That should read:
But rarely if ever has a single news organization mounted such a public campaign against any White House.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Posted on 06/28/2006 4:52:44 AM PDT by teddyballgame
But rarely if ever has any White House mounted such a sustained public campaign against a single news organization. And a vast array of pundits on the right have responded by escalating their rhetoric.
Heather MacDonald, writing in the Weekly Standard, called the Times "a national security threat" that is "drunk" on its own power.
William Bennett, the former Reagan administration official and conservative radio host, said the "cumulative impact" of both Times stories, and The Post's disclosure of secret CIA prisons overseas, had brought the situation to a "critical mass." Conservatives, he said, now wonder: "Gosh, is there a secret operation we're running that won't be disclosed by the press?"
Bennett favors prosecuting journalists in national security cases, but believes that bringing espionage charges is not the best approach. He favors a leak investigation.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
New York Times editors need to be arrested and charged with espionage. The lowliest freelancer doesn't have to go begging to the New York Times not to steal his writings... The law stands with him. If the Times publishes his stuff, he can sue. There's case law surrounding the process of publishing. The State needs to create new case law that deals with publishing State secrets. The way that's done is by our court system. And the start of that has to be an arrest. Where is the FBI?
That should read:
But rarely if ever has a single news organization mounted such a public campaign against any White House.
~~~~~~~~~~~
The thing with the Times has become critical. Either the Times has to get hurt or the Bush administration and the republican party will be badly hurt, one or the other. They (republicans) cannot choose to sit back and ignore this one at this juncture.
I can only hope that every time the NY Times leaks a secret program, a trap is sprung for some CIA mole such as Mary McCarthy.
And of course, who can forget the heinous mrs. slick willie remarking that the internet needed to be 'controlled'......(was that her exact word, I can't recall)
I can tell you where they were a number of years ago!
They had ME on a rotisseri when I was working on classified programs and had a friend from Russia.
They were concerned I _MIGHT_ release classified information.
If ONLY I knew that it would be OK to buy a front page ad in the NYT!!
Wanna bet? They'll kick and stomp their feet, mount some token investigation and it will disappear from the news. I hope they prove me wrong, but I seriously doubt it.
But never has any major mainstream newspaper mounted such a sustained public display of plain treason under the guise of news, and the "people's" right to know where, plainly, the enemy of the state derives priceless benefits to the detriment of both citizens at home and American soldiers in the battleground.... and a vast array, a conglomerate of the clueless and the vicious have compounded the treason by lowering the rhetoric to the logic of children.
No... it's now reached the point where the Times is hurting the country and our ability to locate and defeat the terrorists... That's what's different now.
I can only hope their sales will plummet .
So, let me get this straight ... the NYT leaked vital information, and endangered our war effort, and the pundits on the Left don't seem to be upset at all?? Geeeeeeee, I wonder why ...?
The Left wants us to lose the war. How can it be denied? I don't question their patriotism -- all my questions were answered a long time ago.
I agree that the Times are scums, but the real traitor's are the government leaker's, especially if they are Republican malcontents.
"But rarely if ever has any White House mounted such a sustained public campaign against a single news organization."
That should read:
But rarely if ever has a single news organization mounted such a public campaign against any White House.
My thoughts exactly.
"I agree that the Times are scums, but the real traitor's are the government leaker's, especially if they are Republican malcontents."
Highly unlikely that the leakers are Republican malcontents, try lifelong, Bush-hating beaurocrats.
"Correction:
Rarely, if ever, has the drive-by media waged such a sustained, nasty, rabid all out war against any administration in this country, or displayed such hatred towards any president.
That is what Howard Kutz should be talking about."
Yup, and the level of arrogance on Kurtz. The DBM is so out of touch with where American's loyaties lie. The NYT puts us at greater risk and Kurtz is angry at the White House for pointing it out?!?
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.