Rep. John Conyers
03.17.2006
New York Times Shines Shills Again
The New York Times has had some remarkable coverage about Senator Feingold's censure resolution. Remarkable in its naivete and lack of balance.
Snip...
Perhaps more alarming is the transparent manner in which New York Times journalist,
David D. Kirkpatrick volunteers as his sources in this article: "Paul Weyrich ... declared last month in an e-mail" or "The Republican National Committee sent the editorial out to its e-mail list of 15 million supporters" or "Rush Limbaugh told listeners on his syndicated radio program" or "The Wall Street Journal's editorial board, a conservative standard-bearer" or "Conservative Web sites and talk radio programs have lavished attention on the impeachment resolutions" or "for three days the Republican Party has sent radio hosts news bulletins."
Perhaps Kirkpatrick's "sources" may have explained to him I have done a bit of work. He mentions that I have "proposed an initial inquiry into a censure or impeachment of Mr. Bush over the war." He continues, "(s)o far, the Conyers proposal has attracted support from about two dozen of the chamber's 201 Democrats."
About two dozen? An inquiry into censure
or impeachment?
This flippant account of what must count for research is preposterous. There were actually 32 Members of Congress on my resolution. Maybe that's about two dozen. Or maybe that's more than 15% of the Democrats in Congress and a number that's growing every week. Maybe the author could have signed up for
my email, or even called me or my staff if he wanted to know the facts. Or he could have gone to
Congress.gov to find out who has signed up as a cosponsor.
more...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-conyers/new-york-times-sh_b_17489.html