NY Times doesn't try to hide its bias

The New York Times today runs a story on Peter Paul, the Clintons, and Mrs. Clinton's former campaign finance director, who has been indicted for underreporting the cost of a fundraiser thrown by Paul. Today's article is noteworthy for its references to the organization representing Paul and the manner in which the paper seems to be a lapdog for the Clintons.

It first states that the case "shows the continuing effort of a longtime nemesis of the Clintons, Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, to make legal trouble for the couple." Apparently, though, this single description of Judicial Watch was insufficient for the Times, as it later in the article states that "Judicial Watch [is] a conservative legal group that has dogged the Clintons for years and has been representing Mr. Paul."

The Times has not always attempted to "tar" Judicial Watch with the conservative label, however. Since JW is one of the organizations that sued Vice President Cheney over the Energy Task Force meetings, the Times has mentioned the group in its coverage of the case. Here, for instance, a Times story states that "[t]he judge set Dec. 12 as the next time for the administration to meet back in court with the two groups, the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch, that brought the case."

The Media Research Center noted the blatant bias of the mainstream media in its coverage of Judicial Watch in this comprehensive review two and a half years ago. Apparently, the Times doesn't care to continue the bias in its news stories.