James Taranto calls out the New York Times' editorial board for hypocrisy in opposing the Supreme Court ruling in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion when compared to its support of the Kelo decision supporting eminent domain.
Taranto aptly cites the Times' "phony populism" in raising the specter of class warfare in their new opposition whereas they were possessed of no such scruples with regard to Kelo. Perhaps the fact that the paper "benefited from eminent domain in clearing the land for the new building it is constructing opposite the Port Authority Bus Terminal" explains the seeming contradiction.
The Times editorialists pose as class warriors against corporations, but in fact are selective and self-serving. Never get into a foxhole with the Old Gray Lady; you will find she is an unfaithful ally.