The New York Times headline for June 16, 2007 proclaimed, “Cost of Gas (sic) and Food Rose Sharply Last Month.”

The article by Jeremy W. Peters went on to report that the core rate of inflation, which excludes food and energy prices, was up just 0.1 percent during the month of May, while the overall rate of inflation, including food and energy, was up 0.7 percent.

Peters tells us, “Prices for staple household purchases like gasoline and food rose to even higher levels (in May), effectively causing most Americans to take a pay cut. After taking inflation into account, the average weekly earnings for workers in non-management jobs – some 80 percent of the work force – fell for the second consecutive month in May.”

This, of course, is good news for Democrats because they get to play the class warfare card one more time, and it gives them an excuse to look for new ways to scuttle a healthy and growing economy while a Republican president sits in the White House. It’s bad news for Republicans because, no matter what caused the spike in the overall rate of inflation, George W. Bush still hasn’t figured out after 6˝ years in office that he must occasionally play the role of truth-teller for the people.

Peters goes on to report that, “Gas (sic) prices jumped 10.5 percent last month, compared with an increase of 4.7 percent in April. Food prices rose 0.3 percent but are up sharply so far this year. Beef prices have risen 5.1 percent, poultry prices 4.3 percent, and pork prices 3.4 percent.”

It was the perfect opportunity for Peters and the Times editors to unload a bit of reality on their readers, but to do so would have done serious damage to Democrat plans for a pointless and demagogic energy policy and the Times just couldn’t let that happen. In other words, if the news helps Democrats and hurts Republicans it’s “fit to print,” but if the news tends to hurt Democrats and help Republicans… well, check the small entry at the bottom of page 37.

If Peters had been interested in providing his readers with some really useful information, he would have explained that, a) we’ve only seen the beginning of food price escalation, and that

b) we can look forward to a major increase in Third World famine… and all because of the push by liberals and radical environmentalists to dedicate more and more land to ethanol production. (One study in Great Britain found that, to replace just 5% of their fuel supply with bio-ethanol, would require the commitment of 20% of the country’s arable land to ethanol feedstock production.)

So, for those liberals who can’t make the connection, it would have been extremely helpful if Peters had explained that cattle, hogs, and chickens eat a lot of corn… grain that will be in increasingly short supply as farmers rush to cash in on the coming ethanol bonanza.

And while he was on the subject, and although it has little to do with price inflation, he could have provided a great service to his readers by pointing out that:

What all of this means is that, without taxpayer subsidies, ethanol can never be economically competitive with gasoline, it is far less efficient than gasoline as an engine fuel, and each gallon of the stuff contains more hidden taxes than a Democrat Party platform.

So, if the American people learn nothing else during this year, let’s hope that they at least come to understand that ethanol as an alternative fuel is the biggest hoax perpetrated on the American people since 1938 when Orson Welles convinced his radio audience that Martians had landed in New Jersey.