I have to say that some of the attacks on the New York Times are entertaining. (I can't be too emotionally invested in that paper since I'm too pissed off about what the Tribune Co. and Sam Zell has done to the Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times.)<br><br>It seems that the default position of people with any axe to grind is to simply attack the New York Times. It's not that the Times (or more specifically Judith Miller) hasn't deserved an awful lot of condemnation for their cheerleading of the Iraq War. They certainly betrayed their readership by pimping their news coverage for access and I do mean "pimping" in the most sexually explicit way.<br><br>Speaking of sex... that's what makes this whole dustup with McCain so entertaining. The thing is... I don't entirely think anyone cares what Republican is having sex with whom just so long as it's not a congressional page or in an airport bathroom. Hell, McCain is someone's grandpa. The very thought of him having sex under any circumstance is somewhere on the hilarious side of creepy to begin with.<br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U
From Andrew Sullivan's site:<br><br>"... the NYT must have more than they’re publishing at this point. This article wasn’t some rush job – they’ve been mulling it for months. More to the point, they knew exactly the type of conservative firestorm that the article would produce.<br>It’s hard to imagine the NYT (after institutional deliberation) going forward with such an explosive article with such a thin foundation. In this respect, the sheer recklessness is, in a weird way, perhaps the most frightening thing for the McCain campaign. Maybe the paper has the goods and is trying to tie down one loose end or something. Who knows. They’ve either got the goods or it’s one of the stupidest things in the history of journalism. "<br><br>
my buddy who is connected pretty much said the same thing as Sullivan yesterday. he knows there are more goods on McCain in the not too distant past, but the Times didn't go as far as he thought they'd go. i think there will be a part 2 and that they couldn't wait any longer since a high profile magazine was about to run with their version of the story. the Times didn't want to be scooped on their own scoop. but the story isn't done . . .<br><br>
so Who ever leaked this info to the Times... who do they think will get the GOP nomination if McCain goes down?<br><br>I mean isn't it very likely this was leaked by an untra-conservative because they abhor John's record of sometimes offering a bipartisan solution to problems and that he's criticized GW Bush too often?<br><br>If it were a Dem who had this info, wouldn't they wait until October to drop the "bomb"?<br><br>Sadly John has been swifted more than once... he was by the Bushies in 2000 in the primaries... interesting how the far right will kill their own for their extreme ideology.<br><br>I hope he survives the crisis and gets the nod...<br><br>David (OFI)
McCain has known about this NYTs story for two months and he's spent big bucks lawyering it up. Don't you think he's had plenty of time to rehearse today's statement a thousand times in his head? There's got to be a boatload more that will be revealed ... follow the money. <br><br><br>Today I heard one GOP pundit suggest this was done to get the Michelle Obama "scandal" off the headlines <br><br><br><br><br><br>
it's just a report on what a politician (representing the public trust) who bills himself as he does (anti-lobbyist) has been said by his own staff to have caused some of them concern --one was NOT anonymous-- or the appearance of hypocrisy. what any one does with that info --investigate it, don't investigate it, attack the reporter-- is of no consequence to a journalist/reporter who's job it is to report it to the public.<br><br>my .02<br><br>"if you wish to fear nothing, consider that everything is to be feared." <br><br>[color:red]Libertarian Communist</font color=red>
as i suggested, i believe Mccaine knew it was coming (of course he did, he had a chance to respond before it was published): if Mccaine was any kind of straight shooter (he isn't, he's a pathetic bully) he would have personally broke this story long ago.<br><br>(an innocent man yells it from mountain top at first hint. a repentant guilty man would broach it head on.)<br><br>"if you wish to fear nothing, consider that everything is to be feared." <br><br>[color:red]Libertarian Communist</font color=red>
Loc: Syracuse, NY
And McCain and the rest of the GOP dolts should have known that the endorsement from the NY Times was the kiss of death. Idiots. The MSM know that McCain is the crazy uncle in the cellar. <br><br>I'm actually pining for Hillary right about now. <br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.