I just finished reading the current issue of the New Haven Advocate, and I had to post something about it or I was going to crack a tooth from grinding my jaw so hard.
Now, keep in mind that the paper has always been a pretty liberal publication. While they've poked fun at all sorts of people, they tended to pretty much toe the left-wing line.
But the current issue has a whole spread on the flap over New Haven handing out municipal ID cards to everyone, including illegal aliens, complete with the life stories of a handful of the people scooped up in the infamous immigration raids in the Elm City recently.
I read the article (and you should, too) and it wasn't bad. I mean, once you put aside the whole concept of immigration policy, these are OK people with some heavy issues. (Unfortunately, once you put aside the concept of thievery, people who steal are OK, too.)
The argument over illegal immigration is a classic example of how liberals argue -- they ignore the basic fact that makes their argument moot (that someone is here illegally), and then they can portray that person as a victim of unsympathetic hatemongers (e.g., conservatives).
But that's not even what irked me -- I knew what to expect before I opened the paper.
No, what got my goat was the alleged reprints of angry e-mails city aldermen had supposedly received from around the country, bashing New Haven and its municipal ID program. It would have been amusing, because some of the people that sent these e-mails must be total mouth-breathers, but it irked me because it was a sly way of accusing anyone who disagrees with the liberal stance of being among those loons.
The whole idea of a newspaper is to present all views so your readers can make informed decisions, and I suppose technically the Advocate did that -- only they cherry-picked the most moronic folks they could find to represent the opposition, slanting the "news" and making their agenda seen like the only real intelligent view.
I'm not a moron, or a redneck, or a hatemonger or Klansman, yet I don't support unlawful behavior -- but you would think after reading the Advocate that the only smart people in the state are the ones that subscribe wholeheartedly to the liberal agenda. (Funny, though, that Democrat DeStefano lost the gubernatorial election by such a huge margin to a Republican -- which I guess proves that (a) at least us rednecks can figure out how to get to a voting booth on Election Day and (b) courting people who can't legally vote isn't a great political plan.)
Anyway, back to the bias ... I've seen it all too often before among liberal outlets, so I'm not surprised, but still ticked off.
The Advocate bills itself as a "News & Arts Weekly" -- well, this week it's a "New & Arts Weekly" thanks to some crack editing -- but editorialized slant pieces are not news.
It makes me especially sad because the editor of the Advocate is a former co-worker of mine, and one of the better reporters I have known in my 10 years as a newsperson.
I guess I expected him to lead the paper in a new direction, one of debate and information.
I guess I was wrong.