For all the "recession" talk where there isn't one...perhaps I can now see why the New York Times thinks we are in one.

Forever myopic in all matters, their own books are a mess. Absolute shambles. [SARC]And since they're in the shits, everybody else must be, too, right?[/SARC]

New York Times 2Q profit drops 82 percent

What could possibly account for the drop in revenue? Could it be the product? Heavens, no! It's Bush's fault!

Wow, at this pace, they won't have enough capital laying around to give cut-rate full-page advertisements to leftist groups!

Meanwhile, the New York Post and Wall Street Journal, conservative alternatives in the city, has been steadily climbing since 9/11:

Some Big Papers Buck Trend of Circulation Drops

POST BEATS NEWS NOW 5TH LARGEST NEWSPAPER IN U.S.

Newspaper Circulation: WSJ, USA Today Manage To Buck Trend

Nowhere along the way were there gains for the Old Gay, er Gray Lady. They are in the midst of layoffs. So, as is usual for libtards, their halcyon days are behind them, so it must be the same for everybody else, right?

I hate polls, but I did find this one like this poll (link) hilarious. There are a ton of them out there just like it from myriad sources. It shows that normal Americans don't think like the New York Times...instead it shows that too many of them are susceptible to biased news coverage the likes of the New York Times presents.

Gist of it: Vast majority feel financially secure. Similar majorities feel like a recession certain to come soon (poll I cited is over a year old...so they felt we'd be in one by now). Similar majorities are convinced that everybody else is fucked up.

So, they're unlike the Times insofar as they don't project their circumstance(s) onto the rest of the country. But, thanks to news coverage that is thick with malaise, they're convinced the country is fucked even if they're not.

Is it a surprise that people get tired of reading that bullshit? Especially when they only trot out their Chicken Little bullshit during GOP administrations (and GOP Congresses) and it almost always turns out to be utter crap? So says the free market. How long until the NYTimes goes tits up and ends up, like PBS, federally subsidized and having to rely on tote-bag-giveaway-telethons to support itself?

Now, of course, the difference for me is that I never assume the worst of my country. But I always assume the best for me and my family. We got it like that. Always will.

__________________

"Compassionate Conservatism"?!?! That is a stupid phrase. Conservatism is inherently compassionate. It is liberalism that is cruel for the sake of maintaining a constituency.

The fat lady is warming up for the NYT among others. There is a penalty for treating fiction as truth.

__________________
Hope is the opposite of audacity. It's passive, an excuse for inaction.

Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

“The other kills her own food.”

Well to be fair the news paper industry is in a recession. More and more people get their news online and far fewer from print. The only newspapers that are doing alright are small local ones that provide news not available elsewhere. This has more to do with a change in the medium overall than one specific paper.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Dinosaur media death watch in freeper-talk.

and yet a few thrive. USA Today does it by seeing to it that it appears outside the door of every hotel/motel room in the country. NYP and WSJ do it by content. most of the rest that are hanging in have embraced alternatives and the ones in trouble have abandoned truth in favor of bias.

__________________
Hope is the opposite of audacity. It's passive, an excuse for inaction.

Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

“The other kills her own food.”

NYP is not biased? I would say that is debatable.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

OK, change it to blatant over the top bias and lies.

__________________
Hope is the opposite of audacity. It's passive, an excuse for inaction.

Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

“The other kills her own food.”

Calling Baker and Hamilton surrender monkeys on the front page because they want to have troop reductions seems pretty blatant to me.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

pretty descriptive to me not to mention true.

__________________
Hope is the opposite of audacity. It's passive, an excuse for inaction.

Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

“The other kills her own food.”

Calling a human a monkey is the sort of thing I would expect on a grade school playground rather than the front page of a newspaper. Unless they grow hair all over their bodies and start jumping around on trees then it isn't descriptive at all. I don't see the words war monger in front of Bush on front pages which I would call equally unprofessional by the way.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

SURRENDER monkey.

And I recall seeing many ed cartoons of a rather simian looking Bush regularly.

__________________
Hope is the opposite of audacity. It's passive, an excuse for inaction.

Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

“The other kills her own food.”

Editorials are supposed to be opinionated. I'm talking about the front page which is for reporting. And I still fail to see how the word monkey is relevant in any civilized discourse at least.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

A) Conservatism sells. Just ask Air America. It might have something to do with its inherent love of country and optimism about the people herein.
B) "Surrender Monkey" is a popular reference to a popular television show that is doubtlessly too "pedestrian" for the Upper West Side crowd to watch. Joe Sixpack gets it. The NYT hates Joe Sixpack. Joe Sixpack rules the country.

The market continues to speak. The NYT used to have a dash of objectivity in its coverage - forget about editorials. Exposed for what it is, more and more refuse to buy. The NYT somehow thinks that people don't spend the money on it because of Bush's Economy. Nonsense! People stopped paying for a product based upon its reputation that it, apparently, no longer deserves.

Maybe if people that worked at the NYT ate at "common" places like Olive Garden, and saw the hour-long-wait-just-to-get-a-pager-for-another-hour-wait situation there every weekend night, they'd realize "It ain't the economy, stupid." You can get a non-NY daily (7 days) subscription to the NYT at a little more than the price of a gallon of gas per week. I'll take the gas. Thanks. At least if I get railroaded on the gas, it will be by my own volition.

__________________

"Compassionate Conservatism"?!?! That is a stupid phrase. Conservatism is inherently compassionate. It is liberalism that is cruel for the sake of maintaining a constituency.

NYT is not in a recession - they are in a serious depression.

Newspapers (I spent nearly 20 years in this industry) as a whole are in an epidemic state.
We will ALL pay the price for newspapers closing up...think about it, you turn on whatever flavor of news you like - where do you think the news comes from no matter what media you use? - newspaper reporters.
Newspapers are the ONLY source for in-depth reporting in local markets, local TV news shows a topographical view of only the most dramatic stories of the day.
Especially small cities/towns - governments will be able to do whatever they please - for there will be no media there to cover what they do.

I find it particularly amusing that, as was brought up in the Steelers/Death Tax thread, family owned newspapers are taking it in the ass particularly hard. Meanwhile, leftist rags sing the virtues of the Death Tax and rail against corporate owned newspapers (conglomerates). Probably would fall under the, "Um, uh, well, uh, in every case but that of newspapers...uh, where did I leave my glass of Pinot Noir?" category.

Small town/county papers should do fine. Where else can grandma look up her granddaughter's field hockey scores and see who died (and read all the major stories that hit the Internet a week ago and the city papers 4 days ago)?

__________________

"Compassionate Conservatism"?!?! That is a stupid phrase. Conservatism is inherently compassionate. It is liberalism that is cruel for the sake of maintaining a constituency.