The Underground Conservative

James Taranto at Opinion Journal points out a blatant case of MSM bias and hypocrisy in the case of President Bush’s recess appointee to the ambassadorship of Belgium, Sam Fox:

The assertion that Fox “was sure to lose” a confirmation vote in the Senate is either mistaken or dishonest. As we noted yesterday, Sens. Claire McCaskill and Joe Lieberman had both announced they would support Fox, which would give him 51 votes assuming no Republican defections. The Democrats planned to block Fox’s confirmation by bottling the nomination up in committee, just as the Republicans did to (Clinton recess appointee to the Luxembourg ambassadorship James) Hormel.

Also as in the case of Hormel, Fox’s credentials are not in question–or at least the (New York) Times does not question them. The only objection it offers to his nomination is that it hurts John Kerry’s feelings.

Given the Times’s worldview, which is that any opposition to gay rights is invidious, we can understand why the paper found the Republicans’ blocking of Hormel worse than the Democrats’ blocking of Fox. But no one can dispute that the latter is exceedingly petty. And the Times looks even more risibly partisan than usual in calling recess appointments “an end run around the Senate” when a Republican uses them and a “constitutional provision” when a Democrat does.

Oh, surprise, surprise, it’s the New York Times we’re talking about.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 9th, 2007 at 6:02 pm and is filed under Media, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.