The New York Times needs to get all of their people off of Facebook.

All of them: the rot has set in. To summarize… Marc Cooper, a journalism professor at USC (Annenberg), asked on Facebook what seems to be a fairly reasonable question: if the New York Times doesn’t think that Islamist fanatics killing a dozen people over the publication of satirical cartoons justifies showing said cartoons… hold on a minute.

charlie

Moving on… Marc Cooper asked: if the current number of murdered cartoonists, staffers, and cops weren’t enough to justify the NYT doing its job, then just how many murder victims would be sufficient? – Apparently, this question cooked off the NYT’s executive editor Dean Baquet, because Mr. Baquet went on Facebook to literally call Mr. Cooper an a*shole. Continue reading The New York Times needs to get all of their people off of Facebook.

Apparently, all of the (Democratic) political operatives that the NYT knows are functional sociopaths.

It’s the only explanation for this:

As Congress examines security breaches at the White House, even opposition lawmakers who have spent the last six years fighting his every initiative have expressed deep worry for his security.

…I had a more measured response planned, but Charles Cooke wrote it for me, and I’m not going to give Peter Baker the satisfaction of knowing that he made me swear at him.  But, yeah: this is the sort of nonsense that we have to deal with: people who work with monsters… and then assume that the rest of us are just the same kinds of monsters, just with a different colored tie.

It’s really kind of horrible, when you think about it.

The New York Times reconciles itself to losing the Senate.

(H/T: Hot Air) It wouldn’t publish an article like this unless it had come to terms with the situation:

A Republican takeover of the Senate this fall would hurt Mr. Obama for the final two years of his presidency, but it might help Mrs. Clinton if she runs to succeed him.

Republican control of both the House and Senate would provide Mrs. Clinton a clearer target to run against in courting voters fatigued by Washington dysfunction. The longer an unpopular president and his more-unpopular partisan adversaries battle to a standstill, the easier it is to offer herself as a fresh start.

“It would be bad for the country,” said Stanley B. Greenberg, President Bill Clinton’s former pollster, but “total gridlock would allow Hillary to be the change.”

…Except, of course, for the minor problem that Hillary Clinton put into motion, and was the public face for, the current administration’s disastrous foreign policy record*.  To say nothing of the fact that a sixty-nine year old apparatchik is not exactly what one thinks of when one says ‘dynamic agent of change.’  But that’s just the NYT’s little ways.

What’s more interesting is that the Old Grey Lady is busily reassuring its readers about the sourness of those Senatorial grapes. Contra the Democratic argument – and not a few conservative ones –  there is no particular evidence that the Republican party is at any serious electoral risk vis a vis its policies and stated goals.  If there was, we wouldn’t be seeing the Republican party poised to take control of the Senate.  If you want to see what a political party out of tune with the electorate looks like, look at 2006**.  Or, indeed, 2010.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

*I was going to say ‘worst foreign policy record in American history,’ except that I have to be fair.  Barack Obama has not yet managed to get Washington, DC burned down by an invading army.

**2008 is what a party blindsided by an economic crisis and a new data-driven voter drive paradigm looks like.

The @nytimes has a somewhat provincial audience itself, methinks.

I can’t say that I’m either particularly jubilant that Piers Morgan is going to lose his CNN gig, or obscurely depressed that the gun control movement will effectively lose such a particularly unhelpful spokesman for its cause.  It is a thing: I don’t watch CNN anyway and there’s always going to be somebody else who comes along with Morgan’s gift for negative PR.  Continue reading The @nytimes has a somewhat provincial audience itself, methinks.

The New York Times achieves Anagnorisis on #obamacare.

Don’t know that word? The invaluable RPG Trail of Cthulhu defines it in this case as “the moment that the main character pieces together the nature of the Mythos and goes to pieces:” basically, what happens is that your unlucky protagonist has an insight that allows him and her to understand the true nature of the universe. And the sudden understanding inevitably leads to madness.

So let us thus discuss the New York Times.

Freeing Workers From the Insurance Trap

The Congressional Budget Office estimated on Tuesday that the Affordable Care Act will reduce the number of full-time workers by 2.5 million over the next decade. That is mostly a good thing, a liberating result of the law.

Continue reading The New York Times achieves Anagnorisis on #obamacare.

New York Times: TREMBLE, mortals, at the power of the Koch Artillery War-Zeppelin!

Seriously,  that’s the image that the New York Times is going with in their editorial “The Koch Party.”  EXPLICITLY.

Only a few weeks into this midterm election year, the right-wing political zeppelin is fully inflated with secret cash and is firing malicious falsehoods at supporters of health care reform.

…honestly? I just stopped reading at that point.  Mostly because I go distracted by the possibilities; if the Koch Brothers are handing out War Zeppelins then I want mine to be cyberpunk, with electro-cannons and a steam organ.  And maybe ornithopters.  Yes, definitely ornithopters: otherwise, there’s no freaking point.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: I am taking this editorial as seriously as it deserves.  Look, you throw Artillery War-Zeppelins right over the plate, fat, slow, and happy: I’m going to take a swing at it.

New York Times *finally* tells its readers: #Obamacare is awful for the middle class.

The New York Times is starting to get a bit nervous about this health care law thing.

Ginger Chapman and her husband, Doug, are sitting on the health care cliff.
The cheapest insurance plan they can find through the new federal marketplace in New Hampshire will cost their family of four about $1,000 a month, 12 percent of their annual income of around $100,000 and more than they have ever paid before.

Even more striking, for the Chapmans, is this fact: If they made just a few thousand dollars less a year — below $94,200 — their costs would be cut in half, because a family like theirs could qualify for federal subsidies.

So much so that they’re now gingerly starting to tell their readers what you and I already know: “While the act clearly[*] benefits those at the low end of the income scale — and rich people can continue to afford even the most generous plans — people like the Chapmans are caught in the uncomfortable middle: not poor enough for help, but not rich enough to be indifferent to cost.” I welcome this sudden decision by the New York Times to join us here in Reality Non-Unicorn, and hope that they enjoy their visit.  Indeed, the Old Grey Lady is more than welcome to settle here permanently. Continue reading New York Times *finally* tells its readers: #Obamacare is awful for the middle class.

A discussion of the suggestion regarding the possibility of theoretically firing someone over #obamacare.

My, don’t they sound confident:

White House officials, asserting that the HealthCare.gov website is largely fixed, are under mounting pressure from Democrats and close allies to hold senior-level people accountable for the botched rollout of President Obama’s signature domestic achievement and to determine who should be fired.

Via

Continue reading A discussion of the suggestion regarding the possibility of theoretically firing someone over #obamacare.

NYT (!) to Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D) (!!): enough with the asbestos scam (!!!!!).

That is what they called it. Admittedly, in an Op-Ed, but wow.

In May, Carolyn McCarthy, a nine-term congresswoman from Long Island, was diagnosed with lung cancer. Her treatment began almost immediately, causing her to take a lengthy absence from her office while she fought the disease. At the same time, McCarthy, 69, ended a pack-a-day cigarette habit that she’d had for most of her life, presumably because she understood the link between cigarette-smoking and lung cancer. Scientists estimate that smoking plays a role in 90 percent of lung cancer deaths.

“Since my diagnosis with lung cancer,” she wrote in a recent legal filing, “I have had mental and emotional distress and inconvenience. I am fearful of death.” She added, “My asbestos-related condition has disrupted my life, limiting me in my everyday activities and interfering with living a normal life.”

Asbestos-related?

Continue reading NYT (!) to Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D) (!!): enough with the asbestos scam (!!!!!).