Posted on 08/12/2008 6:37:19 PM PDT by lieutenant columbo
Gawker.com notices that the New York times never balked at calling McCain a "fighter pilot" until this year.
Their full commentary is at this URL:
http://gawker.com/5035890/times-retracts-12-years-of-calling-mccain-fighter-pilot
An excerpt:
"The Times published two amazing corrections this morning, starting with one stating that the newspaper had erroneously called Republican presidential candidate John McCain a "fighter pilot" on Sunday and in "numerous other Times articles the past dozen years." Wow, a correction that spans more than a decade! When McCain was famously shot down over Vietnam, he was flying his usual plane, a small jet aircraft known as the A-4 Skyhawk, which the Times now refers to as an "attack aircraft." That's a safe and widely-agreed upon label for the plane pilots dubbed "Scooter" (heh), but the newspaper needn't have apologized for calling it a "fighter." Many in the aviation community regard it as precisely that....
The Times should not be so easily cowed, particularly when 12 years worth of coverage is at stake. The newspaper no doubt did its own investigation, and "attack aircraft" is a more appropriate term for the A-4 than "fighter" — it's not the "F-4" after all — but there's no need to backtrack from using a perfectly accurate alternative name."
Here's the actual New York Times "correction," which can be found at this URL: http://www.nytimes.com/ref/pageoneplus/corrections.html
"An article on Sunday about Senator John McCain’s campaign management style described his role as a Navy pilot in Vietnam incorrectly. He flew bombing missions as an attack aircraft pilot, but he was not a “fighter pilot.” (The error has appeared in numerous other Times articles the past dozen years, most recently on April 9 and on Dec. 15, 2007.)"
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The A-4 is tiny by modern standards. It was 40 feet long with a 26 foot wingspan. It was one of the few carrier airplanes which did not require folding wings. To compare, the smallest U.S. fighter today is the F-16, which is 49 feet long with a 33 foot wingspan.
How long has the NYT been calling itself a newspaper? To be truly accurate, they should be calling themselves a bird cage liner.
Actually, I’m waiting to see how long it takes the NYT to retract their endorsement of McCain from the primaries.
“And I believe — correct me if wrong — that the argentine Skyhawks were used in both attack and fighter roles during the falklands War.”
New Zealand used the A-4 as both an attack and fighter aircraft too, along with Singapore, if memory serves.
So what? Fighter pilots make movies; attack pilots make history.
As long as they’re going to go back decades and set the record straight, why don’t they run some corrections on Durant and his view of the Stalinist miracle.
AIM-9s, which were the only AAMs the Thud and ‘vark could carry (ok, the USN F-111B could carry AIM-54s), were trialed on the F-117. Apparently someone somewhere read the scenario in “Red Storm Rising” where Clancy had the “F-19s” taking out Mainstays and thought it was a neat idea. ;)
” “Attack” sounds much more theatening than “fighter”. Morons.”
No, that’s not it. “Fighter pilot” sounds sexy and has a lot of Roger Ramjet style Hollywood hype attached to it. “Attack pilot” doesn’t come across as cool.
Not to detract from either discipline, but in politics a lot of times perception is reality.
You know, there were jeeps and trucks with stinger mounts that had the same potential for shooting down aircraft as any of those three planes. The F-105’s claim to fame was that it could carry a bomb payload (at the time the only single engine aircraft that could carry a nuke). What it did after it dropped it’s payload (I heard that it could dogfight empty of bombs) was gravy. Didn’t they put air-to-air missiles on later B-52’s? There was a great fiction novel about an F-105 pilot in Vietnam. I loved the book, but I don’t remember the title, author, or plot, other than he either was shot down by or shot down a Vietnamese Mig with a red tail, and at the end of the book finds out that the Vietnamese guy he’s talking to was the only pilot to fly a Mig with a red tail. Anyone know what book this was?
The Obama campaign told the New York Times to make this “correction” and the New York Times followed orders.
Nothing less should be expected, ever.
That’s interesting ... what is it?
A montage of an A-4 dropping a couple of bombs and the NYT building.
Snorted Coffe up my nose!!!!
Really thats true! LOL!
Thew NYT is not a newspaper , it is:
1) bird cage liner
2) fish wrapper
3) a$$ wipe
4) so left its left out
5) hockey shin pads for poor kids
6) dog chew
7) garden compost
No one reads the NYT, which is why it is tanking on circulation.
Redefined , it is not really a newspaper , it is simply to be called " New York Wadding".
The slimes has been redefined.
... one of my favorites. I’d rather be in an A-10 low over the enemy than anything else. Of course, I’ve always been more of a hands-on type.
First off....sorry about your coffee....I hope it wasn’t too hot!
Secondly....I agree with your list...with the exception of the “a$$ wipe”....my a$$ is too good for that!
Carry on.
Actually, I was referring to the NYT. But thanks for the info.
NYT... don’t you know that every time your stupid commercial comes on tv trying to get me to buy your rag (here in Texas)... I think to myself... those tools that run the Old Gray Lady sure love to flush money down the drain.
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.