Pravda Would Be Proud

Last week The New York Times ran an article about a book of quotations from Hillary, “’I’ve Always Been a Yankees Fan’: Hillary Clinton in Her Own Words,” as well as similar books about President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. 

It was a fairly innocuous piece, but a week later The Paper of Record printed a lengthy “correction” that literally begged forgiveness from Hillary.  It was obvious that someone “got” to The Times. 

The paper noted that the “third paragraph of the article referred to ‘an alleged use of vulgarity toward a Secret Service agent’ attributed to Mrs. Clinton in the new book. But because of an editing error, the article did not make it clear until the 16th paragraph that many quotations in the book had been culled from disputed sources or unverifiable private conversations. (The Bush and Rumsfeld books, by contrast, included mostly comments made in front of crowds or at news conferences, often on videotape.)  The distinction should have been made as soon as the example was cited.”

The Old Grey Lady also said that the book about Hillary shows Mrs. Clinton “wearing a Cubs cap.  But because of an editing error, this explanation was omitted: ‘As early as 1994, Mrs. Clinton was on record explaining that growing up in the Midwest, she had both her hometown favorite, the Cubs, who are in the National League, and also an American League favorite, the Yankees.’” 

Perhaps The Times didn’t note this in the original article because it was actually The Washington Post that first reported this news about Hillary supporting the Bronx Bombers over a decade ago.  It is well known that The Times loves Hillary and will do all that it can to promote her presidential aspirations (including by running a ghastly photo of one of her strongest rivals on the cover of its weekly magazine), but this hypersensitive propaganda – er, “correction” – is taking things too far.