The New York Times clearly believes it can perform miracles. This week, in it's Sunday Magazine section, it has featured "The private life of a former power couple," Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin. If you have not just eaten a meal, you might skim this bit of puffery here: NY Times Puff Piece. And, as you would see, if you could stomach the entire article, it does spend some time to summarize Weinergate (Anthony Weiner's 2011 sexcapades on social media) but also talks at great length about Huma's and Anthony's sympathetic courting and married life ... their child together ... and their close relationships to Hillary and Bill Clinton.
Why is the Times doing this? It appears to this reader that this article's author, Jonathan Van Meter, is shoveling as many words as he can on top of what was and is a very sordid Anthony Weiner story ... all in the hope that he might effectively bury it. And why bury it? It's all politics and money. Weiner has a $4.3 million war chest with which to run this year for Mayor of New York City. And, if he enters this race, the taxpayers will supplement this considerable amount with another $1.5 million of matching funds. (You need to be patient ... these salient facts are not revealed until almost the end of this article.) With $5.8 million, I believe some good political operatives (of which the Clinton's have a surfeit) could get David Berkowitz (that 1970's serial killer, "Son of Sam") elected to replace Mayor Bloomberg.
So, does the New York Times "live by the sea ... and frolic ... in a land called Honah Lee?" We shall see. We shall see.
No comments:
Post a Comment