My question for Pinch Sulzberger

5.15.03 | Mia t

[Mia T]

 

Mr. Raines, who referred to the Blair episode as a "terrible mistake," said that in addition to correcting the record so badly corrupted by Mr. Blair, he planned to assign a task force of newsroom employees to identify lessons for the newspaper. He repeatedly quoted a lesson he said he learned long ago from A. M. Rosenthal, a former executive editor.

"When you're wrong in this profession, there is only one thing to do," he said. "And that is get right as fast as you can."

Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE MAY 13, 2003 19:48:58 ET XXXXX

EMERGENCY MEETING CALLED AT OLD GRAY LADY; NY TIMES NEWSROOM IN CRISIS

[DRUDGE OBTAINED THIS INTERNAL E-MAIL TO NY TIMES STAFF]

Howell, Gerald and Arthur request that you join your newsroom colleagues at an open forum at 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, May 14, to discuss the Jayson Blair matter and anything else you might have on your mind. The meeting will be held at the Loew's Astor Theater, the moviehouse just behind The Times on 44th Street at Broadway, across from Carmine's. Doors open at 2:15 p.m.

Please be sure to bring your Times i.d. card. No one will be admitted to the theater without their Times i.d.

You will be able to ask questions from the floor, or write them on cards that will be distributed at the door. In addition, we have set up an email address -- forum@nytimes.com -- where you can send questions, either in advance of the session or afterward.

On Wednesday morning, we will send out a separate email advising correspondents and bureaus outside New York how they may dial into the forum and listen to the session. Unfortunately, because of the short time available to set up the forum, people listening from a remote location will not be able to ask live questions. You may, however, avail yourself of the email address above. If you get questions to us before 2 p.m. EDT tomorrow [May 14], we will put them into the hopper. Otherwise, they will be answered later.

Send your questions to the New York Times staff
Drudge | May 14, 2003 | Drudge

My question for Pinch (him, he's dreaming) Sulzberger:

Mr. Sulzberger... Shortly after 9/11, you admitted to Brian Lamb (C-SPAN, Washington Journal, 11.30.01) that The Times' endorsement of clinton was based on clinton "policies, not achievements."

When you made that admission, were you following Abe Rosenthal's sage advice, ("When you're wrong in this profession, there is only one thing to do. And that is get right as fast as you can."), mindful of both the clintons' utter failure to protect us from terrorism, and The Times' prior "failure to connect the dots,"... or were you merely covering your own corrupt, nepotistically-enabled, feckless rear?

 

11-30-01

New York Times Chairman/Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. admits to Brian Lamb:

• "Times dropped ball during Holocaust by failing to connect the dots"

• Times was able to endorse clinton by separating clinton's "policies" from "the man" [i.e., by failing to connect the dots!]

 

 

 

by Mia T, November 30, 2001

alpractice and/or malfeasance by "compartmentalization" redux...

It appears that The New York Times doesn't learn from its mistakes. Will it take The Times another 50 years to understand/admit that by having endorsed for reelection a "documentably dysfunctional" president with "delusions" -- its own words -- it must bear sizeable blame for the 9-11 horror and its aftermath ?

(Note, by the way, the irony of Sulzberger's carefully worded rationalization of the clinton endorsements, pointing to clinton "policies," not achievements, (perhaps understanding, at last, that clinton "achievements" -- when legal -- were more illusory than real--perhaps understanding, at last, that The Times' Faustian bargain was not such a good deal after all).).

If we assume that the clintons were the proximate cause of 9-11 --- a proposition not difficult to demonstrate --- it then follows that The New York Times must indeed bear sizeable blame for the 9-11 horror and its aftermath.

The New York Times clinton Endorsements: Then and Now

by Mia T, October 22, 2000

The New York Times' endorsement today of hillary rodham clinton is nothing more or less than a reprise of its shameless endorsement of her husband four years ago. Like the 4-year-old disgrace, this endorsement reveals more about The Times than it does about the candidate.

The Times' endorsements of the clintons are not merely intellectually dishonest--they are laughably, shamelessly so. An obscene disregard for the truth, a blithe jettisoning of logic, a haughty contempt for the electorate, a reckless neglect of Constitution and country, they are willful fourth-estate malfeasance.

Inadvertently, ineptly, ironically, these endorsements become the metaphor for the corrupt, duplicitious, dangerous subjects they attempt to ennoble. The New York Times must bear sizeable blame for the national aberration that is clintonism and for all the devastation that has flowed and will continue to flow therefrom. (NB: This was written more than two years before 9/11.)

I have included both endorsements below. One has only to re-read the 1996 apologia today, in 2000, after eight long years of clinton depravity and destruction, to confirm how spurious its arguments were, how ludicrously revisionist its premises were, how wrong its conclusions were, how damaging its deceits were.

The Lieberman Paradigm

I have dubbed the Times' convoluted, corrupt, pernicious reasoning, (unfortunately now an all-too-familiar Democratic scheme), "The Lieberman Paradigm," in honor of the Connecticut senator and his sharply bifurcated, logically absurd, unrepentantly Faustian, post-Monica ménage-à-troika transaction shamelessly consummated on the floor of the Senate that swapped his soul for clinton's a$$.

Reduced to its essence, the argument is this:

clinton is an unfit president;
therefore, clinton must remain president.

(You will recall that Lieberman's argument that sorry day was rightly headed toward clinton's certain ouster when it suddenly made a swift, hairpin 180, as if clinton hacks took over the wheel. . .)

Nomenclature notwithstanding, (nomenklatura, too), it was not the Lieberman speech but rather the 1996 Times endorsement that institutionalized this Orwellian, left-wing ploy to protect and extend a thoroughly corrupt and repugnant--and as is increasingly obvious-- dangerous -- Democratic regime.

