NYT's remaining twelve readers must be feeling smug...
Posted on 07/21/2008 9:09:19 AM PDT by edzo4
NYT REJECTS MCCAIN'S EDITORIAL; SHOULD 'MIRROR' OBAMA Mon Jul 21 2008 12:00:25 ET
An editorial written by Republican presidential hopeful McCain has been rejected by the NEW YORK TIMES -- less than a week after the paper published an essay written by Obama, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
The paper's decision to refuse McCain's direct rebuttal to Obama's 'My Plan for Iraq' has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.
'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece,' NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain's staff. 'I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.'
MORE
In McCain's submission to the TIMES, he writes of Obama: 'I am dismayed that he never talks about winning the war—only of ending it... if we don't win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president.'
NYT's Shipley advised McCain to try again: 'I'd be pleased, though, to look at another draft.'
[Shipley served in the Clinton Administration from 1995 until 1997 as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Presidential Speechwriter.]
MORE
A top McCain source claims the paper simply does not agree with the senator's Iraq policy, and wants him to change it, not "re-work the draft."
McCain writes in the rejected essay: 'Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. 'I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,' he said on January 10, 2007. 'In fact, I think it will do the reverse.'
MORE
Shipley, who is on vacation this week, explained his decision not to run the editorial.
'The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.'
Shipley continues: 'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.'
Developing...
as if the unbalanced amount of time is the only bias, they probabaly spent 114 minutes propping up obama and 48 minutes slamming mccain...
I'd bet he still doesn't “get it”.
He'll probably apologize for the NYT and applaud the Obomintion upon essay re submittal.
Maybe the nyt would have printed the editorial if mccain had used a pseudonym or threw in a few nice words about liberals.
Many Freepers assume that McCain actually wants to win this election. I believe that McCain was picked by the leftist infested RNC to throw the election and marginalize the American right.
No experienced politician would make this many mistakes, and ignore the countless vulnerabilities presented by the Obama campaign as McCain has done unless they did not desire to win.
The way the NYT behaves - I think to be on their wrong side is more advantageous politically.
NYT's remaining twelve readers must be feeling smug...
Naomi Wolf (born November 12, 1962) is an American author, political consultant, and public intellectual. At a relatively young age, she became the literary star of what was later described as the "third-wave" of the feminist movement. She is also known for her advocacy of progressive politics.ABSOLUTE SHOCKER! /sarc
Talk about audacity....no wonder NYT is going down the tubes.
Too rich.
No doubt many of their subscriptions are taken out by corporations and libraries and schools rather than individuals.
“NYT is biased against Republicans....WOW, who knew....</sarcasm>”
Actually, NYT is biased against Conservatives. They endorsed McCain in the republican primary. The NYT giveth, and the NYT taketh away....
Der New York "Spiegel"
Naomi Wolf reminds me of Monica Lewinsky.
Naomi Wolf married David Shipley (NYT) in 1993. They lived in Washington, where Wolf was an informal adviser to President Clinton on welfare and parenthood approaches. They divorced in 2005.
At a relatively young age, Wolf became the literary star of what was later described as the "third-wave" of the feminist movement. She is also known for her advocacy of progressive politics.
Wolf writes that women should have "the choice to do whatever we want with our faces and bodies without being punished by an ideology that is using attitudes, economic pressure, and even legal judgments regarding women's appearance to undermine us psychologically and politically." Wolf argues that women were under assault by the "beauty myth" in five areas: work, religion, sex, violence, and hunger. Ultimately, Wolf argues for a relaxation of normative standards of beauty.
Wolf's other books include Fire with Fire (1993) on politics, female empowerment and women's sexual liberation.
Wolf was involved in Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election bid, brainstorming with the president's team about ways to reach "soccer moms" and other female voters.
During Al Gore's unsuccessful bid for the presidency in the 2000 election, Wolf was hired as a consultant to target female voters, reprising her role in the Clinton campaign. Wolf's ideas and participation in the Gore campaign generated considerable media coverage and criticism. According to a report by Michael Duffy in Time, Wolf was paid a monthly salary of $15,000 "in exchange for advice on everything from how to win the women’s vote to shirt-and-tie combinations." This article was the original source of the widely reported claim that Wolf was responsible for Gore's "three-buttoned, earth-toned look."
The Time article and others also claimed that Wolf had developed the idea that Gore is "a beta male who needs to take on the alpha male in the Oval Office".
Have some fun while youre at it. Internet ads are most likely monitored to tally the number of clicks a story gets or the number of clicks an ad gets from a particular story. With that in mind, visit some of the advertisers on sites that you might favor and avoid visiting any advertisers from sources like the nyt. The managers of these sites also look search queries. As long as youre there, go to the nyt site search tool and type in "i hope your the nyt loses a lot of business" or some such message. Eventually someone will see it. :P
Nah, see: Reagan’s Cold War Strategy...
RUSH (on Little Barry): This guy is a jerk. An arrogant jerk. A jerk messiah.
Its important to understand that the press isn’t “biased” toward the DNC, the press “is” the DNC.
McCain is asking a DNC propaganda sheet to print his propaganda.
Until the GOP gets control of its information distribution it is going to have a tough time ever winning anything. You’re asking your enemies to transmit your message. Its a losing strategy.
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.