[PJ-Comix]

It's Friday which means the latest edition of NewsBusted is up and running.

[PJ-Comix]

PING!

[bmwcyle]

What can the DEMS say? They defended this type of behavior and told us it had nothing to do with work.

[Mercat]

4?

[SoDak]

5?

[mainerforglobalwarming]

The NYT is pravada without the sophistication. I actually wish conservative leaders would call the NYT a tabloid everytime they’re asked about it on a tv show. Hold it up next to the Star or Enquirer. Although that would be an insult to those fine publications.

[Charles Henrickson]

All the News That Fits Our Bias

[jiggyboy]

My question is DOES IT HAVE THE EVIDENCE I.E. MORE EVIDENCE than it has given in its article to support what it writes?

The last IV drip for a "case" that has no foundation whatsoever. If the Duke Lacross Team had a nickel for every time Nancy Grace expressed the certitude that Michael Nifong did have more evidence, they'd own Duke itself. Oh wait, that's right, pretty soon they will.

[Charles Henrickson]

Lots of people will be asking why now? but my first question upon reading the story was different: why endorse?

Cue the Foundations:

Why do you build me up
Buttercup baby
Just to let me down
And mess me around . . .

[Old Sarge]

This really looks like the New York Times is manipulating the timing of news to change the outcome of elections.

YA THINK???

[Charles Henrickson]

there's one person who would have known about . . . today's story, and who read and approved the paper's endorsements-- or should have. That is Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., the publisher.

Cue Walt Garrison:

"Just a Pinch between your News and Editorial. . . ."

[Charles Henrickson]

is to ask, at a minimum, what Arthur thought he was doing.

The Art of the Dull.

[Charles Henrickson]

According to the McCain camp, the "why now?" question is answered. . . .

In the Pinch camp, the "why not?" question is never asked.

[Poser]

“[That evidence will be delivered by the Great Pumpkin.]”

In 24 business hours!

[muawiyah]

There was an incredibly stupid story floating around several years back about these two gay guys in China who adopted a child.

One of the guys, the "father", was white and the "mother" was Chinese.

Anyway, the "mother" supposedly was able to keep her gender (male) secret from the "father" for several years, and even tricked him into believing he (she) had been pregnant.

It was a totally BS piece of work but it gave us an insight into what a certain crowd of full-bore drag-queens think goes on in the world. For them it's all "image" and "what could be".

In reality there's no way such things can really be kept secret, but the gay crowd pushing that story all pretended it could be.

This story about McCain is a similar psycho-sexual drama fantasized by a gay publisher (Sulzburger) about a powerful man he would like to get to know better himself.

That a story like this can get past the editors and writers at the NYT demonstrates that they all fear for their economic security too much to speak out against such baloney.

The NYT is dead.

[sauropod]

Pinch has run the old grey lady right into the ground, support hose and all.

[Charles Henrickson]

the Times has only anonymous sources. . . .

Their names can now be revealed: Jayson Blair and Mary Mapes.

[Charles Henrickson]

This story now is beginning to remind me of the Dan Rather story. . . .

Fake but accurate.

(BTW, Dan is deeply saddened over his buddy Fidel's resignation.)

[Charles Henrickson]

I think substance is missing from the NYT article.

It's like a Barack Obama speech.

[Charles Henrickson]

Where's the beef for such an important story!

We'll get Jason Leopold of BackGroundBeefing.org on this right away.

[Charles Henrickson]

The "New York Times" has less authenticity than a suburban weekly.

It's sub-suburban.