New York Times taking questions on the McCain hit job

New York Times ^ | 02/22/208 | staff

[safetysign]

A recent New York Times article examined a number of decisions by Senator John McCain that raised questions about his judgment over potential conflicts of interest. The article included reporting on Mr. McCain’s relationship with a female lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee led by Mr. McCain. Since publication of the article, The Times has received more than 2,000 comments, many of them criticizing the handling of the article. Editors and reporters who worked on the article will be answering questions on Friday. Please send yours to

askthetimes@nytimes.com.

[safetysign]

Freep these slimeballs.

[Antoninus]

What if the NY Times wrote a hit piece and nobody cared?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

‘zackly. I wouldn’t spend 2 seconds chewing over their story with the NYT. They are not the journal of record.

[1Old Pro]

The paper is so laughable that it’s expected that they will smear republicans without much notice.

[safetysign]

Ask them why the Bill Clinton getting hummers from Monica Lewisnky didn’t get a front page headline when that story was first reported by Matt Drudge?

[WL-law]

I’m going to be the contrarian here.

Do you think that the Times is stupid enough to go with the story with no backup? They followed the Dan Rather case. They hate the conservatives. They know, from Dan Rather’s case, the right versus wrong way to go to war with the conservatives.

I suspect that they are going to let the conservatives vent, then drop a bomb that proves their case.

McCain’s team had enough advance warning to put together a Day 1 strategy to respond. It got a lot of people on board with him. Good as it goes.

But if I was the NY Times, I would have anticipated all of that. And I would have another move planned.

Let’s wait and see.

[tobyhill]

Slimes excuse, don’t let the lack of substance get in the way of our left wing appeasement.

[AngelesCrestHighway]

Nothing passes the “smell test” at the New York Times!

[WL-law]

PS, it goes without saying that I don’t like McCain, and don’t hold him in nearly the same high regard that he holds for himself — in his view, nobody’s as virtuous as he is.

We’ll see how shallow that is soon enough.

[jaydubya2]

Wasn’t it Newsweak that sat on the Monica Lewinsky story until Matt Drudge decided to release it?

[Philly Nomad]

This is just an example of how the MSM is playing conservatives like a fiddle. They know Conservatives don’t trust McCain, but McCain is the MSM’s candidate of choice.

What’s the easiest way for the MSM to get conservatives on McCain’s side? Write a completely worthless hit job on McCain. The Conservatives will rally around McCain like children.

If the MSM wanted to torpedo the McCain campaign, they would have released this stuff back in December before all the primaries - where Fred or Mitt would have benefited. Instead they release it now when McCain has the nomination all but wrapped up, but early enough that it will be forgotten by November.

The MSM is John McCain’s best friend.

[Nervous Tick]

>> Do you think that the Times is stupid enough to go with the story with no backup?

Yep, and their stupidity is compounded by their echo-chamber environment and their blind partisan hatred.

[fight_truth_decay]

The other day when the questionable video came out alleging uninhibited and intoxicated sexual indescretions of Obama and some now alledgedly dying drug user dude, a thread was created by the Admin to decide if it merited attention. The video I thought was more voyeur in content, and really served no purpose. Facts in word form (no sources to confirm) were not out there in support of this sexual dalliance, even though this guy had filed a law suit, been paid 10 grand on the upstart (by those unknown), the following 90 grand after a lie detector test( which again I guess anyone that is nuts and believes in one's fantasy could pass, whether it happened or not ). Some questioned why he would do all this if at death's door. Financial support in any amount for family? Ten grand, instant lottery, is better than nothing. The MSM, however, never breathed a word, Rush probably wished he could; but did not, even though it went all over the Internet. The Media had to have been blind not to have seen this blogging fury.

Now, the famous NYTimes, Bible of Progressive Liberals and favorite Avian read in bird cages all across America, brings allegations of sexual indiscretions, favoritism, rides on some lobbyist's airplane down on Senator McCain just a few days after the Obama sex/drug allegation/law suit. Poor McCain was visibly "disappointed" after sharing an amicable relationship with the Times over the years. He said, Prove it! But no one has of yet, just like the Obama sex story.

Mr. McCain you should remember what William Shakespeare said turned timely: “Misery (or politics) acquaints a man with strange bedfellows.” It was spoken by a man who had been shipwrecked (so you had a bad day on illegal immigration) and finds himself seeking shelter beside a sleeping monster (The NYTimes). Should the Obama gay sex drug story have merited attention on News 24/7? Both stories are just allegations, unproven, but one media darling becomes sheltered and the other does not. Your opinion? How do they differ?

I guess we are allowed to talk about this in comparison.

[fight_truth_decay]

Correction: allegedly

[purpleraine]

I’m waiting for the above-the-fold front page story on Bill Clinton’s rape of Juanita Brodderick.

[Brilliant]

Looks like the NYT has authenticated McCain as the conservative.

[tcrlaf]

Better yet..

Ask them why a SOURCED story about a Black Presidential candidate having Gay sex in a limo while smoking Crack doesn’t get the “Above The Fold” treatment....

Open, absolute bias...

[West Texas Chuck]

This whole NYT thing smells like an attempt to give McLame some cred with the conservatives in the Republican base. He has always been best buds with the Slimes, I think this is just a smokescreen to give him something to respond to, something easy to dispute, to endear him with us. This chick lobbyist is an easy and obvious card to play, she is an easy target. Claiming McLame might be diddling her just to stir up some support for him by printing this article seems too convenient to me.

Smokescreen.

[cgbg]

I suspect that they are going to let the conservatives vent, then drop a bomb that proves their case. McCain's team had enough advance warning to put together a Day 1 strategy to respond. It got a lot of people on board with him. Good as it goes. But if I was the NY Times, I would have anticipated all of that. And I would have another move planned. Let's wait and see.

If they released this the week before the November election they might be faking it to influence the election. But the timing of this one smells like it is just a warning shot in McCain's direction. The major artillery is being held in abeyance.

This is the _wrong_ issue to attack the Slimes on--when we don't know what they know.

McCain has lots of skeletons in his closet. Rush and the other conservatives need to stand back until Halloween is over.

[Brilliant]

I can’t imagine why the NYT would want to endear McCain to conservatives. They are liberal agenda oriented, and that would definitely not help their agenda. It’s more a case of they can’t help it. Remember the Texas Air National Guard story, after all. They were racing with Dan Rather to get that story out. They had no concern about whether it was accurate. Their concern was to wreck Bush’s candidacy.