On Russia, Oil, Energy,The Artic Circle and Foriegn Policy – Part 2

Telegraph.co.uk

By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:23AM BST 18 May 2008

Canada Claims : Russia is annexing Artic area for Oil Reserves. 

The battle for “ownership” of the polar oil reserves has accelerated with the disclosure that Russia has sent a fleet of nuclear-powered ice breakers into the Arctic.

It has reinforced fears that Moscow intends to annex “unlawfully” a vast portion of the ice-covered Arctic, beneath which scientists believe up to 10 billion tons of gas and oil could be buried. Russian ambition for control of the Arctic has provoked Canada to double to $40 million (£20.5 million) funding for work to map the Arctic seabed in support its claim over the territory.

The Russian ice breakers patrol huge areas of the frozen ocean for months on end, cutting through ice up to 8ft thick. There are thought to be eight in the region, dwarfing the British and American fleets, neither of which includes nuclear-powered ships.

Canada also plans to open an army training centre for cold-weather fighting at Resolute Bay and a deep-water port on the northern tip of Baffin Island, both of which are close to the disputed region. The country’s defence ministry intends to build a special fleet of patrol boats to guard the North West Passage.

The crisis has raised the spectre of Russia and the West joining in a new cold war over the Arctic unless the United Nations can resolve the dispute.

Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, told Telegraph: “Four of the five Arctic powers are Nato members, yet Nato seems ill-configured to be able to respond to the sort of activities we have seen from the Russians. We need to ensure Nato has the will and the capability to deter Russian activity that contravenes international laws or treaties.”

Jonathan Eyal, of the Royal United Services Institute, said the dispute could simmer for years. “The message from Vladimir Putin is that Russia will no longer be shackled to treaties signed by Yeltsin when he was half drunk or when Russia was on its knees,” he said. “This dispute is not only about oil reserves which might or might not exist, it is about the control of sea lanes. Russia’s movements could pitch it into a serious territorial dispute with the US for the first time.”

Tension in the Arctic is also being heightened by the revival of Russian Cold War-era manoeuvres. Hardly a week passes without Russian aircraft over-flying the North Pole, simulating strikes on “enemy” bases and shipping.

The crisis erupted last year when a Russian submarine crew planted a flag on the Lomonosov Ridge, a 1,240-mile stretch of seabed that Moscow says is Russian. Derided at the time as a stunt, the move focused attention on the race for the Arctic’s hidden treasures.

No country owns the Arctic Ocean or the North Pole, but under the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention, each country with a coast has exploitation rights in a limited “exclusive economic zone”. On ratification of the convention – and America has yet to ratify it – each country has 10 years to make claims extending its zone.

Russia rivals Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest oil producer and is estimated to have the largest natural gas supplies. Energy earnings are funding a $189 billion (£97 billion) overhaul of its armed forces.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1976314/Russia-accused-of-annexing-the-Arctic-for-oil-reserves-by-Canada.html

On Russia, Oil, Energy and Foreign Policy & The Artic Circle – Part 1

Posted: July 29, 2008
9:52 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily 

Even if Congress follows President Bush’s lead in opening off-shore oil exploration, there exist over 125,000 square miles of sea bottom that won’t be explored, because the State Department – amid controversy and against the will of Alaskans – has surrendered the land to Russia.

Eight islands and their surrounding sea floors were ceded to the former Soviet Union as part of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. Maritime Boundary Treaty in 1991, a treaty signed by the U.S. Senate and President George Bush but never ratified by the Soviets. Nonetheless, an executive agreement enforcing the terms of the treaty until ratification has been in place through three presidencies, meaning the State Department officially recognizes the islands as Russian territory.

Alaskan legislators, who were given no input or authority on the island giveaway, have long protested the treaty, declaring it null and void without Russian ratification.

And since last week’s U.S. Geological Survey estimating that 90 billion barrels of oil lie undiscovered and technically recoverable above the Arctic Circle, those 125,000 square miles of seabed have taken on newly appreciated value. Five of the islands lie north of the Artic Circle, and the other three sit at the western end of Alaska’s Aleutian island chain.

