PDA

View Full Version : The NYT jumps the shark ...



LWW
07-21-2008, 11:22 AM
The far left is so fond of being spoon fed that the Times no lobger bothers to even claim they have editorial balance.

Shame on them. A once great paper has sank to levels which would embarras the Weekly World News.'

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">NYT REJECTS MCCAIN'S EDITORIAL; SHOULD 'MIRROR' OBAMA
Mon Jul 21 2008 12:00:25 ET

An editorial written by Republican presidential hopeful McCain has been rejected by the NEW YORK TIMES -- less than a week after the paper published an essay written by Obama, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The paper's decision to refuse McCain's direct rebuttal to Obama's 'My Plan for Iraq' has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.

'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece,' NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain's staff. 'I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.'

MORE

In McCain's submission to the TIMES, he writes of Obama: 'I am dismayed that he never talks about winning the waróonly of ending it... if we don't win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president.'

NYT's Shipley advised McCain to try again: 'I'd be pleased, though, to look at another draft.'

[Shipley served in the Clinton Administration from 1995 until 1997 as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Presidential Speechwriter.]

MORE

A top McCain source claims the paper simply does not agree with the senator's Iraq policy, and wants him to change it, not "re-work the draft."

McCain writes in the rejected essay: 'Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. 'I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,' he said on January 10, 2007. 'In fact, I think it will do the reverse.'

MORE

Shipley, who is on vacation this week, explained his decision not to run the editorial.

'The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.'

Shipley continues: 'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.'

Developing...



The DRUDGE REPORT presents the McCain editorial in its submitted form:

In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation ìhardî but not ìhopeless.î Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80% to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation now is full of hope, but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.

Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. "I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,î he said on January 10, 2007. ìIn fact, I think it will do the reverse."

Now Senator Obama has been forced to acknowledge that ìour troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence.î But he still denies that any political progress has resulted.

Perhaps he is unaware that the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, ìIraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress.î Even more heartening has been progress thatís not measured by the benchmarks. More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists. Nor do they measure Prime Minister Nouri al Malikiís new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr Cityóactions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism.

The success of the surge has not changed Senator Obamaís determination to pull out all of our combat troops. All that has changed is his rationale. In a New York Times op-ed and a speech this week, he offered his ìplan for Iraqî in advance of his first ìfact findingî trip to that country in more than three years. It consisted of the same old proposal to pull all of our troops out within 16 months. In 2007 he wanted to withdraw because he thought the war was lost. If we had taken his advice, it would have been. Now he wants to withdraw because he thinks Iraqis no longer need our assistance.

To make this point, he mangles the evidence. He makes it sound as if Prime Minister Maliki has endorsed the Obama timetable, when all he has said is that he would like a plan for the eventual withdrawal of U.S. troops at some unspecified point in the future.

Senator Obama is also misleading on the Iraqi military's readiness. The Iraqi Army will be equipped and trained by the middle of next year, but this does not, as Senator Obama suggests, mean that they will then be ready to secure their country without a good deal of help. The Iraqi Air Force, for one, still lags behind, and no modern army can operate without air cover. The Iraqis are also still learning how to conduct planning, logistics, command and control, communications, and other complicated functions needed to support frontline troops.

No one favors a permanent U.S. presence, as Senator Obama charges. A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five ìsurgeî brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves. As we draw down in Iraq, we can beef up our presence on other battlefields, such as Afghanistan, without fear of leaving a failed state behind. I have said that I expect to welcome home most of our troops from Iraq by the end of my first term in office, in 2013.

But I have also said that any draw-downs must be based on a realistic assessment of conditions on the ground, not on an artificial timetable crafted for domestic political reasons. This is the crux of my disagreement with Senator Obama.

Senator Obama has said that he would consult our commanders on the ground and Iraqi leaders, but he did no such thing before releasing his ìplan for Iraq.î Perhaps thatís because he doesnít want to hear what they have to say. During the course of eight visits to Iraq, I have heard many times from our troops what Major General Jeffrey Hammond, commander of coalition forces in Baghdad, recently said: that leaving based on a timetable would be ìvery dangerous.î

The danger is that extremists supported by Al Qaeda and Iran could stage a comeback, as they have in the past when weíve had too few troops in Iraq. Senator Obama seems to have learned nothing from recent history. I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the ìMission Accomplishedî banner prematurely.

I am also dismayed that he never talks about winning the waróonly of ending it. But if we donít win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president. Instead I will continue implementing a proven counterinsurgency strategy not only in Iraq but also in Afghanistan with the goal of creating stable, secure, self-sustaining democratic allies.</div></div>

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashnym.htm

LWW

sack316
07-21-2008, 11:46 AM
LWW, you beat me to this one. I actually came on to post something about this. I'd love to hear this story presented by one of the major network news anchors, but I hear they are busy this week.

Sack

Bobbyrx
07-21-2008, 12:05 PM
Beside the obvious media bias by the NYT and the TV networks, the funny thing about it is that he writes 'My Plan For Iraq' BEFORE he goes to Iraq to consult with the generals in the field which is what he said he would base his plan on. Sounds like his mind is already made up.......but then thats never stopped him from changing his mind again if it's politically expedient.

Deeman3
07-21-2008, 12:14 PM
What did anyone expect. This si the New York Times. I remember when it was a credible paper with thoughtful commentary....and subscribers.

mike60
07-21-2008, 03:21 PM
L DUB DUCKY, Nice try.

McCain writes:
"Senator Obama is also misleading on the Iraqi military's readiness. The Iraqi Army will be equipped and trained by the middle of next year, but this does not, as Senator Obama suggests, mean that they will then be ready to secure their country without a good deal of help. The Iraqi Air Force, for one, still lags behind, and no modern army can operate without air cover. The Iraqis are also still learning how to conduct planning, logistics, command and control, communications, and other complicated functions needed to support frontline troops."

The Iraqi army fought a prolonged (8years) with Iran. Supplied by Reagan and Bush41. I recall history lessons about Civilization starting in the Tigris Valley while the folks in Europe were still living in caves. All this drivel about training an army when they've been training and fighting wars a thousand years before we existed as a country.
The only thing "complicated" about this is how much of our treasury will be siphoned into the pockets of the WAR PROFITEERS.


"In McCain's submission to the TIMES, he writes of Obama: 'I am dismayed that he never talks about winning the waróonly of ending it... if we don't win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president.' "

The terrorists have had a major triumph: 9/11/2001. Why does Bush never mention Osama Bin Ladin?


miguel666 james kopp murdering scum doing forever as some guy's bitch