Monday, September 22, 2008

The NYT Taken Out To The Woodshed

In a “it’s about time” moment today, the McCain campaign came out and ripped the New York Times for it’s overt support of the Barack Obama campaign. This is way overdue for the Republican Party.

The NYT along with the other liberal media such as the Associated Press, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, etc have for years been highly partisan organizations. As was accused by the McCain campaign today, the NYT has essentially been the public relations arm of the Democratic party for decades.

In two separate incidences today, one involving a campaign aid, the other a supporter at a rally, the liberal media got it’s comeuppance. This is the
story from, they put it best.

“Let’s be clear and be honest with each other about something fundamental to this race, which is this: Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not — by any standard — a journalistic organization,” strategist Steve Schmidt told reporters on a conference call. “It is a pro-Obama advocacy organization that every day attacks the McCain campaign, attacks Senator McCain, attacks Governor [Sarah] Palin and excuses Senator Obama.”

Schmidt accused the Times of giving Obama a pass on his “deceitful ads” and abdicating its journalistic responsibility to vet Obama’s “background and past statements.” It was an unusually harsh critique for a campaign that last year enjoyed largely favorable press coverage.

“This is an organization that is completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate,” Schmidt fumed. “It is an organization that has made a decision to cast aside its journalistic integrity and tradition to advocate for the defeat of one candidate — in this case John McCain — and to advocate for the election of the other candidate — Barack Obama.”

I can only say one thing, WOW.

Then we had a woman with lots of guts, maybe she is being inspired by hockey mom Sarah Palin, stand up and give the assembled press Hell.

The woman ripped reporters for focusing on the pregnant teenage daughter of Palin, the GOP vice presidential nominee, while largely ignoring Obama’s ties to radical Bill Ayers and controversial Chicago businessman Tony Rezko.

“We want the media to start doing their job and stop picking on little children because of their age and their pregnancies,” she exclaimed. “Shame on you! Shame on all of ya’s!”

This is not only gutsy but quite funny. Imagine a press staffer being there. They’re bored because their boss made them follow this McCain guy instead of the dreamy Obama. Further, they’re hoping no one can read they’re thoughts about the dreamy remark because the reporter is, in fact, a man. When all of a sudden, he’s snapped out of his fantasies about Obama by this woman giving him a dressing down in front of this huge crowd. Everyone’s laughing, she saying shame on you. ‘This sucks, I wish I were at the Obama rally.’ It would have been a sight to see folks.

So of course the editor of the NYT (who knew they had an editor) Bill Keller, offered this reply, “You know, you are absolutely correct. We have totally been in the tank for The One, Obama. We are so ashamed. Further, we apologize and will stop this immediately and start reporting fairly.” Just joking, what he really said was this:

“The New York Times is committed to covering the candidates fully, fairly and aggressively,” Keller wrote. “It’s our job to ask hard questions, fact-check their statements and their advertising, examine their programs, positions, biographies and advisers. Candidates and their campaign operatives are not always comfortable with that level of scrutiny, but it’s what our readers expect and deserve.”

The article didn’t say if he was able to get through this without laughing hysterically or not. If he does not find this comment ridiculous, he’s a bigger idiot than even I give him credit for. Also, do you like the whole "it's the conservative's fault" explanation? The NYT couldn't be wrong, the conservatives are just being whiny and misunderstanding.

For more amusement, check out this article on The NYT provides a list of the “hard-hitting” investigative stories they have done on Obama. I just took a sample from the middle of the list to give an indication of just how rough they have been on this poor soul.

29. Obama Secret Service Agent Tied To Sex Joke [New York Times, 5/15/08]
30. The Story of Obama, Written by Obama [New York Times, 5/18/08]
31. Following Months of Criticism, Obama Quits His Church [New York Times, 6/1/08] 32. Many Blacks Find Joy in Unexpected Breakthrough [New York Times, 6/5/08]

The horror they have put this man through.

As I said at the beginning, it is about time the GOP did this. I have said before, it is not the fault of the media for acting this way. It is our fault for tolerating it. If a network or show you are watching cannot bring itself to be balanced, turn it off. We have the power to end this, we just have to stand up to them. For a change, one campaign aid and one lady in Pennsylvania got it right. Here’s hoping for many returns. Stand up, hound these reporters at these rallies.


The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

Remember when the NYTimes gave "the friends and family discount" [Trent Lott] for their "General Betrayus" full-page ad?

The Times has been in non-agenda-driven decline ever since Arthur Schlesinger Jr. took the reins from his father.

LauraB said...

Sarah Palin was willing to meet her head on and would have been gracious. Her speech would have been out of the park. She would have up-staged Hillary. Oops, I am answering the question of why Hillary did not show up. JEALOUS and AFRAID. Not pretty
The Jewish Groups Are Furious That The Protest Against Ahmadinejad Was, turned into, a Pro-Palin, Bash-The-Dems Affair But, why arn't those same Jews are NOT furious that Obama sat in a pew to listen to his Anti-semitic mentor, Reverend Wright, bash Jews for twenty years. ?

cube said...

Yay! It is waaay past time for this.

Remember when we used to complain about liberal media bias and they'd scoff at us as though we were crazy?

Now it's out in the open. There's no denying it any more.

laurab is absolutely right about the Jews and Nobama's church. Where is their outrage for that.

Nancy Swider said...

If only McCain would have divorced the New York Times years ago.. But, oh well, at least now he and his campaign has seen the light. Look the press is in a panic because when you look at the state by state scenarios, its awfully tough for Obama to win. Thats what I'm talking about over on my blog today, let me know what you think.

shoprat said...

It's probably right the job application given out at the NYT

What is your political affiliation?

___ Republican

___ Non Partisan

They consider only conservatives partisan for some reason.

Brooke said...

I about snorted my soda reading the NYT's pathetically comical response!

The newspapers are only useful for lining my bird's cage bottom.

I always get a chuckle of her jumping to the bottom of the cage to examine the fresh paper, and then 'going' on it.

Even a birdbrain knows the thing is a rag... :)

Chuck said...

Wordsmith, of course they denied having an agenda on the despicable Betrayus ad also.

Laura B, thanks for visiting. I think the Jewish groups were upset but I'm not so sure the rank and file Jews are buying it. They have been trending away from Obama. As far as the Wright deal, the media ignored this completely for awhile until Hannity brought it up then they gave it a little play. Stop by again.

Cube and Nancy, In my mind the discussion over whether the media has a liberal bias is over. We have had too many Universities (left leaning in themselves) study this and conclude that the MSM is biased and Fox is the most balanced. The public believes it except for the far left. Some of them even think the NYT is too supportive of Bush.

Shoprat, funny. BTW, I added you to my blogroll.

Brooke, I don't know how they defend this with a straight face.

Aurora said...

If a network or show you are watching cannot bring itself to be balanced, turn it off. We have the power to end this, we just have to stand up to them.

Exactly! I don't even watch TV any more. We are their bread and butter and it's time we let them know.

Chuck said...

Agreed Aurora, we still watch tv but we are selctive about what and who we watch.