NYTimes on Stem Cells: Bias Reporting Seeks to Out "Fox" Voters

Addressing the recent claims that Michael J. Fox may have avoided taking his medication in order to gain sympathy toward Dems running for office, ALESSANDRA STANLEY of the NYTimes writes in an article today,

If Mr. Fox did forgo medication for the advertisement as Mr. Limbaugh suggested, it could hardly be considered fraudulent: if anything, masking the extent of the disease’s ravages is the deception, not revealing them. (A spokesman for Mr. Fox said his tremors were caused by his medication.) It was certainly the most dramatic way Mr. Fox has to personalize the issue; he used his infirmity much the way the late Christopher Reeve did when he lobbied for stem cell research to seek a cure for spinal injuries.

Once again the NYTimes isn't reporting the news, but trying to make it themselves.When did it become ethical for reporters to make excuses for the object of their work? They need to adopt the slogan of the other Fox they adore so much. Anyway, this particular article goes on to say,

Republicans cobbled together a response ad that did not mention Mr. Fox but attacked the ethics of embryonic stem cell research. It included testimonials by the actress Patricia Heaton (“Everybody Loves Raymond”) and James Caviezel, who played Jesus in Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ.” At least in the advance version shown on YouTube last night, Mr. Caviezel’s introduction seemed either garbled or to be in Aramaic.

It has GOT to be clear to everyone that liberal Dems have their own ideology (worldview) even while they claim not to have one (sorry Duckworth). The NYTimes is so obviously seduced by the anti-Christian liberal platform...YES, PLATFORM. Poking fun at Caviezel only makes it more obvious.