"A Tiger Doesn't Change its Spots"

Reprising its 1996 model, The Times cures this clinton's ineptitude and failure with a delusional revisionism and cures her corruption and dysfunction with a character lobe brain transplant.

But revisionism and brain surgery didn't work in 1996, and revisionism and brain surgery won't work today.

 

 

 

...prior attempts at presidential brain surgery

have proven less than brilliant.

You will recall that, as recently as 1996,

The New York Times insisted that

Bill Clinton undergo the surgical procedure;

its endorsement of Clinton was predicated

on Clinton undergoing a partial brain transplant:

specifically of the Character Lobe.

 

Clinton assured us immediately (if tacitly)

that this would be done post haste (or was it post chaste?),

that whatever crimes he never did, he would never do again.

 

If brain surgery was ever performed on Clinton,

it has produced no discernible improvement.

 

 

Perhaps our approach to the problem

of deficient presidential brains

is itself wrong-headed;

that the problem is really

a problem of deficient electorate brains.

 

Voters would be wise to heed

the old roadside ad:

 

Don't lose Your head

To gain a minute

You need your head

Your brains are in it.

--Mia T, Pushme-Pullyou

 

[Mia T]

Q ERTY8 "All the News That's Print to Fit"^BUMP

 

CNNs of Commission, Rapist Demagogues and 9/11

the movie

The REAL "Living History" -- clintoplasmodial slime

Personal Agitprop-and-Money-Laundering Machine, Cozy-clintonoid-Interviews-of-the-Colmes-Kind-Scheme
Bury REAL "Living History"

Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent
 

Mrs. clinton's REAL virtual office update

[xJones]

My question for Pinch Sulzberger

Another question for Sulzberger is why was he nicknamed "Pinch"?

[Mister Baredog]

Love your colorful posts, even if the subject matter is SOOOO NAUSEATING!!!!!

[Mia T]

 

PINCH reality check Q ERTY6 bump! 

PINCH CLINTON

by Mia T, 2.9.02

 

 

In a quainter, less enlightened time, if you had read "pinch" and "clinton" in the same sentence, you would have thought, "hundreds of 'ministered to' troubled young girls," (as the wife was wont to put the clinton rapes and other predations)... not "roomfuls of stolen White House antiques."

 

And yet, according to a reliable-source friend of mine, even back in those days, if the husband had designs on the help, the wife had designs on the furnishings; (she had already acquired the nasty habit of pilfering from the White House drapery fund.)

 

 

In spite of this, when I created the following metaphoric musing more than a year before the clintons -- uh -- "moved," I never imagined that she would -- that they would -- in real life -- in real time -- actually swipe the sofa.

 

 

Smaller objects neatly tuck-able in nuncupative deals & unnumbered Swiss accounts, without question...

 

BUT THE SOFA??

 

"I think the rock is still there, but I'm not sure," Helen quipped. Her punch line to clinton's response to her question about a -- (only in Helen's mind) 'fantasy' -- clinton kleptocracy, was in fact 4th-estate CYA-ing disguised as a joke. Unbeknownst to the always clueless Helen, the one-liner she was delivering was indeed a joke; it was the butt of the joke that was her misreport...

She said the press corps followed a "golden rule that if it didn't affect the running of the country, they didn't need to report on it. We weren't protecting anybody."   As President Bill Clinton reached his last days in office, Thomas asked him what White House possession he would like to take with him.   His reply: the rock Neal Armstrong brought back from the moon. Whenever tension filled the Oval Office, Clinton said, he would point to the rock and tell those present to "chill out." The rock was 3.6 billion years old, he said; they needed perspective.   "I think the rock is still there, but I'm not sure," Thomas said.    Helen Thomas: Bush-A Work in Progress

In the end,

if clinton's arrogant, ruthless, reckless nature is restored to him,

it seems the joke will be on all of us,

for it will be a victory for infinite victimhood and irresponsibility,

for seduction, for violence, for nihilism, for anarchy.

 

We will have set apart clinton as the hero

by making his victims less human than he;

we will have allowed clinton to carefully estrange us from his victims

so that we can enjoy the rapes and the beatings

as much as clinton himself does.

Mia T, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE

 

 

 

[Mia T]

pinch ping

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

wow - tell it!

[Incorrigible]

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA

I'd be nice if whatever staffer they have reading email to this address accidently lets this one slip by for Pinch to read!

[Mia T]

 

"No one put all the pieces together."

Past Holds Little Explanation for The Meteoric Fall Of Jayson Blair
The Washington Post | Thursday, May 15, 2003; Page C01 | Paul Farhi, Washington Post Staff Writer

Q ERTY8 _{Pinch him} NYT's habitual failure to connect the dots^BUMP

My question for Pinch (him, he's dreaming) Sulzberger:

Mr. Sulzberger... Shortly after 9/11, you admitted to Brian Lamb (C-SPAN, Washington Journal, 11.30.01) that The Times' endorsement of clinton was based on clinton "policies, not achievements."

When you made that admission, were you following Abe Rosenthal's sage advice, ("When you're wrong in this profession, there is only one thing to do. And that is get right as fast as you can."), mindful of both the clintons' utter failure to protect us from terrorism, and The Times' prior "failure to connect the dots during the Holocaust,"... or were you merely covering your own corrupt, nepotistically-enabled, feckless rear?

 

 

 

CNNs of Commission, Rapist Demagogues and 9/11

the movie

The REAL "Living History" -- clintoplasmodial slime

Personal Agitprop-and-Money-Laundering Machine, Cozy-clintonoid-Interviews-of-the-Colmes-Kind-Scheme
Bury REAL "Living History"

Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent
 

Mrs. clinton's REAL virtual office update

[firewalk]

Thanks for the ping
bttt