The NY Times and the U.N. high-speed rail plot
|Wu Hong/European Pressphoto Agency|
As I've pointed out before, editors at the NY Times support high-speed rail in spite of the work on the issue by their own reporters. Their pro-HSR bias leaked into a front-page story last Friday:
In Maine, the Tea Party-backed Republican governor canceled a project to ease congestion along the Route 1 corridor after protesters complained it was part of the United Nations plot. Similar opposition helped doom a high-speed train line in Florida.
The governor of Florida rejected federal money for high-speed rail not because he was worried about a U.N. conspiracy, but because he understood that the taxpayers of his state would have been responsible for the inevitable cost-overruns in building the system and to pay to operate it once it was built. Unfortunately, the Governor of California doesn't seem to understand that.
The Times linked a backgrounder that refers to that reality:
The year before, newly elected Republican governors in Florida, Ohio and Wisconsin turned down federal money their Democratic predecessors had won for new rail routes, lest their states have to cover most of the costs for trains that would draw few riders.
Careless in allowing its bias to contaminate news stories, the Times is famous for being fussy about trivia with its copy editing: In a story yesterday ("The 2016 Election, Already Upon Us"), the Senator from Massachusetts was pedantically called "Scott P. Brown," and we were reminded that "John A. Boehner" is "the speaker of the House." Get the big things wrong but be sure to include those middle initials!
And why the comma after "Election" in the title? Not to mention the clunky "Upon" instead of plain old "on."