I had to sort of hunt this morning to find any coverage of Rand Paul’s historic filibuster in the NY Times. I can just imagine that if it were Chuck Schumer talking about abuses of power by the Bush administration, it would be front and center.
I’m sure their strategy is not to do anything to undermine the view that Senator Paul is just some libertarian nutcase with no influence in his party or in the nation. Giving him coverage would just make him look heroic, and we couldn’t have that could we? To her credit, the ever-funny Gail Collins had some marginally positive comments about the filibuster (even though it was couched within a condemnation of Mitch McConnell and full of negative barbs against Paul).
What we do have on the front page of the “paper of record” is limits on abortions in Arkansas, more post-Chaves news from Venezuela, a charity taking on the evil gun lobby, bad behavior by the Syrian rebels, employers unwilling to hire people even though they have lots of good candidates, and–get this–a story about how Brennan’s chief job in the CIA will be confronting the CIA interrogations of the past (read: Bush really was evil after all).
Why am I not surprised?