In an editorial last week, the NY Times, always 'unbiased', tried to change the constitution, and in so doing, came across looking like a bunch of fools:

The White House has tried to create an air of inevitability around Judge Alito's confirmation. But the public is skeptical. In a new Harris poll, just 34 percent of those surveyed said they thought he should be confirmed, while 31 percent said he should not, and 34 percent were unsure. Nearly 70 percent said they would oppose Judge Alito's nomination if they thought he would vote to make abortion illegal - which it appears he might well do.

Now many conservatives and right to lifers have been railing against Roe V Wade for the last 30 years.  But no Jurist sitting on the bench anywhere in this country has the ability to make abortion illegal!  Indeed, before Roe v. Wade, Abortion WAS legal, just not in every state.  And as has been pointed out on JU before, over turning Roe V. Wade would not by fiat make abortion automatically illegal.  It would just then allow laws that predated the ruling to once again go into force, which means that in only 15 states would it be illegal, while in 35 it would still be legal.

Now I understand that the 'average' American does not follow politics close enough to understand what Roe V Wade is all about.  But for a major Newspaper to be so ignorant, and to display its ignorance in black and white is sheer incompetence!  Or, worse, pure propaganda.

In either case it is a bald face lie, and one so blatant one cannot help but assume that the management of the Times are either liars, Pro Abortion Stooges, or incompetent. Or all 3.

Given their record of late, I would vote for the latter.