[Always Right]

I think NYT’s view is that McCain should talked more about his plan rather than using the editorial to simply attack Obama

Sounded like he attacked Obama's position, not Obama. How else do you debate?

[nmh]

You're not supposed to be opposed to the LEFTS Messiah, the Obomination. They will not print anything negative against the Obomination. Didn't you know? The Obomination is god's gift to mankind. They will NOT tolerate and opposing view - to hell with the “Fairness Doctrine”! That only comes out as a bullying phrase when it suits the LEFT.

[neutrality]

That’s perfectly fine, I’m just saying the way they see it editorials are supposed to be a bit more substantive. He should have attacked Obama’s position WHILE detailing his own in a bit more detail.

[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.