The New York Times wants you to think that Marjorie Taylor Greene is politically savvy - LGBTQ Nation
www.lgbtqnation.com
A long profile of Greene downplays her outrageous behavior, presenting her instead as a "shrewd" observer of D.C.

In a surprisingly flattering profile in The New York Times, Marjorie Taylor Greene portrays herself as a political naif who actually believed Donald Trump’s campaign promises and suffered death threats once she broke with the president.

The article softens Greene’s image by omitting some of her most outrageous behavior. The story mentions that she “harassed 18-year-of gun activist David Hogg on the street,” without mentioning that Hogg was himself the survivor of a mass shooting at his high school. There’s no word about Greene calling Hogg “little Hitler” or about the time Greene kicked another teen activist. Nor is there any mention of Greene’s suggestion that Paul Pelosi, husband of then-speaker Nancy Pelosi, knew the man who assaulted him in his home, a homophobic lie circulated by the right.

None of Greene’s actions are presented as beyond the pale. Instead reporter Robert Draper characterizes her in far gentler terms than Greene’s behavior would admit: “Greene did harbor a genuine conspiratorial streak, often even wondering if this or that person wore a wire. But she was also becoming an increasingly shrewd and acerbic observer of life on Capitol Hill.”

    • James R Kirk@startrek.websiteEnglish
      5·
      13 hours ago

      While I am no fan of the Times and absolutely don’t think that she deserves a big splashy feature on their front page, it truly wasn’t a puff piece and definitely not sanewashing. Here are a few examples:

      “Robert,” she replied with a searching look, “do you really think Joe Biden got 81 million votes without even campaigning?” “Yes,” I said. “They counted all the votes. That was the final tally. Why wouldn’t I believe it?” The look she then gave me, which I will never forget, was one of bottomless pity.

      And

      Just outside the front door of her office stood the familiar placard blaring, “There are TWO genders: MALE & FEMALE.”

      And

      Trump, she claims, was bothered by her steadfast opposition to abortion, which she has called “murder.”

      And

      […]she continued to characterize Trump’s Democratic opponents, and their positions, in the direst of terms: “radical communist Kamala Harris,” “the perverted trans agenda against children that is an attack directly on God’s creation,” “the party of pedophiles.”

      As the article OP posted said, she has said many other even more batshit things that should not be forgotten but that’s not really what the Times piece was about (it was about her fight with Trump).

      • biggerBear@lemmynsfw.com
        1·
        1 hour ago

        Reporting only the sane thoughts of someone who literally believes that Jewish space lasers are to blame for forest fires is not journalism.

      • Bakkoda@lemmy.zip
        5·
        14 hours ago

        Carefully edited transcripts, ignoring her past and pretending like she’s been playing the long game is fiction. It’s not censorship, it’s fiction. Honestly this isn’t that hard a take to figure out. Stir shit elsewhere.

      • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        4·
        13 hours ago

        The story mentions that she “harassed 18-year-of gun activist David Hogg on the street,” without mentioning that Hogg was himself the survivor of a mass shooting at his high school.

        Pretty clear sane washing, but Imma assume you can’t read it anyway.

      • Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        13·
        20 hours ago

        Leaving out the more extreme 2/3 of her actions when contextualizing while choosing to report what she is currently saying so she can construct a new image of herself to the voting public is “sanewashing”, yes. The complaint wasn’t about what the times did say (censorship), but what they didn’t.