Christopher at February 20, 2011 12:23 PM

"Sane Conservative?" Not.

Don't be telling this ex-Democrat what is "sane" or "real."

As to your "conservatism," either one of two things have to be true: 1) you are not the least bit conservative, and are trying to gain some pathetic effect by claiming to be so, or 2) you're one of those "houseboy" conservatives that want desperately to be asked to the Democrat Prom because you think the most important thing in the world is to be liked and popular.

Posted by Don Rodrigo at February 20, 2011 1:08 PM

Gee, the "Commentary" folks must also be "Dittoheads" for pointing out the very obvious propaganda on the NYT front page:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/02/20/times-slanted-wisconsin-coverage-contrasts-with-their-treatment-of-tea-party/#more-747475

Kiss our collective ass, "SaneConservative!"

Posted by Don Rodrigo at February 20, 2011 1:21 PM

Methinks "SaneConservative" is but a sock puppet with his own hand shoved up his behind.

Dear Sane,
The next time you're up there, make a fist.

Posted by vanderleun at February 20, 2011 3:50 PM

Well Sane old troll, ever heard the name Walter Duranty? F__k the NYT and all who sail in her.

Posted by RKV at February 20, 2011 5:26 PM

Carol @ Red Carolina, If it makes you feel any better, we're all really just waking up to the depth and degree that 'progressivism'---I would call it godless humanism/relativism---has been embedded in our culture, our government and way of life. I now believe we're at the edge of the abyss. The rule of law, property and First Amendment rights are all threatened by this behemoth. And most of us---Gerard's and my age--- have only come to our senses in the past 8-10 years. So you're not alone and the fact that you're at this point with young children gives me hope.

Homeschooling is a holy place to be right now. If I had it to do over, I'd do the same thing as you.

Posted by Webutante at February 20, 2011 5:34 PM

I wonder if "SaneConservative" is Michael Medved.

Posted by rickl at February 20, 2011 6:03 PM

By this marker, it won't belong until Governor Walker and the WI legislature graduate to "Capitalist running dogs."

Posted by betheweb at February 21, 2011 5:34 AM

Sane.. stumble on down the road, okay?"

With pleasure. This is not a place for independent thinking people. It's only for those who can obediently recite Glenn Beck's talking points.

Posted by SaneConservative at February 21, 2011 12:21 PM

Sane Conservative. I'm noticing that you have made assertions but provided no evidence. The total of your comments has been "Wow, you guys are stupid!" - dressed up with references to other people you think are stupid, also without evidence. Not even a mention of how we are stupid, or why we are stupid. We might be. But can you see why we might not find yours a persuasive argument?

To the content: PR of parties. Democrats promise to fight for you, Republicans to work for you. Happens every election. It sums up their philosophies admirably. Granted, neither of them keep those respective promises all that well. But even at their best, Democrats are convinced that people will not receive justice or any good thing unless they take it forcibly from the rich/corporate interests/society. Republicans at their best believe that prosperity, governance, and justice are difficult and require effort.

Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at February 21, 2011 2:21 PM

Glenn who?

Posted by vanderleun at February 22, 2011 12:42 PM

I get my truth from Pravda.

Posted by MikeConner at March 10, 2013 11:58 AM