the Slimes just doing what it does best... but this time it slimed itself.
Posted on 02/21/2008 5:23:22 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
One of two things will happen in the wake of Thursday's New York Times story that suggested John McCain may have had a "romantic relationship" nine years ago with a lobbyist who did business before the Senate Commerce Committee which he then chaired. (The story purported to be about McCain's ethics and dealings with D.C. lobbyists, in a failed attempt to gloss gossip with a patina of gravitas.)
Either new information will come forward to corroborate this weak story - based solely on the speculation - as opposed to actual knowledge - of two sources (who refused to be named and, for all we know, may have an ax to grind), and despite denials by both McCain and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman.
Even then, the Gray Lady's reputation will suffer, because the New York Times, not John McCain, has become the story.
Or nothing new will come forward and the public will have every reason to believe that the New York Times and copycat media smeared McCain.
And the next time the Times' announces that it has lost circulation or is eliminating more newsroom positions, people will cheer, when they should be saddened. This story is bad news for the news business.
No doubt Times reporters Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick and Stephen Labaton believed they had a story.
That's why newspapers have editors, to insist that reporters nail down hunches that reporters believe in their guts to be true.
That didn't happen with this story.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
This may very well backfire on the MSM.
The Al Qaeda Times has published so much BS in the past half century that even TV listings, sports scores and lottery numbers from that rag should be verified with an actual news source.
When you throw mud, you lose ground.
Sheesh. How bad is it when the SAN FRANSICKO CHRONIC calls you sleazy?
the Slimes just doing what it does best... but this time it slimed itself.
Au contraire.
Quote of the Day:
Schnur noted, “John McCain can win a Republican primary against the New York Times.”
Sullied? The NY Times? How can anybody tell—there isn’t a clean spot left on this rag...
they’ve got soooooooooooo much momentum in barkabamo. why did they need to reduce themselves to....oh, wait, nevermind. pigs, mud, etc.
Did they hire Dan Rather?
They sat on this story for years. I’m just surprised that they didn’t sit on it until October. Guess the nominated Republican offered too much temptation.
Most newsmen are supporting the Times, probably out of fear.
Why should they be saddened? The NY Times abandoned its journalistic standards 70 years ago in favor of a left-wing agenda. It took a long time for the public to figure it out.
The “Kill the Times” backlash continues across the MSM spectrum. This may be the biggest “Dinosaur DeathWatch” event of the new century.
“Sheesh. How bad is it when the SAN FRANSICKO CHRONIC calls you sleazy?”
I thought the same thing, Lol!
Secondly, if the NYT is willing to print this....then why haven't they done a story on the Odrama/Larry Sinclair Sex, Drugs and Limo story? LOL!
I'm just sayin.......
McCain needs to bury this one.
I’m no fan of McCain – but it seems obvious that this is either purely sloppy journalism on the part of the NYT (not likely since it stewed for several months), or perhaps this is the most visible example of Hillary’s campaign doing some early battlefield preparation.
I assume the underlying suggestion of an extramarital relationship is not true – but I can’t say that I have a lot of reason to believe that. It seemed awkward when McCain started out with the remarks about how “Disappointed” they were with this story. Were I in that position I would be screaming from the rooftops, the veins would be bulging in my forehead and I would be ripping mad at the NYT. Somehow, given how forceful he has been in some of his past speeches – he didn’t seem to express the proper level if indignation, especially standing there with his wife.
Assuming the suggestion of an inappropriate relationship is untrue, by suggestion to McCain is this:
Offer to undergo a polygraph examination along with the lobbyist, conducted by a polygrapher of certain credentials (years of experience with FBI, professional credentials, etc.), selected by one of the NYT journalists (sic) responsible for Wednesday’s story, on 5 or 10 questions which establish the truth or falsity of his (and her) denial. Then take the exams, publish the results (which would vindicate both of them) and start beating the NYT like a rented car for the rest of the campaign.
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.