The New York Times wrote the following ridiculous paragraph in an article about Robert F. Kennedy:
“Mr. Kennedy has singled out Froot Loops as an example of a product with too many artificial ingredients, questioning why the Canadian version has fewer than the U.S. version. But he was wrong. The ingredient list is roughly the same, although Canada’s has natural colorings made from blueberries and carrots while the U.S. product contains red dye 40, yellow 5 and blue 1 as well as Butylated hydroxytoluene, or BHT, a lab-made chemical that is used ‘for freshness,’ according to the ingredient label.”
The Times claims that the ingredient list is roughly the same, while in the very same sentence listing four substantial differences in the ingredient list.
It’s like Mary Lincoln telling someone that she mostly enjoyed watching “Our American Cousin,” except for the minor detail of her husband being shot in the head by John Wilkes Booth.
How can the Times not see that it is directly contradicting itself in a single sentence?
“But he was wrong,” the Times pompously boasts. Not seeing the fact that they are proving Kennedy right with their very next sentence, in which they list the artificial ingredients in Froot Loops.
As Brad Cohn points out: “As you see, the ingredient list is just completely identical, except the US product contains formaldehyde, cyanide, and nearly undetectable levels of saxitoxin.”
The New York Times is pathetic, both for their contemptuous tone and for their complete lack of logic.
Source: DC Draino / Being Libertarian