The New York Times has been many things over the years: a paragon of journalistic integrity, a beacon of investigative prowess, and, more recently, a master of the hyperbolic masquerade. In their latest editorial spectacle, the Times has called on President Joe Biden to step aside following his “performance” in the first presidential debate of 2024. They couch this call in faux-patriotic language, urging Biden to “serve his country” by leaving the race. The gall, the chutzpah, the sheer audacity of it all! As a seasoned observer of American politics and a former congressional staffer, I must say: The Times has outdone itself in the theater of the absurd.
The Times’ Self-Serving Sideshow
To anyone paying even the slightest attention, the Times’ call for Biden to step aside is more than a little self-serving. Since Biden first took office, the Gray Lady has been anything but gracious. The Times has harbored a simmering grudge ever since Biden refused to grant them a sit-down interview, an interview they felt entitled to as if the presidential seat comes with a mandatory chit-chat clause for the benefit of their editorial board.
This grudge has manifested in a series of critical articles that have barely masked their disdain. So, when the Times wraps their plea for Biden to bow out in a red, white, and blue bunting, claiming it’s for the good of the nation, one can’t help but laugh at the hollow patriotism. The English writer Samuel Johnson stated that patriotism is the scoundrel’s last refuge. And what scoundrels the Times editorial board have revealed themselves to be!
The Debate Performance That Wasn’t
I concede Biden’s “performance” at the debate was not his best. But was it the disaster the Times paints it to be? Hardly. The president did not faint, spontaneously combust, or confess to being an alien from Mars. He was, admittedly, not at his sharpest, but neither was he the doddering old fool the Times would have you believe.
The absolute disgrace here is the Times’ response, which was beneath the dignity of one of the nation’s premier newspapers. They pounced on Biden with all the subtlety of a jackal eyeing a carcass, ignoring that presidential debates are often less about policy discourse and theatrical one-upmanship. Instead of offering constructive criticism or even a modicum of support, they threw Biden under the proverbial bus, and for what? To satiate their bruised ego over a spurned interview request?
My Lifelong Disgust
My disgust at the Times is no passing bit of anger. It’s a deeply rooted disappointment cultivated over years of reading the paper since childhood. I remember when the New York Times stood for something more than clickbait headlines and vendettas. As a young politico, I devoured their pages, hungry for insightful analysis and investigative reporting that seemed to flow effortlessly from their presses. But that was then.
Today, the Times has become a shadow of its former self, more interested in sensationalism and self-righteous posturing than in the hard work of journalism. Their call for Biden to step aside is just the latest in a long line of editorial missteps, each one more embarrassing than the last.
A Missing Condemnation
To add insult to injury, the Times has yet to issue a blanket condemnation of the Republican Party for its affiliation with Donald Trump. Instead, they offer a nuanced view of specific events and trends within the party. Nuanced? Really? The GOP is the same party that has, time and again, bent over backward to accommodate Trump’s every whim and fancy, including normalizing his felony convictions and civil judgments for sexual assault and defamation. From election denial to insurrectionist behavior, the GOP’s obeisance to Trump is as clear as day; it is now the Party of Trump. Yet the Times remains oddly circumspect, criticizing the party piecemeal rather than delivering the full-throated rebuke that is so clearly warranted.
The Forgotten Lessons of History
As one of the nation’s signature newspapers, the Times seems to have lost its historical memory. Let’s stroll down memory lane to the 1948 presidential election. On election night, Harry Truman went to bed with everyone telling him he would surely lose to Thomas Dewey, who, like Trump, appeared to be the media’s darling for the amount of copy he helped to generate. The following day, Truman awoke to the news that he had defeated Dewey.
In its infinite wisdom, The Times appears to have forgotten this lesson. Instead of channeling the spirit of “Give ’em hell, Harry!” and offering constructive suggestions on what Biden needs to do to defeat Trump, they see this as a hair-on-fire moment, urging Biden to throw in the towel. It’s as if they’ve learned nothing from history, preferring instead to repeat past mistakes with a kind of willful ignorance that would be amusing if it weren’t so tragic.
Conclusion: Give Him Hell, Joe!
In conclusion, I say to the New York Times: Shame on you. Shame on you for your self-serving editorializing, your hollow patriotism, and your failure to stand by a president who, despite his flaws, has done more to restore dignity to the office than his predecessor ever did — or would. Shame on you for failing to recognize this election’s stakes and for your shortsightedness in calling on Biden to step aside.
To President Biden, I say: Give ’em hell, Joe. Don’t let the naysayers and the fair-weather patriots get you down. You have a country to lead and a fight to win. The Times may have lost its way, but the American people are counting on you. So, stand tall, keep fighting, and show them all what true leadership looks like.
It seems the New York Times has forgotten the lessons of history and the true meaning of patriotism. They’ve chosen to side with sensationalism over substance, and in doing so, they’ve lost the respect of this lifelong reader. But all is not lost. There’s still time for the Times to redeem itself (endorsement time is coming soon), to remember its roots, and to become the paper of record once again that it once was. Until then, we’ll be here, watching, waiting, and hoping for a return to sanity.
And to the Times editorial board, I have one final thing to say: good night and good luck. You’re going to need it.
~Dunneagin~