So, That's How the Old Dominion University Terrorist Was Able to Obtain a...
Yes, This NYT Headline Is Real...and They Appear to Have a Muslim Terrorist...
We Got Some More Manpower Heading to the Middle East
CNN's Kaitlin Collins Set Up Scott Jennings Perfectly to Torch the Biden Administration
My Word, Ms. Spanberger, What Fresh Hell Is This Tweet?
Victory for President Trump’s DOGE – ACLJ Amicus Brief Affirmed
Did We Avoid Another Terrorist Attack This Week? This Arrest in Texas Makes...
Globalize the Intifada? Authorities in the Netherlands Are Investigating Fire at Synagogue
What Can We Do About Islam in America?
Does Retaliation Against the United States Mean We Shouldn't Wage War Against Our...
Pete Hegseth Blasts Reports That the United States Did Not Plan on Iran...
All Six American Crewman Aboard Refueling Aircraft That Crashed in Iraq Confirmed Dead
Ex-Top Gun Pilot Says The Threat of Iranian Sleeper Cells 'Is Not a...
Even Obama's Former DHS Secretary Is Calling on Democrats to Fund DHS
Former Nevada County Commissioner Indicted in Alleged $500K COVID Relief Fraud
OPINION

Worst of Times

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Worst of Times

Now that I no longer do a weekly TV show, I have more time to read my local paper. Sadly, that's The New York Times.

The Times actually does some good reporting, but their political and economic coverage is filled with deceit.

Advertisement

Can I find deceit every day? You bet. Take a look at a few days just last week.

--Thursday:

The front page: "NAFTA's promise is falling short, Mexicans agree."

Wow, the Times now embraces Donald Trump's position on trade? Economists estimate that 14 million jobs depend upon NAFTA, but people everywhere often oppose trade because the smaller number of jobs lost is more visible than gradual gains.

What evidence of NAFTA's failings does the Times offer? Oddly, the article says "the workforce has grown."

Ah, hello? Job growth is good.

Jose Luis Rico "earns well under $10,000 a year."

Not much by American standards, but good for Latin America, and the reporter mentions that Rico got "a handful of raises." Have you gotten "a handful of raises"?

Despite NAFTA, the "gap between the nation's rich and poor persists."

Duh. Trade doesn't eliminate wealth gaps -- it may increase the gap because the cleverest traders get rich. But since the poor gain jobs and wealth, too, so what?

Finally, the clueless Times reporter quotes a Mexican politician and crony capitalist complaining: "Government has not established policies to protect Mexican businesses."

But "protection" for some businesses is corporate welfare -- welfare for the rich. It hurts poor people by raising prices. The Times wants that? Maybe they're sucking up to Donald Trump and his friend Carlos Slim, Mexico's richest crony capitalist, and the Times' biggest shareholder.

Advertisement

Related:

NEW YORK TIMES

--Friday:

A front-page story smears David and Charles Koch.

First, the reporter labels them "the ultraconservative billionaire brothers." Ultra? Why ultra? Why conservative even?

The Kochs favor liberal immigration rules, gay marriage, legal drugs, ending racial discrimination in criminal sentencing, fighting in fewer foreign wars and getting rid of government bailouts and favors for businesses, including their own. David Koch supports higher taxes to reduce the deficit. Which of those things is conservative?!

Maybe the Times calls the Kochs "ultraconservative" because a political group they support points out, "Policies that subsidize electric vehicles and solar panels for the wealthy raise energy prices" and gas and oil are cheaper for everyone. The reporter adds that the group even showed a "video of people driving, turning on lights and plugging in appliances." Oh, no! How terrible!

The reporter claims the "Kochs have long worked to quash ... renewable energy sources like wind and solar." But they haven't! They try to quash subsidies for renewables. Big difference. Doesn't the Times know the difference?

The Times appeals to its Trump-hating readers with a headline that begins "Sensing Gains Ahead Under Trump, the Kochs ..." But the Kochs didn't give Trump a penny.

It's time for the Times to stop calling all their opponents "conservatives." Some of us are libertarians. America has other choices besides the anti-capitalism of the Times and anti-capitalism of Trump.

Advertisement

--Saturday:

The Times quotes left-wing New York Governor Andrew Cuomo saying it "defies common sense" to have a nuclear power plant near New York City. Green activists oppose the plant and Cuomo now says it will close.

But where will New Yorkers get power? The "options include hydropower from Quebec and power from wind farms."

Great. But what will we do when the wind doesn't blow? At least the reporter admits that "New York City could be burdened with higher energy prices." Could be? (SET ITAL) Will be!

--Sunday:

"Trump Denies Climate Change, These Kids Die."

That's the headline on a Nicholas Kristof column about drought in southern Africa. Apparently, there were no dry spells before "man-made global warming."

In truth, starvation has decreased dramatically thanks to fossil fuels. Starvation now is caused by corrupt governments, not climate change.

If there's a way to blame capitalism even as it improves the world, the Times will find it.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement