“The New York Times is deliberately pitched to the liberal point of view.”

"pitched to the liberal point of view" ? The New York Times is a hard core proselytizing rag for a "progressive" socialism.

I wonder if they'll be reporting that the US is sending 20 - F16 fighter jets to the present Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt? Naw probably not...why would Americans want to know there tax dollars are being used to support anti-American puppet governments in the Middle East? Bet they'll be all over the next IPhone though....

Another obvious fact.

In the first place, it's highly questionable testimony to the often-bankrupt 'information' echo chamber (and this site's careless editors), that the above quote belongs to a DINSMORE, not a "Dismore", as it is near-universally attributed. Next, whatever Mr. Dinsmore's motivations were in articulating the idea, any 'great' newspaper that intentionally keeps massive NSA warrantless searches of private citizens secret, because the felons responsible for the lawless intrusions required them to, is anything but "liberal" in composition. This also applies to the absence of any substantial NY Times coverage, at all, of the "Chillcot Inquiry" or The Downing St. Memo or any number of other extremely vital things Americans need to know in order to cast an intelligent vote. Enduring baseless patter about "liberal media" is increasingly difficult, when its greatest domestic successes lie in keeping Americans needlessly fearful - and painting "Pax Americana" as something noble instead of something Hitlerian - SELLING a great country on the idea that "national security" requires projecting offensive warfare globally. I despair when the NY Times ignores the fact that 200 banksters were JAILED in tiny Iceland, for fraud in conjunction with the still not-concluded "banking crisis." Such things wouldn't be possible in a truly FREE press. Nor can media et-al be accurately characterized as "liberal" - however much some try. The great truth is this: journalists as a whole may indeed be liberally-oriented. Ooh, big deal. In fact, in every significant case the people they work for - the ones who decide what is and isn't emphasized for public consumption - demonstrably aren't.

As is common with most professed liberals (e.g. Mann, Kalamazoo), they have great difficulty facing the hard facts that 'progressives' are totalitarians in disguise. The current liberal attitude is that the wrongs of the world are to be solved through the collective power of the State. They espouse the same rhetoric as the early communists in Russia (before they actually got communism.) One need only search through the rhetoric of the national socialists in Germany that brought Hitler to power to see the similarity of today's 'progressives.'

Mann tries to blame the owners of the media and seems to claim that while their papers and television broadcasts may indeed be liberal, the owners' views are not. That could be said for the liberal politicians in Congress as well -- because in the end, the only way to implement progressive liberal policies is to force them upon the rest of us. These policies always carry with them new permissions for the government to take from selected citizens -- and the media are used as the town criers for scaring the people into obeying. Today's liberals are in fact not liberal at all -- their policies in fact result in more property confiscation, more regulatory power elevated to 'laws' that must be obeyed, more social engineering that regiments the people into more indoctrinated and obedient wards of the state. The liberals LIE -- they LIE because it requires a certain amount of lying to oneself for a liberal argument like 'corporations are evil' all the while they centralize power more and more into the government corporations and the biggest corporation of them all, the central bank.

The reason the press is pitched to the left is because the left buys it, is pleasantly groomed by it, while they can blame the 'owners' and the corporations for the world's troubles. And as far as war goes, which seems to be the argument against the press being truly liberal, well, the liberal politicians are as much to blame for war as the conservatives. Obama and the Democrat majority of both houses for 2 years did not end any wars -- in fact they increased them as well as pointed their 'security' domestically. The police state has grown exponentially under 'liberal' control -- and this historically is what happened in Russia and Nazi Germany. Liberals talk and talk so that they do not have to look at themselves and their own hypocrisy.

But this is what the liberals blame the religious 'right' for -- interesting how they have merely 'secularized' a religion of the State in which our government are demigods and God is power. The liberals have merely created their own religion that funnily enough is as oppressive as the church of old and is as far off from reality as the infallibility of the pope.

The New York Slimes is in a close race with The Washington Compost for this title.