New York Times altering quotes

I saw this and had to post it.

I hope that the New York Times begins to die a quick and painful death. When a newspaper begins altering quotes you know that they have a huge bias and that they are not a legitimate source for news anymore. The NYT has been for quite some time been nothing more than a giant editorial piece.

I now submit further evidence:

The New York Times took a breather yesterday from covering the Karl Rove pseudo-scandal to tout "The Evolution of Hillary Clinton" - a tribute to the ambitious Democrat's newfound voice of moderation.

Among the maneuvers cited by the Old Gray Lady was Mrs. Clinton's purported shift to the right on the hot-button issue of immigration.

Included in the evidence cited by the Times: Hillary's quote to WABC Radio's John Gambling on Feb. 11, 2003, wherein she proclaimed, "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigration."

The only problem is, Mrs. Clinton never spoke those words.

Apparently, the Times was offended by what she actually said, which was: "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants" - a quote first reported by NewsMax an hour after Clinton uttered it.

OK, so it's one word, big deal. Right?

Wrong.

The distinction is important, since, in the Times version, Mrs. Clinton is condemning the crime of illegal immigration, while in realty, what Hillary did was state her opposition to the immigrants themselves.

Moreover, the alteration is important because it is altering what is being presented as fact.

Tsk, tsk...the New York Times is proving more and more that there is a real media bias and they are the center of the deception.