NYT Rejects Mccain's Editorial; Should 'mirror' Obama

bhkad · 07-22-08, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

i keep my blolt carrier well oiled for the day the UN comes to collect a tax.

Oh, they will just collect it the way the do it now. You'll just have a little less to spend.

But think of it. There will be people all over the world who are just as grateful to you for your contribution as Americans and illegal aliens on welfare are.

aps · 07-22-08, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

but my question is how do they differ in thier imperfections?

Hmmmm, I don't know if I want to sit down and think about this question. I do see Obama as being more honest than McCain. McCain lost credibility in my eyes over the last year or so based on multiple situations. It would take a miracle to get it back. I have not had that same feeling about Obama as of yet.

bhkad · 07-22-08, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aps

Hmmmm, I don't know if I want to sit down and think about this question. I do see Obama as being more honest than McCain. McCain lost credibility in my eyes over the last year or so based on multiple situations. It would take a miracle to get it back. I have not had that same feeling about Obama as of yet.

Are you kidding me?

Obama slipped this Global Poverty bill through the House without anyone having read it and on a voice vote so that no one's vote could be held against them.

You think that is honest?

And what about the sweetheart deals Obama got from Tony Rezko?

And all the other shady characters in and out of his life and campaign???

I hope you let your husband do all the talking when you go car shopping.

You think Obama is more honest than McCain???

HAWWWWW!!!!!!

Indy · 07-22-08, 02:41 PM

Honestly I think they did the right thing. I know that's going to be a very unpopular position to take in this thread but there it is. Obama's piece touched on McCain, true, but it was more about Obama's positions and what HE wanted to do. McCain's piece on the other hand was nothing more than an attack piece. He didn't give anything of substance as to why we should elect him, it was just about why we shouldn't elect Obama. It wasn't worth printing and was a fairly crappy article. A waste of space if you will. McCain wasn't being forced to support Obama in any way, he was just being forced to write something of substance and give his specifics and what he wanted to do. Instead McCain went the Karl Rove route and attacked.

Just my opinion of course but I agree with their stance.

Reverend_Hellh0und · 07-22-08, 03:14 PM

You know what is facinating?

I bet we can't find one instance where the NYT had such an issue with a democrat.

jallman · 07-22-08, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indy

Honestly I think they did the right thing. I know that's going to be a very unpopular position to take in this thread but there it is. Obama's piece touched on McCain, true, but it was more about Obama's positions and what HE wanted to do. McCain's piece on the other hand was nothing more than an attack piece. He didn't give anything of substance as to why we should elect him, it was just about why we shouldn't elect Obama. It wasn't worth printing and was a fairly crappy article. A waste of space if you will. McCain wasn't being forced to support Obama in any way, he was just being forced to write something of substance and give his specifics and what he wanted to do. Instead McCain went the Karl Rove route and attacked.

Just my opinion of course but I agree with their stance.

Uh...it's called a rebuttal and speaking to the half-truths and lies in the original piece is what the rebuttal is supposed to do.

aps · 07-23-08, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jallman

Uh...it's called a rebuttal and speaking to the half-truths and lies in the original piece is what the rebuttal is supposed to do.

It's called McCain writing a poorly-written article and the New York Times correctly not wanting to print it. McCain was unwilling to define victory in Iraq, yet you had no problem defining it to me last week.

PeteEU · 07-23-08, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

You know what is facinating?

I bet we can't find one instance where the NYT had such an issue with a democrat.

the NYT rejected Bill Clinton several times according to former Clinton White House staff. I dunno if its true or not, but if true it kinda blows that argument out of the water that NYT was targeting McCain due to him being a republican.

CNN.com - Transcripts

Quote:

JENNIFER PALMIERI, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I don't think so. When I worked for President Clinton, "The New York Times" rejected many op- eds written by him as a sitting president of the United States. They don't just give up space to a candidate because their opponent has space. You can't just go -- you can't go to "The New York Times" editorial page and say I want to say what's wrong with the other guy. They want to leverage their space, which is very valuable, to force you to say something you haven't said before. And I think that they turned down McCain not because they like Obama but because McCain, all he was doing in his piece was criticizing Obama and they wanted him to put him on the spot to say more.

Maybe just maybe, because the op-ed piece was so bad that only tabloids would publish it.

The problem is that it is full of factual mistakes and McCain should really fact check his stuff before he gets it published.

DeeJayH · 07-23-08, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteEU

the NYT rejected Bill Clinton several times according to former Clinton White House staff. I dunno if its true or not, but if true it kinda blows that argument out of the water that NUT was targeting McCain due to him being a republican.

CNN.com - Transcripts

Maybe just maybe, because the op-ed piece was so bad that only tabloids would publish it.

The problem is that it is full of factual mistakes and McCain should really fact check his stuff before he gets it published.

first of all a sitting president is completely different from one presidential CANDIDATE responding to ANOTHER presidential CANDIDATES op-ed that was already published by said magazine
a sitting president writing op-eds is the stupidest thing i have ever heard of
all he has to do is a press release or a speech
why the **** would he need the times to print an op-ed for him
sounds like using them as his propaganda mouthpiece

independent_thinker2002 · 07-23-08, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

Obama's bill "subordinates U.S. foreign policy to the U.N. and commits us to fulfill what are called the U.N. Millennium goals — that is, 0.7 percent of GNP to foreign aid. And that means we’ve got to come up (with) $845 billion...”

CHANGE!

See why the NYT didn't print his Op-Ed? Even you lost interest and would rather talk about Obama.

07-22-08, 02:41 PM	#24
Indy Phoenecian Join Date: Mar 2006 Last Seen: 11-05-09 02:00 PM Location: Chicago Posts: 2,085 Thanks: 340 Thanked 413 Times in 252 Posts Lean: Independent	Re: NYT Rejects Mccain's Editorial; Should 'mirror' Obama Honestly I think they did the right thing. I know that's going to be a very unpopular position to take in this thread but there it is. Obama's piece touched on McCain, true, but it was more about Obama's positions and what HE wanted to do. McCain's piece on the other hand was nothing more than an attack piece. He didn't give anything of substance as to why we should elect him, it was just about why we shouldn't elect Obama. It wasn't worth printing and was a fairly crappy article. A waste of space if you will. McCain wasn't being forced to support Obama in any way, he was just being forced to write something of substance and give his specifics and what he wanted to do. Instead McCain went the Karl Rove route and attacked. Just my opinion of course but I agree with their stance.
	__________________ Affiant further sayeth not.

07-22-08, 03:14 PM	#25
Reverend_Hellh0und Bombastic Grandiloquence The Bartender Join Date: Sep 2007 Last Seen: Today 11:11 AM Location: You're Awesome! Posts: 33,573 Thanks: 6,030 Thanked 7,486 Times in 4,617 Posts Lean: Libertarian Gender: Total Awards: 3	Re: NYT Rejects Mccain's Editorial; Should 'mirror' Obama You know what is facinating? I bet we can't find one instance where the NYT had such an issue with a democrat.
	__________________ كافر Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode