I coincidentally received in the mail a New York Times subscription offer on the same day that a “This Just In” item about The New York Times Magazine's “Planet Hillary” cover was published ( “Planet Hillary? Magazine cover gives some the creeps” ). I took full advantage of the opportunity to respond to the subscription offer. Here's how I put it to The Times.
“Your offer opened the door for this conservative patriot's salvo: The New York Times' misconstrued report on Benghazi to save face for Hillary Clinton is par for a state that has overdosed on liberal progressivism. By all means include U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Bill de Blasio, Times columnist Paul Krugman, etc., with Hillary and blast them off to another planet to detoxify New York of its pushers of socialism. And while you're at it, invite California Gov. Jerry Brown and his liberal progressive cronies to climb aboard for the launch.”
It's inconceivable that the state harboring the Statue of Liberty could become so “progressive” and hellbent on destroying what Lady Liberty stands for and beckons. Gadzooks!
Incidentally, the state of the union is lousy, thanks to undermining by liberal “progressives.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Behind tax inversions
- Find hilarity in the headlines
- ‘PC’ Ebola approach deadly
- GCC 19, sportsmanship 0
- Export more oil
- Coal’s biggest threat
- No need for Sheetz in Heights
- Sheetz-CVS hearing
- Lying time of year
- Corbett respects women