The NYT sympathized with Hitler, and then Stalin, so why should we even be talking about them? As Andrew Klavan humorously calls them, "A former newspaper", the NYT has become an embarrassment to the ideals of journalism. And for those who still say, "Yes, but they are STILL getting some things right", I say, "Yes, and Mussolini got the trains running on time!"
The NYT sympathized with Hitler, and then Stalin, so why should we even be talking about them? As Andrew Klavan humorously calls them, "A former newspaper", the NYT has become an embarrassment to the ideals of journalism. And for those who still say, "Yes, but they are STILL getting some things right", I say, "Yes, and Mussolini got the trains running on time!"
We still get the Sunday Times. My wife reads it for the nuptials and I read it for the obituaries. The rest I give to my handyman for his puppy's excretions.
The NYT sympathized with Hitler, and then Stalin, so why should we even be talking about them? As Andrew Klavan humorously calls them, "A former newspaper", the NYT has become an embarrassment to the ideals of journalism. And for those who still say, "Yes, but they are STILL getting some things right", I say, "Yes, and Mussolini got the trains running on time!"
We still get the Sunday Times. My wife reads it for the nuptials and I read it for the obituaries. The rest I give to my handyman for his puppy's excretions.
B-B-B-Benny and the Trains