For the first time ever the New York Times is not endorsing a single Republican

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/05/opinion/05sun1.html

This election is indeed about George W. Bush — and the Congressional majority’s insistence on protecting him from the consequences of his mistakes and misdeeds. Mr. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 and proceeded to govern as if he had an enormous mandate. After he actually beat his opponent in 2004, he announced he now had real political capital and intended to spend it. We have seen the results. It is frightening to contemplate the new excesses he could concoct if he woke up next Wednesday and found that his party had maintained its hold on the House and Senate.

 

Jeff Gerth's bullshit on Whitewater.

Katherine Seelye's bullshit on Al Gore during Campaign 2000.

Judith Miller's bullshit on WMD.

The bullshit holding of the NSA/wiretapping story until after the 2004 election.

We have seen the results, indeed.

Fuck you, New York Times.

 

And Bill O'Reilly's head explodes

 

So they should have done what exactly in this instance?

Do you have any idea how ridiculous posts like this and the Friedman post look? Times comes around to your way of thinking and instead of rejoicing, you bitch and moan that they weren't with you long enough?

Good grief.

 

Link please?

 

Re: For the first time ever the New York Times is not endorsing a single Republi

Do you have any idea how ridiculous posts like this and the NYT editorial posts look? One poster bitches and moans after the Times comes around to his way of thinking, and you bitch and moan about how he bitches and moans that they didn't come around to his way of thinking soon enough.

Good grief.

 

I didn't mean to start an inflammatory thread. I just found it interesting that this is the first time the NYT has NEVER endorsed a single GOP candidate in these elections.

Past journalistic sins notwithstanding, this is pretty amazing.

 

Re: For the first time ever the New York Times is not endorsing a single Republi

I definitely wasn't "Edit: referring" to you. It's just funny that Rossi's now shit all over two separate entities for writing/saying what he believes ... but just not doing it quickly enough.

Definitely worthy of a thread. Just not sure why it was worthy of Rossi's diatribe.

 

Mustard
I know you weren't.

 

Re: For the first time ever the New York Times is not endorsing a single Republi

A journalist citing another organization's shoddy journalism, the result of which has been to this country's detriment? If this is a faux pas, our profession has bigger problems than I thought.

This isn't, or at least it shouldn't be, a left-right issue. My point is this: The NYT is the last organization that has the right to look around in bewilderment and muse, "How could this have happened?"

And mustard, if there have been any similarly egregious NYT work that has stuck it to Republicans, by all means, post it. I'd feel the same way about it.

 

This thread is worthless without pictures.

 

When you've hung around Lou Grant as long as Rossi has, everything becomes worthy of a diatribe.