NY Times re-writes history to boost socialist mayoral candidate

A few weeks ago New Yorkers elected a Democrat named Bill deBlasio to be their new mayor.  DeBlasio is openly socialist, but that's not the point of this post.


As most people know, the New York Times loves any Democrat, and enthusiastically endorsed deBlasio’s  candidacy.  One Times editorial assured readers that crime wouldn’t increase under de Blasio because “policing is far better than it used to be, thanks to innovations by Mayor David Dinkins.”

That statement isn't just fact-free but a complete inversion of the truth.  If you're neither a political junkie nor a New Yorker you wouldn't know that Dinkins' administration was widely considered to be notoriously soft on criminals.  Under his policing “innovations” there were an all-time high of 2,245 murders in New York City in Dinkins’ first year in office.  After four years murders were still an astronomical 1,995 per year.  (By comparison, in 2012 the city saw 419 murders.)

But of course that was so long ago that the Times can safely assume no one remembers the actual numbers. 

Why would the Times lie so brazenly?  Surely they must have known someone would cite the actual numbers.  But of course, what difference does it make?  They wanted the Democrat/socialist to win, and they were concerned that the Republican might charge that deBlasio would take the city back to the awful days of Dinkins.

Solution?  Get out there first and "reassure" New York voters that the Dinkins years were actually idyllic, thanks to the mayor's "innovations." 

It's a lot easier to win elections if you can rewrite history.  And it's easy to rewrite history if you have a) a printing press; and b) a majority of moronic voters who will believe anything you say.

But remember, citizen:  The media is absolutely unbiased and truthful!