Carl Olson, a retired U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander and chairman of State Department Watch, a nonpartisan foreign policy watchdog group, explained to WND the significance of the State Department’s stance: “The area off the coast of an island that a nation may use is called the exclusive economic zone. The group in charge of defining that is the State Department. So (the president and Congress) can say the off-shore areas are opened up, but still not recognize these quarter of a million square miles available for American oil exploration.”

Alaska state Rep. John B. Coghill told WND earlier, “The issues involve not only state sovereignty over vital territories but also significant national defense concerns and substantial economic losses over fisheries and petroleum.”

The Alaskan legislature and a sympathetic California legislature have both passed resolutions asking Congress to allow Alaska at the bargaining table with Russia to resolve the islands’ ownership. After almost 20 years of official protests, the U.S. State Department has yet to acknowledge Alaska’s arguments.

“It’s totally anti-public, anti-Congress, anti-state actions – but unfortunately the State Department thinks it has the power to adopt this boundary line with the Russians without anybody’s consent outside themselves, ” Olson told WND. “The State Department is basically chopping off a piece of Alaska and giving it to a foreign government without Alaska having any say in it.”

The lands in dispute include the islands of Herald, Bennett, Henrietta, Jeanette, Copper Island, Sea Lion Rock, Sea Otter Rock, and Wrangel, which is the largest of the eight, roughly the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined.

The U.S. purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867, including the Aleutian Islands, which presumably would include Copper Island, Sea Otter Rock and Sea Lion Rock. In 1881, U.S. Captain Calvin L. Hooper landed on Wrangel Island and claimed it for the U.S. Also in 1881, the U.S. Navy claimed the islands of Bennett, Jeannette, and Henrietta. The British held Herald Island, but they gave up that claim, permitting the U.S. to take it.

American citizens had occupied Wrangel Island from approximately 1881 to 1924, when Russian soldiers landed and forcibly removed the American occupants from its shores. The Russians then reportedly used the island as a concentration camp.

Many Alaskan legislators believe the islands were part of their state, even after the Wrangel invasion, though the U.S. State Department officially disagrees. Without a ratified treaty designating them as Russian, those same legislators and Carl Olson believe the islands still are American territory and can be reverted to the U.S. easily.

The only thing binding the islands to Russia is “in the form of an executive agreement,” Olson told WND, “which means it can be changed with the stroke of a pen by the president, because it has no force of law.”

“We have been steadily maintaining the pressure,” said Olson. “It’s just a matter of finding sympathetic people in Washington and the other states to go for it. There’s plenty of organizations who have endorsed our efforts, so we keep up the drumbeat.”

Coghill has also sought the support of other states, claiming that the federal State Department has overstepped its authority in giving away a state’s land. “If they can do this to Alaska,” he warns, “they can do this to any state.”

U.S. State Department officials did not return WND telephone calls to discuss the matter, but a State Department webpage devoted to the island controversy denies that islands were ever claimed by the United States and explains that though the treaty between the U.S. and Russian Federation was never fully ratified, “In a separate exchange of diplomatic notes, the two countries agreed to apply the agreement provisionally.”

The webpage concludes, “The U.S. has no intention of reopening discussion of the 1990 Maritime Boundary Treaty.”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=70902

Georgia President Pushes For NATO To Speed Up Membership

TBILISI, Georgia —  Georgia’s president says he hopes a visit from NATO’s chief will accelerate his nation’s drive to join the Western alliance.

Mikhail Saakashvili said Monday that Georgia and NATO should work hard to show that Georgia is on track to join what he called the “Euro-Atlantic family.”

He said that is Georgia’s proper and rightful place.

NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer criticized Russia but spoke cautiously in opening remarks before a NATO-Georgia meeting.

