Skip to comments.
Great Gray Lady in spat with saloon hussy (New York Times vs. Fox News) Ann Coulter
worldnetdaily ^
| 11/20/2002
| Ann Coulter
Posted on 11/20/2002 3:51:15 PM PST by TLBSHOW
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last
To: laurav
It is you who has been lazy in following her argument.
She has simply given other examples of news outlets being less than strictly objective in their coverage of politicians with nary a peep from the Grey Hag.
To: laurav
I think you missed the point.
42
posted on
11/20/2002 6:19:21 PM PST
by
Tempest
To: roob
I think her intent was to point out that the liberal biased media is far from objective and neutral therefore the Times has a lot of nerve complaining and whining about Ailes voicing his opinion to Bush.Well, it isn't the NYTimes' "voice." It's a bylined opinion piece. So it's this writer's opinion, not the Times complaining.
43
posted on
11/20/2002 6:24:22 PM PST
by
laurav
To: laurav
It is the Grey Hag who is show casing the writer's opinion.
Stop being obtuse and petulant or are you a liberal, in which case such behavior is quite normal.
Comment #45 Removed by Moderator
To: TLBSHOW
Thanks for the post TLBSHOW... I know I can count on you every Wednesday at 5 PM Pacific time to post Ann's latest.
Didn't see the original NYTimes article 'cause I gave up reading that rag ages ago but caught some of Begala (ugh!) on Imus this morning (any reference to Begala must be followed by 'ugh!') railing aginst Fox and Ailes for this affront to journalistic objectivity! The horror! Wonder where Begala plans on going once he gets booted from CNN / Crossfire?
What's the matter with a journalist taking the US side in the war???? The media just does not get it do they? Instead they are busy subjecting the country to the Al and Tipper US Tour 2002! I've given up on TV but still can't escape that onslaught.
46
posted on
11/20/2002 7:19:34 PM PST
by
Rummyfan
To: Pokey78
Pokey -
Please add me to the Ann Coulter ping list too (already on the Steyn list). Thanks.
47
posted on
11/20/2002 7:21:17 PM PST
by
Rummyfan
To: TLBSHOW
For ANYONE still paying for the New York Times - give up your subscription and put the money here!
I learned along time ago where my valuable news comes from - Free Republic. GIVE MONTHLY! It keeps the information river alive!
48
posted on
11/20/2002 7:22:43 PM PST
by
txzman
To: laurav
Ann was pointing out that Ailes wasn't reporting news, he was sending a personal letter to the President. He wasn't expressing partisanship, but patriotism. The Times staffer with a byline slams Ailes and dams Fox but ignores egregious cases by others and itself. It's not a matter of guilt by association. It's a matter of Times' hypocrisy and stoopidity.
The Times is still hiding Pinch Sulzberger's SAT scores.
49
posted on
11/20/2002 8:40:36 PM PST
by
hrhdave
To: bumba_rasclot
Stop being obtuse and petulant or are you a liberal, in which case such behavior is quite normal.Mmm... name-calling. A very intelligent way to argue a point.
The NY Times showcased the piece, sure. Ann Coultur used to write for USA Today (before they dropped her column because of multiple factual errors). Does that mean USA Today agreed with her positions, just because the newspaper chose to print what she wrote?
50
posted on
11/20/2002 8:47:00 PM PST
by
laurav
To: Rummyfan
Done.
51
posted on
11/20/2002 8:57:29 PM PST
by
Pokey78
To: roob
I think Ann is lumping all liberal media outlets together. Guilt by association maybe.If so, this is a rather weak strategy. There is definitely a point to be made about media bias, but simply lumping all of these outfits together, from NBC to the Washington Post doesn't do it. Most of the people who work for these news agencies neither know nor like each other. They may have a similar worldview, and that's worth pointing out. But "guilt by association" seems a rather strange strategy for a conservative lawyer interested in individual rights to support.
This string of quotes concept is vintage Coultur. Ann relies on a technique known as "reporting by Lexis-Nexis." She looks up quotes in her database of news articles and then throws in a few zingers. She's good at the zingers and that makes it entertaining. But she's wasting her talent by not getting out and reporting her own stories. Instead, she just complains about liberals.
A very good writer once said that if you're writing an opinion piece, unless you call and interview someone who disagrees with you, you probably won't write a good one.
52
posted on
11/20/2002 8:57:49 PM PST
by
laurav
To: laurav
Is this what you are looking for? Happy now?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/792905/posts
NYT ed: The Fox News Presidential Adviser
The New York Times ^ | 11/21/2002 | editorial board
Posted on 11/20/2002 9:12 PM PST by Pokey78
Politicos who morph into journalists do themselves and their new profession no favor if they fail to shed their partisan habits. Roger Ailes, the vinegary chairman of Fox News, shows no sign of understanding that. Not long after Sept. 11, we learn from Bob Woodward's new book, "Bush at War," Mr. Ailes advised President Bush how to cope with the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. That would be fine, were Mr. Ailes still in the business of advising political candidates, but as a top executive of a news organization he should know better than to offer private counsel to Mr. Bush.
Mr. Ailes's action seems especially hypocritical for someone who has spent years trumpeting the fairness of Fox and the partisanship of just about everybody else in the news business. Fox's promotional slogan is: "We report. You decide." But the news channel has a Republican tilt and a conservative agenda.
Mr. Ailes, a former Republican strategist who helped the president's father win the White House in 1988, has argued that his missive contained not political counseling but personal advice about presidential policies. The difference hardly matters in the world of journalism.
53
posted on
11/20/2002 9:22:53 PM PST
by
Drango
To: Drango
sure- if she'd gone after this one, she'd be on much firmer ground. I agree the NY Times is being ridiculous. I also think Ann can do better.
54
posted on
11/20/2002 9:25:52 PM PST
by
laurav
To: Doc Savage
Uhhh Huhhhh I is in luv!
55
posted on
11/20/2002 9:29:38 PM PST
by
45semi
To: laurav
You said it was bylined. According to the posting above, it's an unsigned editorial.
To: laurav
sure- if she'd gone after this one, she'd be on much firmer ground. What? Now you're upset she's Miss Cleo?
57
posted on
11/20/2002 9:41:32 PM PST
by
Drango
To: Tempest
I'd be worried if the Dems had such an intelligent and attractive lady on their side.Hmmm... we have Ann Coulter.
They have Helen Thomas.
Yeah. We win.
To: LibWhacker
Or my favorite, when Nina Burleigh wrote in the Washington Post that she was busting at the seams to give Bill Clinton a blow job.Yeah, I remember when that pig said that!
It would be her way of thanking Clinton for protecting a woman's right to kill her baby after the baby was all born except for the top of its head. Wonder whatever became of that pig, Nina Burleigh?
To: laurav
Why do you keep spelling Ann's name "Coultur"?
It's like you are totally unfamiliar with her work or something. In which case, your commenting on her writing would be... idiotic.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson