New York Times Endorses Clinton and McCain, Slams Rudy

Yawn 1, yawn 2. I know this is a big endorsement for the two candidates, but surprising? No.

First, McCain, who has picked up steam (and money, raising $7 million this month); the NYT takes a swipe at the lunatic professional "Christian" set and warmongering neo-cons that have done a fabulous job of taking the country down a dark moral path:
We have strong disagreements with all the Republicans running for president. The leading candidates have no plan for getting American troops out of Iraq. They are too wedded to discredited economic theories and unwilling even now to break with the legacy of President Bush. We disagree with them strongly on what makes a good Supreme Court justice.
Still, there is a choice to be made, and it is an easy one. Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe. With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field.
...Mr. McCain was one of the first prominent Republicans to point out how badly the war in Iraq was being managed. We wish he could now see as clearly past the temporary victories produced by Mr. Bush's unsustainable escalation, which have not led to any change in Iraq's murderous political calculus. At the least, he owes Americans a real idea of how he would win this war, which he says he can do. We disagree on issues like reproductive rights and gay marriage.
Gee, how could the NYT overlook the incredible performances of McCain last year, trying to prop up administration policy, like the infamous high-security Baghdad market excursion? What about his courting of the Creationist vote and unsuccessful, fawning courting of Daddy D, or his mind-boggling ignorant statements about HIV transmission and prevention. What it tells you is that the GOP field is so weak, so full of empty suits, theocrats or sure-fire losers, that it was slim pickins.

My favorite part of the endorsement, however, is the absolute blast Rudy Giuliani receives. The NYT could have continued its lovefest with the Tool, but it shot a Taser into the former NY mayor:
ACLU By ACLUSponsored

Imagine you've forgotten once again the difference between a gorilla and a chimpanzee, so you do a quick Google image search of “gorilla." But instead of finding images of adorable animals, photos of a Black couple pop up.

Is this just a glitch in the algorithm? Or, is Google an ad company, not an information company, that's replicating the discrimination of the world it operates in? How can this discrimination be addressed and who is accountable for it?

“These platforms are encoded with racism," says UCLA professor and best-selling author of Algorithms of Oppression, Dr. Safiya Noble. “The logic is racist and sexist because it would allow for these kinds of false, misleading, kinds of results to come to the fore…There are unfortunately thousands of examples now of harm that comes from algorithmic discrimination."

On At Liberty this week, Dr. Noble joined us to discuss what she calls “algorithmic oppression," and what needs to be done to end this kind of bias and dismantle systemic racism in software, predictive analytics, search platforms, surveillance systems, and other technologies.

What you can do:
Take the pledge: Systemic Equality Agenda
Sign up