New York Times Doesn't Like the Deal

Story #2: New York Times Calls Tea Party "Hostage Takers"

RUSH: To the New York Times. The outrage here I think is faked, but there is plenty of outrage. It's an editorial: "To Escape Chaos, A Terrible Deal -- There is little to like about the tentative agreement between Congressional leaders and the White House except that it happened at all. The deal would avert a catastrophic government default, immediately and probably through the end of 2012. The rest of it is a nearly complete capitulation to the hostage-taking demands of Republican extremists. It will hurt programs for the middle class and poor, and hinder an economic recovery. It is not yet set in stone, and there may still be time to make it better. But in the end, most. Democrats will have no choice but to swallow their fury, accept the deal and, we hope, fight harder the next time."

Now, surely this outrage has gotta be faked here. Even the editors at the New York Times can't be this far removed from reality. This is just an attempt here to make the deal seem more reasonable and more centrist than it really is. I think the Times is playing Sister Souljah for Dingy Harry and Barack Obama. Back to their editorial. "For weeks, ever since House Republicans said they would not raise the nation’s debt ceiling without huge spending cuts, Democrats have held out for a few basic principles. There must be new tax revenues in the mix so that the wealthy bear a share of the burden and Medicare cannot be affected." Notice (laughing) New York Times calls principles always boils down to raising taxes. It always does. But how about this. The New York Times, in a lead editorial, talking about the hostage-taking demands of Republican extremists.

This is continuing this outlandish, outrageous, didn't get the memo on civility kind of talk that the Democrats began last week. The New York Times has never written that way about Muslim terrorists. They have never referred to them as hostage-taking extremists, never. But Republican Tea Partiers, it's exactly what the Times calls them, and Muslim terrorists fly airplanes into buildings. They set bombs on their kids with timers and they blow them and anybody near them up. And the New York Times will not refer to them as extremists, or terrorists. The New York Times doesn't like it when our politicians actually listen to the people. So they're calling for Obama here in this piece, they're calling for Obama to take on dictatorial powers and raise the debt limit by his own authority. They're calling for the 14th Amendment. They're telling Obama, "Screw these Republican extremists. Screw these hostage takers. Screw these radicals and lunatics and extortionists."

The New York Times, the paper of record, people like Thomas "Loopy" Friedman and Paul "Ferret Face" Krugman -- he does, he looks like a ferret. Have you noticed that? Some ferrets are cute. They look like weasels, but some of them are cute. He's even got that twitchy nose like a ferret has. These people have become completely unhinged. The New York Times has become the voice of the lunatic fringe. I suspect this is one of the main reasons why Sheila Jackson Lee and Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz and all the other Democrats are unhinged today, is because the New York Times is, in their lead editorial.

"Democrats can look forward to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts next year, and will have to make the case in the 2012 elections for new lawmakers who will undo the damage." The New York Times is unhappy with Democrat incumbents. They think with Obama and the gift that he has and the majority in the Senate, and these inexperienced Tea Party people, that we ought to be being rolled. It's fascinating, I think, to actually look at how both sides are analyzing the results of this. And if the House doesn't pass it tonight, folks, tomorrow is gonna be a lot of fun.

___________
My Schedule of Regular Posts:
*Monday through Friday morning - schedules of President, VP and Secretary of State and her diplomats
*Monday through Friday afternoon - List of topics Limbaugh discussed on his program that day
*Monday through Friday throughout the day - My posts on anything that I feel like talking about. At least one or two a day, sometimes more.
*Saturday through Sunday morning - An addition to my booklist of political books - covering Democrats, Republicans and other interested parties.