Posted on 10/16/2004 9:46:35 PM PDT by vanderleun
One of the most suspenseful moments in modern journalism came to an end today, when The New York Times, after months of coy beating around the bush, came out for Senator Kerry.
Although the final selection process was described by an unnamed insider as "A very close run thing," in the end it was John Kerry's unflinching celebration of the lesbian lifestyle of prominent Republican families that put him over the top.
"Maureen," said our source " was just not going to be denied and neither was Frank Rich. Once Kerry said "Lesbian Daughter," they both got so wet we had to mop the corridors between their offices twice.
"We knocked around the idea of supporting Bush quite a bit in the newsroom and up on the executive floor, but when Pinch came out of the Publishers' Suite and announced he was wearing pantyhose under his suit in honor of 'lesbian daughters everywhere,' we knew we had to go for it."
In editorials smeared all over the Saturday and Sunday editions, the Times shocked its conservative of readers on the Upper West Side, the West Village and the Meatpacking district by playing the moral high card.
Kerry "has qualities that could be the basis for a great chief executive, not just a modest improvement on the incumbent," the newspaper said. "He strikes us, above all, as a man with a strong moral core."
After "examining what the candidates have done in the past, their apparent priorities and their general character," the Times said "we enthusiastically endorse John Kerry for president." -- Kerry Collects Major Endorsement
Reaction from the White House was swift, surprised and disappointed.
"We'd been preparing a statement all weekend for Monday release that we really thought could turn the tide at the Times," said an unnamed senior aid to the President who spoke on deep background (and whose initials are K.R.) "We saw how the celebration of lesbian children was swaying the Times and we were going to fire back with our own heartfelf admiration for of Teresa Heinz Kerry's classic collection of cast-iron sex aids. But we just couldn't jam them in the right news cycles fast enough to satisfy the Times. Next time, we'll use Kinkos."
Asked if the Times endorsement was costly, the source replied candidly, "Why yes. We were really counting on the Times to deliver their numberless hoard of readers who have been enslaved to the paper so long that they do the Sunday Crossword in ink."
Early analysis by John Stewart (fresh from his on-air disembowelment of the entire CNN Pundit Team and feeling frisky) indicated that the Times endorsement had moved "...more than two and less than five undecided Times readers into the Kerry column. This is obviously a stunning and unexpected blow to the President. The only way he can possibly recover is by coming on my show every night between now and November 2. I remind you that The Daily Show really is the only place left on TV where a man can demonstrate integrity, integrity, integrity. On the other hand, since the lead-in to my show has a cast of a bunch of puppets, the editorial board of the Times would fit right in as well."
Next think you know CBS will switch sides and endorse Kerry too!
They are full of excuses...here's one:
"Max Suich, former editorial director for Fairfax, wrote about this in 'The Age'. He noted how these days it's much harder for journalists to get any useful party sources other than the official ones. Maybe they don't exist - party membership has shrunk and the party operations are increasingly run by professionals connnected to the leader's office. He thinks political reporting is becoming like sports reporting, all about scores and who won today's match.
This might be the new divide between the media and the public. Where the details are increasingly manipulated and controlled, the public will just turn off from the detail and reflect on the big picture."
IMO that's just what they did...didn't listen to the ideologically driven journalistic garbage and made up their own minds as to what was important...and came up with SECURITY AND THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM.
This is hilarious. Has the NYT EVER endorsed a Republican?
Ooooo! News flash--NY Times endorses Kerry! And while you're at it, Rosie O'Donnell and Ellen Degeneres are gay.
Truly, this would have broken any journalist's heart.
Because, right now, there's a whole lotta reflectin' goin' on out thayuh...
Karl Marx wasn't available?
Just before Peter explains that we had a "tantrum."
I believe they endorsed Coolidge in 1924.
post 29
I had no idea Rita was that old, but I thought she was a Dem, like 99% of the people in the entertainment biz....
New York Times = Wart on Edwards lip
After November 2nd, I hope the US is littered with the broken hearts of journalists and all your MSM 'newspapers' become kitty-litter!
Gasp!!! I'm in shock!
Dude, my fellow FReeper, I love ya but thats naive. They will bang the viewers and readers heads against the wall and ask why the voters are so stupid. Like when Peter Jennings said after the 1994 election that the voters threw a "temper tantrum" by putting the GOP into the Congressional majority.
I am so surprised! I just knew they would endorse Buchanan too! Oh, he isn't running this time is he. Well, that explains it then.
i agree.....she's mildly irritating to say the least
They probably could have written the bulk of it before the primaries, just leaving blanks for the name and a few indiviudal details for verisimilitude.
I have no idea.
Believe me if I knew of a way to pull the rug from under the establishment media I would.
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.