The editorial lists the three key reasons
“The economy is slowly recovering from the 2008 meltdown, and the country could suffer another recession if the wrong policies take hold.
“The United States is embroiled in unstable regions that could easily explode into full-blown disaster.
“An ideological assault from the right has started to undermine the vital health reform law passed in 2010. Those forces are eroding women’s access to health care, and their right to control their lives. Nearly 50 years after passage of the Civil Rights Act, all Americans’ rights are cheapened by the right wing’s determination to deny marriage benefits to a selected group of us.’
So the US continues in recession and has a budget deficit America’s annual budget deficit is $1.5 trillion out of $3.8 trillion of expenditures with no sign of this closing and with debt heading for Grecian proportions. Yet according to the Times, “He has formed sensible budget policies”. The Times says, “Poverty would have been much worse without the billions spent on Medicaid, food stamps and jobless benefits.” It offers praise not blushes that food stamp use has increased 51 per cent since 2008. Fifteen per cent of the population is now in receipt of this form of dole, which is a testimony to government failure, amplified by the 47 per cent who benefit from support government provides from seizing assets of the nation’s productive people.
And the US being embroiled in unstable regions owes much to the re-set of Obama policies in courting Islamic fascists posing as democrats while consolidating the reverence to the Saudis, the bankers of the Wahabbi schools that teach hatred of the west. The Islamic fanatics triumph of Bengazi and deceits the Administration resorted to in blaming it on the West’s own provocative actions in allowing a film to be made about Mohammed, will go down as signature failures of Obama’s tenure
The third arm of support is the Obama extension of the social state. “The ideological assault from the right” is language for supporting socialised medicine, free condoms and government recognition of gay marriage.
The Times thunders on, “In the poisonous atmosphere of this campaign, it may be easy to overlook Mr. Obama’s many important achievements, including carrying out the economic stimulus, saving the auto industry, improving fuel efficiency standards, and making two very fine Supreme Court appointments.”
It is astonishing that anyone can judge these as policy achievements. The only consolation is that the Times has had a poor record at picking winners. They have not endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower in 1956.
Well wouldnt that! What a turnaround!
Borisgodunov
28 Oct 12 at 6:24 pm
Message to NYT. You have a left wing president now and marriage rights are still denied to gays and polygamists.
Idiots.
jupes
28 Oct 12 at 6:30 pm
I know! I almost batted an eyelid over the news.
Gab
28 Oct 12 at 6:33 pm
Maybe the NYT’s folk are closet communists. Wasn’t it one of their goals to bring about the downfall of the west, to get as many people as possible dependent on government handouts? Something like that anyway.
Ellen of Tasmania
28 Oct 12 at 6:45 pm
Flashback:
Just sayin’.
sdog
28 Oct 12 at 6:54 pm
Oops:
“Obama Tells MTV He Won’t Push Gay Marriage In Second Term.”
sdog
28 Oct 12 at 7:03 pm
The newspaper of record is becoming the newspaper of history. You will soon need to visit a museum to see it.
To paraphrase Mr Moran: Shock! Liberal newspaper loses money in 2012!
Suggestion to the NYT, if you wish to make money having a potential audience bigger than the 30% who are progressive lefties is a useful first step.
Bruce
28 Oct 12 at 7:15 pm
A newspaper should never take sides in an election. I am always annoyed when an editorial argues that we should vote for X or Y.
The New York Times supported Stephen Douglas against Abraham Lincoln in the 1860 election (it first went to print in 1851) so it has a long history of being wrong.
Samuel J
28 Oct 12 at 7:31 pm
I’ll see your NYT and raise you one Des Moines Register
NoFixedAddress
28 Oct 12 at 7:42 pm
the NY Times support Eisenhower in 1956 and 1952; wilkie in 1940; and taft in 1908.
see http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/10/28/opinion/presidential-endorsement-timeline.html
Jim Rose
28 Oct 12 at 8:17 pm
Meanwhile, elswhere…
Gab
28 Oct 12 at 8:20 pm
Vid: The $6 Trillion Man rap.
Very good.
Gab
28 Oct 12 at 9:10 pm
Good point. It’s a stupid practice, and has dubious effect anyway. The endorsement of individual columnists within a newspaper carries more weight than the editorial position of the paper as an organisation.
dd
28 Oct 12 at 9:46 pm
Alan – the USA is a federalist system (the “States” in “United States” is the hint for young players).
Just because 47% of people (actually 46%) don’t pay Federal income tax, doesn’t mean they don’t pay State (again, remember the word States” in “United States” – tricky eh?) income tax, school district property tax, or local sales taxes. And I somehow know that you would feel outraged that some of those in the 47% are in there because they’re deriving their income from tax-free municipal bonds issued by state governments – that is if you betrayed any knowledge that the United States was a federalist system where the States and myriad other local governments have taxing power, States and local governments which provide whose taxes are generally regressive. States which distribute the food stamp benefits you appear so bitter about.
And we’re yet to get to Federal payroll taxes, essentially paid by everyone with a job. And remind me, what was the unemployment rate at the start of Obama’s presidency? And what is it now?
PSC
28 Oct 12 at 10:12 pm
“Good point. It’s a stupid practice, and has dubious effect anyway.”
Possibly a left-over from when newspapers were much more respected, and perhaps someone’s main source of news/opinion.
We don’t see it here in Australia, at least not that I’ve noticed.
“So the US continues in recession”
It’s not recession if there’s growth, by definition.
“America’s annual budget deficit is $1.5 trillion out of $3.8 trillion of expenditures with no sign of this closing”
Actually, its budget deficit is $1.089 trillion. The one before was $1.297 trillion, so that is a sign of closing.
Jarrah
29 Oct 12 at 9:55 am
Public Service Champion. Did you know Australia is also a federation? And Russia is very big. I think everybody should live off the government because it is also big and immensely rich
Jarrah
net increase in US federarl debt averaged $1.5 billion a year in 2010 and 2011. Though below that level in 2012, it showed an increase on 2011. I suppose you think the outcome is a healthy endorsement of the present administration.
Alan Moran
29 Oct 12 at 10:53 am
Alan, budget deficits are not the same as debt increase.
“I suppose you think the outcome is a healthy endorsement of the present administration.”
No, your supposition is incorrect.
I note you haven’t tried to defend your new definition of ‘recession’ that includes economic growth.
Jarrah
29 Oct 12 at 11:08 am
Why the NYT is regarded as as serious newspaper when it comes to national politics is beyond me. The facts are it has never called for the election of a republican President since Dwight Eisenhower in 1956 and that was Ike’s second term. It doesn’t matter who currently works there or who currently owns it, for 56 years it has been a mouthpiece of the liberal left and their party, the Democrats. Surely any serious reader from either side would have to doubt the accuracy of what they are reading in the Times about American presidential politics, and this would apply to any rusted-on-for-fifty-six-years newspaper, right or left of centre. Try reading the increasingly shrill anti-Romney nonsense littering the pages of the Times now BO, the current darling President of the left, looks as though he’s in trouble.
davey street
30 Oct 12 at 2:14 pm