NYT REJECTS MCCAIN'S EDITORIAL; SHOULD 'MIRROR' OBAMA

Drudge ^ | Mon Jul 21 2008 | Drudge

[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...

[Miss Didi]

Rush says if he were McCain he'd talking gas prices, gas prices, gas prices and be out on an oil rig...take a trip up to ANWR with a crew of Drive-Bys while Little Barry is away playing President at summer camp.

[kellynla]

Ouch!

The “Ol’ Gray Whore” is BUSTED...again!

“That’s gonna leave a mark. Better put some ice on that.” LOL

[Osage Orange]

McCain's an idiot........for ever thinking the MSM / DBM liked him.

IMO...he's just another "Poster Boy" for term limits.

[Stark_GOP]

‘It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece,’ NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained.

---

Just take Obama’s article and reprint it. /s

If McCain had sent his editorial in first, would Obama have been required to mirror McCain's article?

[bamahead]

The times is simply positioning themselves as the new Pravda - to become the official state mouthpiece once Comrade Obama is coronated.

[quintr]

It’s amazing that if a differing point of view is directed then it’s bias or being unfair.

So if two opposing points of view are not allowed, then where is the discussion or debate?

That’s okay. McCain will get far more exposure to his editorial through Drudge than he’d ever get in the New York Times.

Now maybe it’s time for business persons to start pulling advertising revenue from publications that engage in censorship or any other form of managed news.

[Halls]

I agree! McCain needs to go Conservative now and he will win. Rish is right!

[stockstrader]

So, McCain is not even entitled to his own opinion?

The answer to that one is obvious.

Just when you think it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the bias of the NYT to be even more blatant, outrageous, unconscionable and contemptible.

[Jeff Head]

So, Obama releases his "plan" for Iraq before talking to our military commanders or the Iraqis themselves. His plan is simply another regurgitation of what he has always proposed...a full and headlong retreat.

He would take an ajbect victory, which we are in the process of obtaining, defeating enemies intent on defeating us there and brining the fight here, which is creating a much better future, much mor eliberty, and self-determination for tens of millions of people...which could create a beacon of hope and liberty in an area that has never known it, and in the process destroying tens of thousands of our abject enemies...he would take all of that and throw it to the wind in a perverse effort to get himself elected.

Obama is a self centered, marxist power monger and his true colors are showing more and more each day.

Not only would he betray the people we have liberated, not only would he betray our own long term interests and security here at home, but he would also abjectly betray the brave men and women volunteers who have sacrficed, suffered, bled, and died to make these gains possible.

The word of who Obama really is and what he represents MUST spread and it is we who must spread it because the MSM and the DNC are complicit in the lies regarding him.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA - CHANGE YOU CAN COUNT ON, BUT DON'T WANT

THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

NOBAMA '08 STICKER - SIGHTED IN IDAHO, JULY 2008

[luvie]

Anyone here that is surprised at this, raise his/her hand.

[Red Steel]

has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.

These guys must have just woke up.

[TRY ONE]

NYT: “Now Johnny, Hussein is the smart one in class; so you must write your paper like he did.”

[Alas Babylon!]

well, hasn’t the NYT’s come out in favor of reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine? They think that the radio stations that host Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, for example, should be forced to offer a different opinion. So, then the government should FORCE the NYTs to print McCain’s editorial.

But wait, that would be an enfringement on their 1st ammendment rights. The inability to follow cognitive congruence by the Left is astounding.

[Niuhuru]

“Rush is blasting Little Barry today. Little Barry brags about how he opposed the mission and then goes over there and makes arrogant statements completely ignoring the plans of McCain and the Commander-in-Chief.”

I wonder what the world’s other leadesr think of Obama, seeing as to how he’s demanding to meet them despite having no real diplomatic position.

With his arrogance I see him ticking off the CHinese by dictating to them why they should hand over Tibet to the Dalai Lama.

I see us getting attacked and not just by terrorists and not soley due to terrorism. Obama is going to offend someone and get us into a seriously dangerous diplomatic situation.

[visualops]

Boy ain’t that the truth!! They probably did him an unintended favor by rejected it! LOL

[Polyxene]

McQueeg has been thrown under the bus, and he still doesn’t realize it. You aren’t teacher’s pet anymore, Johnny. The Maverick has been replaced by The Messiah Lord Hussein.

[Diogenesis]

[Red in Blue PA]

[RedEyeJack]

Apparently they invited him to reply and then decided they didn’t like what he had to say so...

“No Soup (Editorial) For You!

NYT... home of the Editorial (soup) Nazis.

[Chances Are]

Democratic Party Times?

Ha!

How about Communist Party Times? The DNC has been a wholly owned subsidiary of the CPUSA since 1968. The CPUSA hasn't bothered to run their own candidate for president in years - they've simply endorsed the Democratic party candidate.

That's how far they've fallen (the Dems - not the Commies!).

And should the Times’ boy win in November, you'll see this nation convulse like never before, come January ‘09....

CA....