NYT: Conservatives Pimping Hillary-hostaet Book... Except We're Not

Kaus digests an article that annoyed the hell out of me when I read it last night.

This NYT hack claims that conservatives are promoting the new Edward Klein anti-Hillary book, the one containing the ridiculous claim about Clinton raping his wife.

True enough, you can order it through conservative book clubs, in the "anit-Clinton" section, as you would expect. But you can also order it through Amazon and PriceOwl.

In fact, the rape claim contained in the book immediately caused most conservatives to dismiss it as trash.

How biased is the New York Times? Well, let me put it this way: even liberal super-hack Joe Conason acknoweldges that conservatives are treating it as embarassing and not fit for discussion:

Indeed, the instant revulsion of publications and writers not necessarily known for elevated standards indicates just how terrible Mr. Klein’s book is—and how irresponsible Penguin Group was to publish it. The Drudge Report’s disclosure of the rape charge sent nauseous waves through the right-wing blogosphere.

"This is sick, people," cried a blogger at Redstate.org. "I have had just about enough of these so-called ‘insider’ true stories that are really nothing more than smear jobs, regardless of the target," said another Republican blogger, whose complaint echoed many more.

Even Page Six, the New York Post’s Clinton-bashing gossip column, derided the book as a "hostaet-job" and the author as "error-prone." The tabloid mocked Mr. Klein for identifying a happily married former classmate as Mrs. Clinton’s rumored lesbian lover. He never spoke with this lady—who denied the smear to the Post—and he repeatedly misspells her surname, which he evidently copied from another book. The New York Times management must cringe whenever Mr. Klein’s former employment there is cited as his main journalistic credential.

So, conservative bloggers are revolted by the idiotic slander, the conservative tabloid New York Post dismisses it as an amateurish smear, and even Smokin' Joe Conason acknowledges this.

But not the New York Times. Oh, no. As far as their liberal-cocooned Upper West Side audience is concerned, we're "promoting" the Dickens out of it.

posted by Ace at 04:28 PM

| Access Comments