America’s Worst Newspaper?
Posted by Sal on November 21, 2006
Michelle Malkin started a thread over at her blog on which newspaper is America’s Worst. The thread originated over at Powerlineblog, which excluded the New York Times, because that paper would most likely automatically win.
I nominate the Boston Globe. The Globe is a poor sibling of the times (owned by the same corporation) that has had some of the most biased and liberal-based reporting since I can remember. Local talk show host Michael Graham of 96.9 FM-Talk (a great Conservative talk show for any of you in the Boston-Metro area) has labeled the Boston Globe the “Boston Globe-Democrat”, which is as accurate a name as I could have thought of. In a recent post on his blog The Natural Truth, Graham speaks of the Massachusetts gay marriage amendment and its coverage by the Globe. In the Globe-Democrat article that I posted yesterday, a professor of law was quoted as saying the following:
A specialist on Massachusetts constitutional law said Romney’s legal appeal is unlikely to succeed, in part because it is premature. Legislators still have one day to vote on the same-sex marriage ban on Jan. 2, the last remaining day for current legislators, said Lawrence Friedman, an assistant professor at the New England School of Law. He also said Romney’s legal argument is wrong.
“That’s a lawsuit that is probably a waste of taxpayers’ dollars,” said Friedman , who filed a legal brief in support of same-sex marriage when it came before the SJC in 2003. He said he is not involved in the current debate. “The constitution doesn’t actually require the Legislature to take a vote. It says that they have to discuss it and debate it, and I don’t think there is any good argument that there hasn’t been a lot of discussion and debate.”
The Globe presented this quote as fact without any refutation, fact-checking, or challenge to that statement. However, Graham points out Article I, Section III of the Massachusetts’s Constitution reads:
Article IV, Section 3: A proposal for an amendment to the constitution introduced by initiative petition shall be voted upon in the form in which it was introduced, unless such amendment is amended by vote of three-fourths of the members voting thereon in joint session, which vote shall be taken by call of the yeas and nays if called for by any member.
What an example of objective journalism.