Green Room

NYT addresses the IRS scandal in Buffalo Bill style

posted at 12:18 pm on May 14, 2013 by

This was the headline on the NYT editorial about the IRS scandal last night:

NYT IRS

Apparently unable to bring itself to institutionally condemn the political abuse of power the IRS engaged in—probably because the same editorial page endorsed it explicitly last year—the Grey Lady was reduced to “it puts the lotion on its skin.”

This morning, the headline has been changed to this passive-voice doozy:

The I.R.S. Audits Are Condemned

Really, guys? That’s crappy writing and a crappy moral compass. The editorial excuses the NYT’s own cheerleading for the IRS abuse, glides over the IRS’ “serious mistake,” begrudgingly conceded, to go on to demand better regulation of political speech and mourn that this OBVIOUS, ADMITTED ABUSE OF POWER BY THE IRS TARGETED AT THE WHITE HOUSE’S POLITICAL ENEMIES might, gasp!, give those political enemies the chance to make political hay of this and distract from real stuff like gun control and more campaign finance reform.

Inevitably, the stumble by the I.R.S. will now be used by the Republicans as a point of attack. They are gleefully promising months of hearings, and the National Republican Congressional Committee is already trying to tarnish Democratic lawmakers with what it calls “the Obama administration’s use of the I.R.S. as a political tool.”

This will serve as the perfect distraction from issues, like the budget, gun control or immigration reform. And it will probably prevent any real progress on campaign finance reform, which, in turn, will make it vastly more difficult for the I.R.S. to prevent abuse of the tax code.

It writes the editorial with its pen or else it gets the hose again.

H/t The Anchoress, who had some fun on a theme:

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I missed my calling. If this is what passes for journalism these days, I should’ve done that. I could certainly do better.

But then, so could my nine year old daughter.

Chris of Rights on May 14, 2013 at 12:28 PM

I can’t think of any right leaning group that would use the term “social welfare” to describe its mission.

I associate that little euphemism with the left. Not to mention “masquerading”.

RushBaby on May 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Is Gollum writing for the NYT now? My precious?

Next headline written by Legolas:

I should have foreseen this…

geojed on May 14, 2013 at 12:51 PM

I’d always known the NYT was ridiculous, but I never realized anybody could be so far gone as to have to resort to nonsensical sentence structure to avoid stating the obvious.

rightmind on May 14, 2013 at 1:07 PM

It writes the editorial with its pen or else it gets the hose again.

Awesomeness.

John the Libertarian on May 14, 2013 at 1:48 PM

Would you impeach me?

I’d impeach me.

I’d impeach me hard.

Good Solid B-Plus on May 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

The last two paragraphs of that editorial are breathtaking. I’m glad you quoted them so fully, starting with the laughable “stumble by the IRS” bit.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 14, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Would you impeach me?

I’d impeach me.

I’d impeach me hard.

Good Solid B-Plus on May 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

Pure awesome! LOL…

Nineball on May 14, 2013 at 4:27 PM

What a steaming pile.

avagreen on May 14, 2013 at 6:44 PM