Georgia’s president has angered Russia with his pursuit of NATO membership. Last week he said Russia went to war to keep Georgia out of the alliance and warned NATO not to let Moscow get its way through force.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,422621,00.html

https://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/16/nato-chief-warns-moscow-you-have-no-veto-on-georgias-membership/

https://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/12/palins-interview-on-abc-democratic-talking-points-on-nato-georgia-and-the-ukraine/

NATO CHIEF WARNS MOSCOW, “You have no Veto on Georgia’s Membership”

Nato Chief Says Alliance Will Continue To Expand

TBILISI, Georgia —  NATO’s chief said Tuesday the Western alliance will continue its expansion despite Russian opposition and warned Moscow that it has no veto on Georgia’s bid to become a member.

In a strong message of support for Georgia after its debilitating war with Russia, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said “the road to NATO is still wide open” and Russia could not break the alliance’s ties with the former Soviet republic through military action.

“The process of NATO enlargement will continue, with due caution but also with a clear purpose — to help create a stable, undivided Europe,” he said in a speech at Tbilisi State University during a two-day visit.

“No other country will have a veto over that process, nor will we allow our strong ties to Georgia to be broken by outside military intervention and pressure,” he said. “Georgia has a rightful place in this Europe.”

De Hoop Scheffer condemned Russia’s recognition of the two separatist regions in Georgia, saying its sovereignty and territorial integrity must be respected. He also called on Moscow to tone down its rhetoric in the wake of the war.

Reflecting NATO’s precarious position, however, he said NATO is “not in the business of punishing Russia” and does not want to be. “Punishing Russia is not the way forward. The way forward, really, is to help Georgia,” he said.

De Hoop Sheffer said NATO would not accept Russian demands that it choose between Russia and Georgia.

He said NATO still wants to work with Russia but stressed that it had put some ties on hold until Moscow complies with a cease-fire deal and withdraws its forces to positions they held before the war erupted Aug. 7 in separatist South Ossetia.

Georgia has angered Russia with its drive to join NATO. The alliance in April declined to take a key step toward membership for Georgia but assured the nation that it will eventually join.

Earlier on Tuesday, de Hoop Scheffer met with Georgia’s parliament speaker during the second day of a visit that comes with thousands of Russian troops on its soil, more than a month after a war that has caused mounting confrontation between Moscow and the West.

De Hoop Sheffer said he and the NATO ambassadors of all 26 allies were in the ex-Soviet republic wanted “to show solidarity with its people, to show that we stand by them as they work to reshape their country and take their proper place in the European and Euro-Atlantic community.”

He said it was “fitting” to be meeting in Georgia’s colonnaded parliament building, the hub of the peaceful Rose Revolution protests in 2003 that ushered President Mikhail Saakashvili to power and set the country firmly on a pro-Western path.

The parliament speaker, Saakashvili ally David Bakradze, said that while the government party faces strong opposition, the country is united in its desire to join NATO and integrate with the West.

On Monday, de Hoop Scheffer and Georgia’s prime minister signed documents creating the new NATO-Georgia Commission conceived in the wake of the war to emphasize alliance support for Georgia and oversee further relations.

The NATO leader also condemned Russia’s use of “disproportional force” and emphasized NATO’s demand that Moscow withdraw to positions its forces held before the fighting erupted, complying with a cease-fire deal brokered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Under a supplemental agreement Sarkozy reached last week, Russia has pledged to withdraw its forces from Georgian territory outside South Ossetia and Abkhazia, within 10 days of the deployment of EU monitors expected to be in place by Oct. 1.

But Moscow has said it will maintain nearly 8,000 troops in South Ossetia and Abkhazia for the foreseeable future. The U.S. and European Union say that would flagrantly violate the commitment to withdraw to pre-conflict positions.

Russia has adamantly opposed NATO membership for Georgia, whose location straddling a key westward energy route for Caspian and Central Asian oil and gas supplies gives it outsize geopolitical importance.

Georgia has emerged as a major focus of a struggle for influence, pitting a resurgent Russia against the United States and the European Union amid relations that have become increasingly frayed over the past decade.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423103,00.html

NATO is a Treaty Organiztion with 26 Member Countries. The Organization is pledged to the mutual Defense of its Members. Current Member Countries include: Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. 

https://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/12/palins-interview-on-abc-democratic-talking-points-on-nato-georgia-and-the-ukraine/

NATO has helped keep the peace in Europe for 60 years.

