The New York Times is certainly free of any conservative voices in their opinion section





Just to be safe though they really should publish any and all pieces written by Republicans regardless of merit.

Ahhh David Brooks, the man behind Applebeesgate

I'm going to vote for the candidate with the heart-smart salad dressing slathered with bacon jimmies.

Psst, McCain Supporters...over here!

I'm a McCain supporter too. I don't know whether or not it was their intention, but the NYT actually did the McCain campaign a favor by calling for a rewrite of the editorial. It really wasn't written very well at all.

heh heh... i almost said in my comment how McCain's piece read like a 2nd grade version of a Bill Kristol piece. And i thought THAT guy was a horrible writer...

heh heh... i almost said in my comment how McCain's piece read like a 2nd grade version of a Bill Kristol piece. And i thought THAT guy was a horrible writer...

by far I hear much more blatant anti-Barack material broadcast that pro-Barack or anti-McCain. Take a look at how many hours a week is spent on radio blasting Barack. Rush, Savage, etc. and it's not just the network talk shows either, the local ones also spend hours, Carr, the dolts on WAAF in the morning, Peter Blute etc. I started a fun little game for my amusement driving in to work in the morning. I listen to Ex congressman, ex Massport hack, and all around dolt Peter Blute in the morning and see how long it takes him to attack Senator Obama, then I switch it off. So far about the furthest I've gotten from my house is 8 blocks.
The idea that the broadcast and cable airwaves are biased towards Barack is just total bullshit.

Savage , Rush , Hannity etc etc are NOT the media

By definition they are.

From the NYT:

If McCain is smart he will not write another draft and continue to play the bias card. People who care about such things could give a shit less what the NY Times thinks about the content or quality of it. The NY Times helped out McCain by doing this. It was one story that took away precious air time away from Barry's Excelent European Adventure. My guess is Obama advisors are pissed at the Times right now and will not say it.

Oh, shit. Gimme a second to catch my breath....

Hooo boy.

Then what are they? Fighters for truth, justice and the American Way?!!

Holy crap.

McCain's entire platform seems to have devolved into whining about Obama. Whining about the NYT not publishing his op-ed (because it was too whiny) is a good thing for McCain?

OK...

Dude looks more and more desparate (and confused) daily...

but isn't the NY Times a fairly conservative paper? there's no real bias there... also, if the editor says that the piece isn't up to snuff, what's the big deal? he didn't say he will never let mccain get ink, he just said that his piece wasn't really bringing any new content to the table. after reading what mccain submitted and how the editor handled the situation, i think mccain should do his re-write. the paper is doing him a (conservative) favor.

Copy!

I think the distinciton is the major networks and newspapers while having editorial content are supposed to report news primarily. I don't think Rush has a defined news segment. On principle the NY Times is supposed to be neutral in their news print and can shape their editorial content the way they see fit. However having about a dozen hard core liberals and two conservatives does seem to be a bit much. They do seem to have a penchant for placing good news about and for democrats on the top fold and bury the bad on page A19. The reverse seems to be true for Republicans. I must give them credit for doing a smash up job on helping Bush make his case for war.

If Michelle Malkin is a "reporter" and part of the media, like smcd said on this very board, then those guys must also be "the media".

You guys can't have it both ways

radio is definitely MEDIA. come on.

McCain does a very similar tour and no anchors of the major networks go. Obama does it and all 3 anchors travel to the countries and lead their broadcast from there. Patently ridiculous ball washing.

true. but one slip up and mccain gets to thumb his nose at the guy for the rest of this campaign. and you know everybody on the right is looking at this trip with a microscope trying to find that slip up. not such a good position for obama.

Ball washing? Or more interesting and newsworthy?

Seriously, McCain's tour reminds me of Bush Sr. when he was being interviewed by MTV and he was a crotchety old fart and came off looking out of step with America and the youth. While Clinton was hip and modern.

The NY Times is far from a conservative paper. The Wall Street Journal is. Times? Hardly.

So what's the problem? Who gives a shit if the liberal newspaper doesn't print EXACTLY the version of McInsane's diatribe that he submits?

Tell him to send it to his ball washing newsrag the WSJ.

All true but it was a trip he had to make. Foreign policy and the war are the only way McCain beats him. I think he is much smarter than Kerry handling these things but still think this is where he will get tripped up.

Because the "paper of record" and a major American newspaper is supposed to give the candidates for the presidental election equal thrift. Operative word being "supposed" to. The NY times left the reservation on this a long time ago.

