Old gray hag.
FGS, could someone please have mercy on us all and pull the plug at the NYT? A true mercy killing I could support.
You have to ask yourself, who would be stupid enough to advertize in the Times these days?
Will Shortz (the replacement for the real genius, Eugene Maleska) has the best daily crossword puzzle in the country. I do it everyday and it is holding my alzheimers at bay...IIRC (huh?).
That might happen after James Risen let the cat out of the bag on Katie Couric's little show the other day. His statements were more profoundly revealing than most have recognized. After listening to his defense of the leakers and his explanation of the "concerns" of the "Whistleblowers", it is clear that the motives of these individuals was policy differences not civil liberty concerns. In oher words...it's all about politics.
Risen's statements about the concerns of the bureaucrats and careerists within the executive branch pointedly betray the argument he makes; that their motives were pure. Bullshit! He revealed that his sources were responding to an administration that had the temerity to actually make policy decisions that they did not agree with.
Here is how Risen described the motives of the leakers;
"the checks and balances that normally keep American foreign policy and national security policy toward the center kind of broke down. You had more of a
radicalization, in which the career professionals were not really given a chance to forge a consensus within the administration. The principals: Rumsfeld, Cheney Tenet and Rice were meeting constantly, setting policy and never allowing the experts, the people who understand the region to have a say."
This statement by Risen indicates many things, among them that the career professionals with the executive branches, such as the Justice and State Departments, thought it was they, not the elected President of The United States, that should be deciding course and policy decisions within the Government.
Policy had been "radicalized", they were not allowed to "forge a consensus", "The principals: Rumsfeld, Cheney Tenet and Rice were meeting constantly", "never allowing the experts" to have a say. My God, imagine that, the highest elected officials in our government actually deciding a course that differed from those career leftwing bureaucrats who forged the failed policies that got us in this mess in the first place.
Risen has made a stupendously stupid admission and revealed the true motives of the "Whistleblowers". Their motives were borne of hubris and politics, not the law, and certainly not your civil liberties. They are in deep trouble and they should be.
Freegards,
PresidentFelon
Paper of record? More like paper of wreckage.
TU, LOL. But I agree.
Crab Wrapper
Oh, the old gray mare,
She ain't what she used to be,
Ain't what she used to be,
Oh, the old gray mare,
She ain't what she used to be,
Many long years ago
Many long years ago.
Actually, she's the same old hag but she's losing her ability shovel the BS on the masses and get away with it.
Not much time to take this one apart properly, but New York Times' Adam Cohen today holds bloggers up to ethical standards which, he argues, ought to equal the high...
Not much time to take this one apart properly, but New York Times' Adam Cohen today holds bloggers up to ethical standards which, he argues, ought to equal the high standards of those in the MSM.
While we agree with much of his thesis in general, one wonders if he ought to be throwing such stones from inside the Times' own fragile glass house.
This finger-wagging quote -- "Information should be verified before it is printed" -- amongst others, strikes one as more than just a tad ironic coming from the paper who allowed buckets of front page ink for Judith Miller to post un-verified information which helped march the world directly into a (so far) endless war.
Ms. Miller still works at -- and presumably collects a handsome salary from -- New York Times in the bargain. As she doesn't seem to have been held up to any particular set of ethics in the bargain, wouldn't Cohen's criticism be better directed homeward right about now?
Blogs, it seems, in Cohen's article are all tossed into the same ethically-challenged, non-journalistic barrel. All of us, apparently, require an "ethical upgrade" in Cohen's condescending opinion. True, we suppose, in as much as it would be appropriate for us to criticize the Times themselves for "reporting" done by super-market tabloids such as Weekly World News.
By way of example, here's just one graf from Cohen's piece:
The NYT is no longer the paper of record, and we haven't needed one for more than a decade.
What do you call 500 less New York Times employees?
...................A good Start!!!
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 20, 2005--The New York Times Company announced today that it plans to undertake staff reductions that will affect approximately 500 employees, about four percent of its total workforce. It plans to begin the staff reductions in October and implement them over the course of the next six to nine months.