If you had any doubt that the editors of The New York Times will say or do anything to further their leftist agenda, consider this. The Times says the following in today's editorial opinion:
Judge Alito's assertions that he will keep an open mind on Roe are little comfort. With nearly 70 percent of Americans saying in a recent Harris poll that they would oppose Judge Alito's confirmation if they thought he would vote against constitutional protection for abortion rights, he was not likely to say at his hearings that he would do so. Few nominees would be so brave or foolhardy.
This is a blatant misrepresentation of the Harris poll. Here is the poll question:
"If you thought that Judge Alito, if confirmed, would vote to make abortions illegal, would you favor or oppose his confirmation?"
There is no evidence that 70% of the American people oppose overruling Roe v. Wade, for that would merely return the issue to the states, many of which would continue to allow abortions. The Times makes it appear as though there are just two possibilities: (1) abortion is allowed by law everywhere and (2) abortion is prohibited by law everywhere. Perhaps if these were the only two choices (as the poll question makes it seem), 70% of Americans would support the former. But these are not the only two choices. Can you say "dishonest"? Can you say "the end justifies the means"?
Addendum: I'd like to thank Eugene Volokh for linking to this post. If you've never been here before, welcome. Take a look around and, if you like what you see, come back. Let me comment on Eugene's post. For a poll to be meaningful, it would have to list all of the possibilities, since it can't be assumed that respondents know what it means to "overrule Roe v. Wade." Probably many people think that overruling Roe means making abortion illegal at all stages of a pregnancy. There are three possibilities:
1. Abortion is prohibited in every state (a Human Life Amendment regime).
2. Abortion is allowed in every state, up to a certain point in a pregnancy (the Roe regime).
3. Each state decides how to deal with abortion (the overruled-Roe regime).
Wouldn't it be interesting to see where things break down, if people got to choose one of these three? I suspect no more than 30% of respondents would choose 2. My criticism of the Harris poll is that it ignored the third possibility. My criticism of The New York Times is that it relied on this flawed poll question to assert that 70% of respondents would choose 2 if all three choices were given. That's a non sequitur.