This is like saying that a diet coke balances out a Super Size Wopper meal.

I could swear they asked him to edit it and submit a better version more in line with what type of piece they were looking for. Is it their fault he's a kooky old loon who yells at kids on his lawn??

such a douchebag.

They did no such thing (and I can't stand that rag).

They simply sad that this isn't a place to simply launch political attacks. If you wanna do what Obama did and lay out a your vision for your foreign policy you can.. and please please do, we'd love you to.

That's hardly, "McCain has to substantively be like Obama" and you know it.

Thing is MacCain has had perfect opportunities to take advantage of him being out of the country to attack him and he continues to flub up everything. Have you seen his new commercial blaming Obama for gas prices? People on all sides are making fun of him for that. How about saying that Iraq borders Pakistan? His job this week was supposed to talk economy to under cut Obama's foreign trip, instead he has been making flubs on both the economy AND Foreign policy (which is his main selling point). The running joke is that Obama should just come home now while he is ahead.

Is there news bias? Of course there is. He is a much more engaging character then McCain. Having him on TV sells ads, gets viewers etc. It's money people, not political bent. Now they are able to keep the story going further by discussing whether or not he is getting too much coverage. That should carry on for another 2 weeks until the Olympics. After that the conventions start. The news media is squeezing this for all it's worth. They have made more money and had more viewership in a time that is supposed to be the "down time" of the election. Of course they are going to stay with what people are going to watch.

As for the NYT thing. After reading what was sent back to the McCain camp for the re write, it made sense. They don't just publish whatever someone send them and it is always a practice to re write. The editor's suggestions made sense. He basically told McCain he was not publishing something that was the same old talking points that had been used for months. He wanted something fresh, something that expanded on what McCains own policies would be under specific situations etc. That is what the meant by making it more like Obama's piece. When his piece was printed it laid out completely new plans and solutions that had yet to enter his stump. They were giving the McCain camp a chance to hit back with substance (which they claim is Obama's fault, no substance).

Since when?

So now defining how what you said in the past (which was right) vs. what your political opponent said (which was wrong) is a political attack? Defining how you would go about things going forward against what your opponent says is an attack Wow you really eat the horseshit with two heaping spoons.

well, their op-ed pages seem to be equal opportunity...

That is what my journalism professors taught me. In the real world it is bullshit. So.... exactly bra exactly.

It this case... apparently not.


And as far as their staffing not so much either.

The NY Times employs a dozen clearly liberal editorial writers and 2 conservatives.

Is it at all possible that the article McCain submitted just plain wasn't very good, and would have made both the paper and McCain himself look terrible by printing it?

Because from all accounts - this is what the truth was. It was poorly written.

It is not a news editors job to tell a candidate for president of the united states what his positions should be and how he should present them.

Yes. ALL accounts. I see.

When it pertains to editorials being printed in said Editor's newspaper - it most certainly is.

all except yours.

It was not under they by line of one of his employee's.

All editorials printed in any newspaper are done so at the editor's discretion.


This is such a non-story, it isn't even funny.

So you're for reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, then, whereby radio stations couldn't broadcast nothing but Limbaugh and Savage types, but would have to allow for opposing points of view?

I'm sure in your head this is intelligible, but it isn't to the rest of us.

I'm also sure you'd want the government to control the editorial pages of newspapers so that they're "fair".

I gotta say man, for someone who paid such close attention in that supposed journalism class you must have slept in the day they described what a newspaper editor does.

i didnt read any of this thread
but maybe its just a
"havent you people done enough to this country already?" thing

Whatever "equal thrift" means, it has never been the policy of any American paper to accept drafts of anything no questions asked/no revisions asked for.

I know you like making your partisan points lest ye die of ennui or some shit, but you're engaging in an amazing stretch here.

McCain challenged Obama to do a tour like this. McCain's only hope of winning this election is if Obama fails this (foreign policy related) test.

It is huge news, not insignificantly because of McCain's own bluster.

McCain has emphasized Obama as much as anyone. Almost all the news McCain makes these days is Obama-centric.

Shemp's rather brilliant comment was that NYT only prints articles they "agree" with.

An overwhelming liberal bias in the media is a rather tenuous argument to make and those that do seem to be of the position that the media should only exist to cheerlead Republicans.

It's a news editor's job to decide how things will be presented in the paper.