One thing we’ve noticed, if you’re in the mainstream media, you never want to end up on Kimberley Strassel’s radar.
She is brutally honest.
Take for example this tweet about a New York Times headline and the story as well:
This headline, entire story, is a case study in bias. Lawyer is among many that wants good regulatory policy, and so opposes bad, economy-crushing climate rules. But is accused here of "dismantling" clean air for "industry" paymasters. https://t.co/Cf1RBVF7cJ
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) August 20, 2018
Ouch.
See what we mean?
From the New York Times:
The rollbacks are part of the administration’s effort to bring regulatory relief to the coal industry, and other major sources of air pollution. But to proponents of a tougher stance on industries that contribute to global warming, Mr. Wehrum is regarded as the single biggest threat inside the E.P.A., with Tuesday’s expected announcement to weaken what is known as the Clean Power Plan the most recent evidence of his handiwork.
“They basically found the most aggressive and knowledgeable fox and said, ‘Here are the keys to the henhouse,’” said Bruce Buckheit, an air pollution expert who worked for the Justice Department’s Environmental Enforcement Section and as director of the E.P.A.’s air enforcement office under Democratic and Republican presidents.
Alrighty then.
Seems like more and more it is one of our daily case studies in bias. They can't help themselves, it runs too deep.
— Steverino (@srohm) August 20, 2018
Anything to make Trump and the Republicans look EVIL.
That’s the goal here, not to inform or educate, but to persuade.
And it seems more and more like that goal is biting the media, particularly the New York Times, right in the backside.
The media's hatred of Trump is only hurting itself https://t.co/7kIWiVX8IL via @nypost
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) August 20, 2018
See what we mean?
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member