In today’s edition of The New York Times is a short article on our friend and candidate Sam Brownback: In a Crowded G.O.P. Field, a Lesser-Known Hopes to Capitalize on the Issues. In it, the author makes a not-so-subtle attempt to belittle the conservative candidate:
“I’m Senator Sam Brownback,” the man said brightly. “And I’m running for president.”
Mrs. Van Peursem clucked out a greeting. But after Mr. Brownback, a Kansas Republican, moved to another table, she whispered to a reporter, “Who is he again?”
Nice. The liberal media is on the case.
It goes on to suggest (without any context) that the Senator “bucks other Republicans on issues like immigration,” that he is “struggling” and has a problem insofar as “name recognition.” Nice little digs, NYT, thank you very much. I’m not sure I want to read any further. Sigh.
Another nice quote from expert Mrs. Van Peursem who can’t even remember the name “Sam Brownback” for more than ten seconds:
“I really like him [er, that guy, what’s his name],” she said. “He’s very common.”
Yeah, sure. Good old dime-a-dozen. Is this supposed to be objective journalism? Blah, blah, blah, “electability”, blah, blah, “Giuliani”, “McCain,” “Romney,” blah, blah, “lagging in the polls,” etc., etc…. Who are you trying to fool, NYT? I think this article clearly demonstrates exactly what I was trying to say in my last post about the media.
“I think in the end he has to prove he can beat someone like Senator Clinton,” said Carl E. Zylstra, president of a local Christian college, who came out to meet Mr. Brownback at another pizza place in neighboring Sioux Center.
Um, Mr. Zylstra, if you were reading Blogs4Brownback instead of chowing down on free pizza, you’d have seen that the Brownback vs Clinton matchup was close, nearly within the margin of error. Sadly, Carl hasn’t plugged us into his browser recently.
OK, I can’t bear to read any more. The NYT makes my eyes glaze over and my blood pressure rise. If there’s anything else worthwhile in this less than flattering (business as usual) article, I’ll add an update. Don’t count on it though.
File this one under “liberal media bias” and put it in the circular file. Or line your bird cage with it. The New York Slimes shapes the story rather than simply reporting the facts, yet again. It makes me sick.
Update: I missed this bit, the parting shot: “In contrast to higher-wattage competitors like Mr. McCain….” Am I supposed to infer from this that Brownback is some kind of a dim bulb (25w) to compared to McCain’s dazzling brilliance (200w)? McCain’s still the media darling. Pathetic.