Baghdad fell in 22 days. A stunning military victory. Mission accomplished.
Liberals promote perception...conservatives promote reality.
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...
You “think that NYT’s view is....”
Well but sensible people don’t care about NYT’s view and want a fair campaign where the candidates can criticize each other and specifically WHERE McCAIN CAN CRITICIZE OUSbama EVEN IF the liberal “””BIBLE”””,the NYT,don’t like it.
Defeating ouBSAMA in November would be a great defeat for the MSM.They deserve it
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
ANd his preacher mode, the “look how wise I am” mode is so off putting.
I agree with you.
The NY Slimes is irrelevant. McCain’s op-ed will get far more coverage being on Drudge and Freerepublic than anywhere else, especially the NY Slimes.
“Why is this a surprise? The Slimes long ago stopped even pretending to be objective.”
Very true.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?ei=5088&en=452926dcb11511a3&ex=1248667200
But true. W has been a serious disappointment to me. “Ineffective” is the word I'd use. He did very well in the days after September 11th, but not so well on anything else since.
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.’
The man has won my vote!
You might - oddly - be right.....and then there’s Hillary, lurking in the background
“the rats always say that fighting the terrorists only encourages them, as if surrendering wouldn’t be the best recruiting tool they ever had”
that’s why they are dumocraps. It’s a simple enough idea to grasp, but they don’t :-(
Baghdad fell in 22 days. A stunning military victory. Mission accomplished.
Liberals promote perception...conservatives promote reality.
Where do I start in supporting the FACT that McPain doesn’t get it?
Here’s one example:
HE’S DENSE!
Look at how he is handling illegal immigration. “The people SPOKE”, LOUDLY and the bill didn’t go through. In his own state they are up in arms AGAINST illegal immigration. So what does the imbecile do? Says he’ll build a fence and then meets with “La Raca” which means “the race”. It’s a RADICAL HIPSPANIC group and plays words games to “trust him” and that he’ll make IMMIGRATION REFORM a “top priority”. He still doesn’t get that or if he does, he doesn’t care what his base WANTS.
Lou Dobbs interview with Rosanna Pulido Talking about John Mc Cain (The Founding Father of the Amnesty bill)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bltpx32MPOw
CNN American Morning http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB2p4NBVpqk
He still wants to give them AMNESTY.
The reality is that this election, like nearly every presidential election, will not be decided by conservatives or liberals, but by people who will pay very scant attention to anything until after Labor Day, and precious little even after that. Since you're a conservative, accpet that reality, or get used to saying President Obama.
At this point my only hope is that future Republican candidates and officeholders will now see the futility of prostrating themselves before the MSM who are so obviously DNC hacks.
After McCain, hopefully a new generation of Republicans who have been schooled on the dangers of MSM propaganda will emerge.
Maybe its you who doesn’t get it.
This thread was about the NYT and its rejection of a McCain editorial about the war in Iraq.
McCain handled it beautifully.
Mac doesn’t get amnesty and why we are opposed. But this thread was not about that.
Why should McCain mirror a copycat?
Maybe its you who doesn’t get it.
This thread was about the NYT and its rejection of a McCain editorial about the war in Iraq.
McCain handled it beautifully.
Mac doesn’t get amnesty and why we are opposed. But this thread was not about that.
Okay, have it your way.
To make another point about McPain;
ever wonder WHY McPain thought the NYT’s would print HIS ESSAY when it mocks Oboma’s drivel? McPain doesn’t get that either. McPain was a “useful IDIOT” for the NYT. McPain must have thought they’d be “fair”. Well the NYT is not “fair”. Only an imbecile like McPain would believe the NYT’s is “fair” and almost forgot, “balanced”.
People who read the NYT on a regular basis, and think it’s a good paper, are going to vote for the Demo-Socialist candidate. Demo-Socialist don’t think, they are ignorant robots.
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.