The liberal media developed a ridiculous a story about how Republicans were avoiding the anniversary celebration in Selma, and the New York Times dutifully obliged by cropping former President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush from a front page photo.

Tens of thousands of people gathered in Selma this past weekend to solemnly mark the 50-year anniversary of the 1965 “Bloody Sunday” march.  The violent confrontation which resulted from that march decades ago would lead to the passage of the Voting Rights Act.

The Washington Post published a column in which they contended or at least insinuated that no Republicans were heading to Selma to commemorate the event – because of course, racism!

But as Kemberlee Kaye of Legal Insurrection notes, “Members of both political parties descended upon Selma, Alabama” this weekend.

Trending: Pelosi Warns - The World Will End If Trump Wins

Kaye added, “Partisan politics were shelved as members of Congress were unified in remembering the sacrifice of those who marched for freedom.

The New York Times however, went well out of their way to convey the message that Republicans weren’t in attendance, cropping George and Laura Bush out of their front page photo of the march.

Here’s an original with the Bush’s on the right …



And here is what the Times ran with on their front page:



Tim Graham of NewsBusters points out that the Bush family did manage to at least make the report – ten paragraphs in.

The online story by Peter Baker and Richard Fausset doesn’t have column-inch limitations, but its photo, too, excludes the Bushes. They did make the story after ten paragraphs:

Joining Mr. Obama on Saturday was former President George W. Bush, who signed the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act in 2006, as well as more than 100 members of Congress. About two dozen of them were Republicans, including the House majority leader, Kevin McCarthy of California. While sitting onstage, Mr. Bush made no remarks, but rose to his feet to applaud Mr. Obama, and the two men hugged afterward.

In a media age in which a significant number of people get their news by scanning headlines, it’s certainly no accident that the Times managed to bury any mention of the former President and First Lady deep into their coverage.