Franken claims that “to show just how much the media elite hates Christians,” Ann Coulter attributed certain anti-Christian statements to The New York Times. Franken argues that the Times was not actually saying those things–they were quoting other people and doing book reviews.
Of course, Coulter never claimed anyone should credit the Times with those statements. Her statement that the Times “had allowed loose associations between Nazis and Christians to be made in its pages,” means just that. Instead of taking a stand against the anti-Christian associations, the Times afforded dignity to them—thereby allowing each association to be “made in its pages”.
The New York Times dignified such statements as, “Did the Nazi crimes draw on Christian tradition?” and “the Church is co-responsible for the holocaust….” even if it did not endorse them.
Franken seems to defend the actions of the paper however, arguing that other views were also represented. In other words, he thinks the associations were reasonable and well enough balanced out with other things. All of which only confirms the claim Coulter made: The Times allowed the associations to be made in its pages.