VOTER FRAUD REPORTED IN MICHIGAN – 200,000 NEW REGISTRATIONS – ACORN GROUP TIED TO ACTIVITIES: By Detroit Free Press

BY L.L. BRASIER • FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER • September 14, 2008

Several municipal clerks across the state are reporting fraudulent and duplicate voter registration applications, most of them from a nationwide community activist group working to help low- and moderate-income families.

The majority of the problem applications are coming from the group ACORN, Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, which has a large voter registration program among its many social service programs. ACORN’s Michigan branch, based in Detroit, has enrolled 200,000 voters statewide in recent months, mostly with the use of paid, part-time employees.

There appears to be a sizeable number of duplicate and fraudulent applications,” said Kelly Chesney, spokeswoman for the Michigan Secretary of State’s Office. “And it appears to be widespread.”

Chesney said her office has had discussions with ACORN officials after local clerks reported the questionable applications to the state. Chesney said some of the applications are duplicates and some appear to be names that have been made up. The Secretary of State’s Office has turned over several of the applications to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office on Friday declined to confirm whether an investigation was taking place.

In recent years, ACORN’s voter registration programs have come under investigation in Ohio, Colorado, Missouri and Washington, with some employees convicted of voter fraud.

ACORN officials said they were looking into the problem.

“We’ll do an investigation to see what’s happening,” said David Lagstein, a spokesman for the Detroit office. “If it’s really as many as that, it warrants further investigation.”

In Pontiac, where several thousand applications have been submitted by ACORN in the last few weeks for the November election, the clerk’s office is finding that numerous applications are sometimes filed under one name.

“What it causes is a slowdown of our operations,” said Pontiac City Clerk Yvette Talley. “They’re steadily coming in, and we are finding a huge number of duplications.”

Talley said she could not provide an exact number.

Clerks are required to check their records against a statewide database of all registered voters within their jurisdiction, so it would be unlikely that duplications would allow voters to cast their votes more than once, Talley said.

“We catch them all, but it’s taking up a lot of our time,” she said.

In Oak Park, clerk Sandra Gadd said they have been seeing “lots of duplication” from ACORN in recent months but were reassured by ACORN officials that the group was working to correct the problem.

“They’ve been very cooperative,” Gadd said. “I spoke with them this week. They called me, and they’re willing to go door-to-door to do whatever they have to do to take care of this.”

ACORN is the nation’s largest community organization for low- and moderate-income families. Created more than 30 years ago, it has branches in 100 cities and claims 350,000 families as members. It works to help create affordable housing and health care, and to improve job conditions and neighborhood schools.

Lagstein said ACORN’s Detroit office has hired dozens of employees for the voter registration program and that any problems likely stem from sloppiness or incompetence — not an intent to let people vote more than once.

“We’re proud of our efforts to increase voter registration, and we have aggressive training for our staff to make sure the cards are filled out appropriately,” he said.

ACORN has a method to track the workers who filled out individual registration cards, which will allow investigators to question the workers, Lagstein said.

“We certainly do our best to keep the duplications as low as possible, so we’ll have to evaluate what’s happening here,” he said.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008809140383

Sara Palin’s Unedited Answers to ABC’s Charlie Gibson – ABC’s Mischaracterization of Palin

ABC News Edited Out Key Parts Of Sarah Palin’s Answers

A transcript of the unedited interview of Sarah Palin by Charles Gibson clearly shows that ABC News edited out crucial portions of the interview that showed Palin as knowledgeable or presented her answers out of context. This unedited transcript of the first of the Gibson interviews with Palin is available on radio host Mark Levin’s website. The sections edited out by ABC News are in bold. The first edit shows Palin responding about meeting with foreign leaders but this was actually in response to a question Gibson asked several questions earlier:

GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?

PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.

GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.

PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.

PALIN: Right, right.

