Well, we have the opportunity to put their argument to the test this morning. Here is a headline in today's New York Times:
Death Sentences in Texas Cases Try Supreme Court's PatienceNow that's rather innocuous. And could involve either of two story lines. One, the more conservative outlook, would involve a story that reveals the court system's glacial pace as it relates to the appeals process for those convicted and sentenced to death. The liberal viewpoint would be expressed in a story about the court system being too harsh in dealing with those convicted of crimes punishable by their being executed.
Now which storyline do you suppose this article is going to take? Hmm. Let's find out.
The actions of the two appeals courts that hear capital cases from Texas help explain why the state leads the nation in executions, with 336 since 1976, when the death penalty was reinstated, more than the next five states combined.There you have it. The lengthy article goes on to describe the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit as being just this side of a Soviet tribunal operating out of Lubyanka. You can tell when a newspaper is driven by its editors' biases when you can predict, regardless of who the reporter is, what an article's point of view is going to be. The leadership at the New York Times is anti-death penalty. It should be no surprise to anyone that this front-page article is - ta da! - anti-death penalty.
So predictable. So wrong.