The New York Times headline blared “They Died Shielding Their Baby in El Paso. Their Family’s Anguish Was Only Beginning.“
A few days after the shooting, baby Paul was dressed up and taken back to the hospital for a meeting with the president. Andre’s brother, Tito Anchondo, told NPR that Andre had been supportive of Mr. Trump; he said he wanted to sit down with the president and have a conversation face to face.
But after the White House released an image from the visit, Tito Anchondo said, his family was hounded with hate calls and messages. “This is what you voted for as a Trump supporter,” one commenter wrote in a social media post. “Your family is literally reaping what they’ve sowed.”
The Anchondo family has been mercilessly hounded by media and by angry Trump haters. This poor orphaned baby is being made into a terrible symbol.
What is wrong with the New York Times, covering this story as if they had no role in it?
The White House, and President Trump (being the man he is), didn’t scoop up a baby from a family that doesn’t support the president. The Anchondo family is hispanic and Republican. I realize that these two things are impossibly incompatible in the minds of New York-based newspaper editors and writers, but in El Paso, they do exist.
The Anchondos do hurt, grieve, and want to heal.
Andre and Jordan Anchondo were killed doing what all parents would do. They are “heroes” only through their love, which has nothing to do with politics. The NYT seems to claim that any president but Donald Trump can go to a city in shellshock from a mass shooting. They in fact blame Trump for the shooting, which is not journalism–it’s political hackery.
Instead of publishing lurid headlines and further harming the Anchondo family, why doesn’t the staff, editors, and writers of the New York Times give to help the family? (Here is the link to GoFundMe.)
Maybe they have. Now, leave the Anchondos alone.