GIBSON: I’m talking about somebody who’s a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?

PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we’ve got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state … these last couple of weeks … it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.
 

Next we see that Palin was not nearly as hostile towards Russia as was presented in the edited interview:

GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.

PALIN: Sure.

GIBSON: Let’s start, because we are near Russia, let’s start with Russia and Georgia.

The administration has said we’ve got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?

PALIN: First off, we’re going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him my commitment, as John McCain’s running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we’ve got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep…

GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.

PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there. I think it was unfortunate. That manifestation that we saw with that invasion of Georgia shows us some steps backwards that Russia has recently taken away from the race toward a more democratic nation with democratic ideals. That’s why we have to keep an eye on Russia.

And, Charlie, you’re in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors.We need to have a good relationship with them. They’re very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor.

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

 

We also see from Palin’s following remark, which was also edited out, that she is far from some sort of latter day Cold Warrior which the edited interview made her seem to be:

We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We’ve learned lessons from that in our relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.

We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

 

Palin’s extended remarks about defending our NATO allies were edited out to make it seem that she was ready to go to war with Russia. 

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.

But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to — especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.

We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.

GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.

PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to be cognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.

And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.

It doesn’t have to lead to war and it doesn’t have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries.

His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that’s a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we were to allow that to happen.

 

That answer presented Palin as a bit too knowledgeable for the purposes of ABC News and was, of course, edited out. Palin’s answers about a nuclear Iran were carefully edited to the point where she was even edited out in mid-sentence to make it seem that Palin favored unilateral action against that country:

GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?

PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.

GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran? John McCain said the only thing worse than a war with Iran would be a nuclear Iran. John Abizaid said we may have to live with a nuclear Iran. Who’s right?

PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we’re talking about Israel, we’re talking about Ahmadinejad’s comment about Israel being the “stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth,” that’s atrocious. That’s unacceptable.

GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?

PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.

GIBSON: But, Governor, we’ve threatened greater sanctions against Iran for a long time. It hasn’t done any good. It hasn’t stemmed their nuclear program.

PALIN: We need to pursue those and we need to implement those. We cannot back off. We cannot just concede that, oh, gee, maybe they’re going to have nuclear weapons, what can we do about it. No way, not Americans. We do not have to stand for that.

 

Laughably, a remark by Gibson that indicated he agreed with Palin was edited out:

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words when he said — first, he suggested never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak God’s words.

But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that’s a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God’s side.

That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie. And I do believe, though, that this war against extreme Islamic terrorists is the right thing. It’s an unfortunate thing, because war is hell and I hate war, and, Charlie, today is the day that I send my first born, my son, my teenage son overseas with his Stryker brigade, 4,000 other wonderful American men and women, to fight for our country, for democracy, for our freedoms.

Charlie, those are freedoms that too many of us just take for granted. I hate war and I want to see war ended. We end war when we see victory, and we do see victory in sight in Iraq.

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln’s words, but you went on and said, “There is a plan and it is God’s plan.”

 

Gibson took her point about Lincoln’s words but we wouldn’t know that by watching the interview since it was left on the cutting room floor. I urge everybody to see just how the unedited version of the first interview compared to what we saw on television  by checking out the full transcript. It is a fascinating look into media manipulation via skillful editing.

Compare this interview with Gibson’s 2007 Obama Interview Here: https://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/obamas-2007-interview-abcs-charlie-gibson-you-can-compare/ 
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/09/13/abc-news-edited-out-key-parts-sarah-palin-interview

Sarah Palin & The New York Times: 4 Attack Pieces In One Day – Elitism In American Politics

Yesterday, September 14, 2008, The New York Times published 4 attack pieces in the Sunday Edition. The pieces are actually “Opinion” pieces but the NYT published them as Political News. 

Just another example of the Elitism displayed by the Press.

For a Historical Discussion of Elitism in the Press and American Politics See:  https://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/14/give-em-hell-sarah-palin-harry-truman-elitism-in-american-politics/

%d bloggers like this: