Saturday, August 22, 2009

My name is Carole Callaghan, and I hate the New York Times.

So I've never really liked the New York Times. They are way to liberal and self-important. But on Friday the went beyond being a liberal fish rag with one of their editorials. I now find that paper to be so pathetically bad that I don't find it worthy of holding up fish guts. Using their paper for gutting fish is insulting to the decapatated fish community. My ire is based on an editorial about Sharon Keller which had so many factual errors that it would be easier to count the words that were correct than to summarize the downright lies the opinion contained. And I bet I could count the accurate words without resorting to my toes. Normally I would post a link to the offending article, but I'm not going to up the web hits to the NYT by making it easy for my readers to go there. If you want to seek it out, go ahead, but be forewarned that in some way, you are supporting their unethical and reprehensible behavior.

I'd call out the author of the article as being a liberal gossip-monger, but he/she is too slimy and chicken-shit to even post his/her name. So I'll just assume that he/she speaks for the entirety of the NYT and go on being repulsed by the newspaper as a whole. These people give journalism a bad name. No wonder people don't want to buy the paper anymore.

At any rate, I have to go prepare for court, but I wanted to let everyone know that you should NEVER believe what you read from the NYT. God forbid you rely on something they say. Because chances are likely, if not highly probable, that they are leading you astray.


UPDATE: Some anonymous reader commented that I would have more credibility if I would cite to at least one fact that the article got wrong. Here is my response:

When talking about her stating that the clerk's office closes at five, the author wrote "She did not follow appropriate procedures."

The clerk's office closes at five. It's mandated by state law. There are procedures for filing after hours, which were not utilized by Richard's attorneys. Thus, regardless of how you feel about her empathy for Richard, she most certainly did follow appropriate procedures.

3 comments:

  1. You might have more credibility if you would cite at least one fact in the Times article that was not factual.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here you go: When talking about her stating that the clerk's office closes at five, the author wrote "She did not follow appropriate procedures."

    The clerk's office closes at five. It's mandated by state law. There are procedures for filing after hours, which were not utilized by Richard's attorneys. Thus, regardless of how you feel about her empathy for Richard, she most certainly did follow appropriate procedures.

    ReplyDelete
  3. by the way, anonymous, you don't happen to write for the NYT, do you?

    ReplyDelete