Hopeless bias against Sarah Palin

Michael Goodwin:

Palin Derangement Syndrome strikes again. The victim this time is dangerously contagious.

In a bombshell announcement, New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller publicly confessed his sickness. OK, he didn't put it exactly that way, but you don't have to be a doctor to recognize the symptoms. Here's how he started a column in the Times Magazine:

"If the 2012 election were held in the newsrooms of America and pitted Sarah Palin against Barack Obama, I doubt Palin would get 10 percent of the vote. However tempting the newsworthy havoc of a Palin presidency, I'm pretty sure most journalists would recoil in horror from the idea."

It's a paragraph worth parsing. First comes the backhanded admission that the "newsrooms of America" are overwhelmingly liberal. The 90 percent Obama vote Keller cites is consistent with surveys showing the vast majority of journalists tilt left, a fact that explains the warped coverage of government, culture, business and even sports in most major news organizations.
His second sentence condescendingly reveals Keller's agreement with the journalistic "horror" of the "havoc of a Palin presidency."

That's a huge mistake. As the supposed objective editor of the Times' news pages, he is giving license to his staff to go after Palin and, by inference, go easy on Obama. His not-so-subtle marching order is certain to find favor with ambitious reporters and editors hoping to please the boss.

...

There is more.

Sarah Palin is a mainstream conservative. Her positions on the issues are not that different from most conservatives. So what the Times is doing is hitting her as a means of slandering all conservatives. It is also clear that she is some one liberals fear the most because she will not be cowed by them into accepting liberalism. The frenzy over the emails was seen as another opportunity to destroy her politically. It did not work, but they are not going to leave her alone as long as she is a viable candidate which she still is.