Times censors Dodd's defense of Constitution, rejection of retroactive immunity for telcos
[Welcome, acolytes of the famously lingeried one. But move along! Move along! There's no story here.]
Gosh, how odd. Or not.
Because you'd think this story has everything: Dodd, alone among the Democrats, stands up to a Bipartisan juggernaut to grant the telcos retroactive immunity for massive lawbreaking--a story the Times itself broke--by saying he'll put a hold on the bill. Reid, the Senate [cough] leader, says he'll ignore the hold. Dodd raises the ante, says he'll [gasp] filibuster. Biden joins in. Hillary and Obama waver on the sidelines.
We've got the Jimmy Stewart figure, standing alone against great odds. We've got dissension in the Democratic caucus. We've got craven politicians. We've got bags of corporate cash.
In short, we've got a rich, compelling narrative, filled with drama, human failings, and high principle.
And if all that's not enough, Dodd's from the Time's circulation catchment: Connecticut. What, the locals aren't interested in their Senator?
So, you'd think the Times would be all over this; or at least give it a paragraph in the Week in Review.
But n-o-o-o-o-o-o-o! I wonder why not?
Could it be the subject matter?
Could it be that the Bill "Helen" Keller's newsroom just doesn't care about Constitutional government?
Or perhaps doesn't even understand it?
NOTE The Week in Review does, however, find space (2/15 of the page) for the distant genetic relationship between Shooter and Obama. Sigh.
You can reach the Times Public editor here.