That headline seems a bit harsh, doesn’t it? I mean, is the New York Times really an extremist Left-Wing Rag? Is that fair, or even close to accurate? Maybe not, but in its recent article, purporting to give readers a “Behind the Mug-Shot” view of Arizona murderer Jared Loughner, the writers can’t help themselves: although they address the many indicators that Loughner was mentally unhinged, they have to slip in inferences that there is a connection to “right-wing groups”.
Strangely, they are silent about Loughner’s left-wing influences, they say nothing about Loughner being an atheist – because these parts of the psychotic puzzle that is Loughner do not fit well with their agenda of attacking and undermining their opponents on the right.
Under the guise of “journalism” they show us some of the evidence of Loughner’s insanity, but they can’t help dropping in statements that imply some kind of connection with “right-wing groups”. Why not share evidence of Loughner’s being an atheist, left-wing nut? Because the writers’ agenda is to imply it’s the right-wing that is exerting a dangerous influence on American society.
They do show us evidence of Loughner’s madness:
Looking Behind the Mug-Shot Grin of an Accused Killer
“What the cacophony of facts do suggest is that Mr. Loughner is struggling with a profound mental illness (most likely paranoid schizophrenia, many psychiatrists say); that his recent years have been marked by stinging rejection — from his country’s military, his community college, his girlfriends and, perhaps, his father; that he, in turn, rejected American society, including its government, its currency, its language, even its math. Mr. Loughner once declared to his professor that the number 6 could be called 18.
As he alienated himself from his small clutch of friends, grew contemptuous of women in positions of power and became increasingly oblivious to basic social mores, Mr. Loughner seemed to develop a dreamy alternate world, where the sky was sometimes orange, the grass sometimes blue and the Internet’s informational chaos provided refuge.â€
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/us/16loughner.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
But then they can’t help themselves, they have to imply that the right somehow has played a part in this insanity:
“He became an echo chamber for stray ideas, amplifying, for example, certain grandiose tenets of a number of extremist right-wing groups — including the need for a new money system and the government’s mind-manipulation of the masses through language.
Mr. Loughner said that he had paid for his courses illegally because, “I did not pay with gold and silver†— a standard position among right-wing extremist groups.” [emphasis mine]
