Frank Rich: Dishonest, Reprehensible, Corrupt ...
Now that's what I call Truth in Advertising.
Posted on 11/27/2005 1:24:02 PM PST by summer
I guess that means no one here will miss him, but -- there are a lot of NYT readers who lurk on FR, of that I'm sure. And, now, there is no response to Frank Rich. I really think that's bad. The NYT needs to rethink its position on TimesSelect for its political columnists, if people are to be able to discuss and present different points of view in a national dialogue. Otherwise, the NYT contributes to the polarization.
Change his oil. Rotate his tires. Cheney's good for another 100,000 miles.
And, I realize most people here believe the NYT is just slime. But, the NYT keepiing CLAIMING it wants to be unbiased! And says it's going to expand its coverage of religion and regional matters. But, then, this. Not a good decision by the NYT.
Frank who????
I'm with you on that....if you change "sleepy" to "stupid".
Hmmmm.....
Frank Rich, a writer for the BS?NBT....
vs.
Dick Cheney, former Congressman, SecDef Iraq1, and 2 term VP.
What more does one need to know?
"Frank who?"
That's what I think as well. If you want a truly consistent leftist columnist, we can read Canada's Gwynne Dwyer or Britain's Robert Fisk and they are widely available. To this foreigner, we don't need yet another leftist but who writes at juvenile-level, even if the sentimental reason is "He is an American, so he must understand American politics better."
Dishonest, Reprehensible, Corrupt.
1) Dishonest - "I did not sleep with that Woman, Monica Lewinsky"
2) Reprehensible - is leaving a funeral joking it up with your buddies, then immediately going into "tear shed mode" within 2 seconds of spotting the cameras.
3) Corrupt - is selling the Lincoln Bedroom; is accepting campaign cash from illegal sources; is changing the export rules for big contributor Loral that enabled China to have nuclear weapons pointed at us to this day; is pardoning the husband of a large campaign contributor; is pardoning unrepentant FLN terrorists in the eve of 9/11
I'm not reading this article. But somehow I doubt there's anything nearly as damning against Cheney as against Bill Clinton. Probably just unfounded allegations, not items with actual evidence like the above.
That's a good point - maybe the NYT has inadvertedly widened the discussion with its TimesSelect, by forcing readers to look to international writers, published for free elsewhere, instead of NYT writers whose articles can not now be posted unless you pay.
Frank Rich: Dishonest, Reprehensible, Corrupt ...
Now that's what I call Truth in Advertising.
Readers are becomiong more discerning. Soon, the only columnists who will be making a living at it will be those who offer unique viewpoints spiced with wit and wisdom.
Which means Frank Rich is doomed. Doomed!
His medical problems will send him out to pasture.
LOL...you just did what Rich did in his column. Turned one's own words upside down. :)
The Times took its previously-influential columnists, especially Rich, Krugman and Dowd, completely out of the marketplace of ideas, cut their readership by 90%, and for all intents and purposes marginalized them.
Even liberals won't pay $50 a year to be lectured to by these Three Stooges, when there's plenty of other writers who get the same DNC talking points fax as these three, and write the same points into substantially similar columns. The only original bit any of them have ever done is MoDo's entertaining, "I can't get a date, therefore men hate intelligent women," perennial whine. And it's not entertaining in the way the poor spinster intends.
The real reason, though, I'd bet, is that Calame and Keller got tired of trying to get Krugman to correct his usual alternative facts.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Bingo to you, too! I think you're right. :)
Do you really think the NYT cares?
They want polarization.
They want Conservatives to become liberals.
They do not want discussion or responses.
If Cheney dies of a heart attack, I'm sure liberals will take credit for some satanic curse.
Their stockholders care.
They'll only put up with this juvenile journalism from their money-gushing baby boomer editorial staff for so long.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.