McCain OpEd Not Up to NY Times’ Snuff

Good McCain has done enough lying in his TV ads. The problem McSame has is he can not say what “victory” or “winning” is….

Glad to see that ABC, so far, has been fair in covering both candidates.
I wish CNN would take the hint. CNN is Obama’s network – bought and paid for.

Dr. Larry Hunter: Lifelong Conservative Republican Economist Supports Senator Obama
I’m a lifelong Republican – a supply-side conservative. I worked in the Reagan White House. I was the chief economist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for five years. In 1994, I helped write the Republican Contract with America. I served on Bob Dole’s presidential campaign team and was chief economist for Jack Kemp’s Empower America.
This November, I’m voting for Barack Obama.
When I first made this decision, many colleagues were shocked. How could I support a candidate with a domestic policy platform that’s antithetical to almost everything I believe in?
The answer is simple: Unjustified war and unconstitutional abridgment of individual rights vs. ill-conceived tax and economic policies – this is the difference between venial and mortal sins.
Taxes, economic policy and health care reform matter, of course. But how we extract ourselves from the bloody boondoggle in Iraq, how we avoid getting into a war with Iran and how we preserve our individual rights while dealing with real foreign threats – these are of greater importance.
John McCain would continue the Bush administration’s commitment to interventionism and constitutional overreach. Obama promises a humbler engagement with our allies, while promising retaliation against any enemy who dares attack us. That’s what conservatism used to mean – and it’s what George W. Bush promised as a candidate.
Plus, when it comes to domestic issues, I don’t take Obama at his word. That may sound cynical. But the fact that he says just about all the wrong things on domestic issues doesn’t bother me as much as it once would have. After all, the Republicans said all the right things – fiscal responsibility, spending restraint – and it didn’t mean a thing. It is a sad commentary on American politics today, but it’s taken as a given that politicians, all of them, must pander, obfuscate and prevaricate.
Besides, I suspect Obama is more free-market friendly than he lets on. He taught at the University of Chicago, a hotbed of right-of-center thought. His economic advisers, notably Austan Goolsbee, recognize that ordinary citizens stand to gain more from open markets than from government meddling. That’s got to rub off.
When it comes to health care, I am hoping Obama quietly recognizes that a crusade against pharmaceutical companies would result in the opposite of any intended effect. And in any event, McCain’s plans in this area are deeply problematic, too. Take drug re-importation. McCain (like Obama) says he’s perfectly comfortable with this ill-conceived scheme, which would drive research and development dollars away from the next generation of miracle cures.
But overall, based on his embrace of centrist advisers and policies, it seems likely that Obama will turn out to be in the mold of John Kennedy – who was fond of noting that “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Over the last few decades, economic growth has made Americans at every income level better off. For all his borderline pessimistic rhetoric, Obama knows this. And I believe he is savvy enough to realize that the real threat to middle-class families and the poor – an economic undertow that drags everyone down – cannot be counteracted by an activist government.
Or maybe not. But here’s the thing: Even if my hopes on domestic policy are dashed and Obama reveals himself as an unreconstructed, dyed-in-the-wool, big-government liberal, I’m still voting for him.
These past eight years, we have spent over a trillion dollars on foreign soil – and lost countless lives – and done what I consider irreparable damage to our Constitution.
If economic damage from well-intentioned but misbegotten Obama economic schemes is the ransom we must pay him to clean up this foreign policy mess, then so be it. It’s not nearly as costly as enduring four more years of what we suffered the last eight years.
http://letustalk.wordpress.com/2008/07/19/dr-larry-hunter-lifelong-conservative-republican-economist-supports-senator-obama/

So now McCain has to MIRROR Bambi’s articles — he has to respond, and not write his own position papers? Obama gets to write about whatever he wants, and theNYT is eager to print those. McCain isn’t allowed the same access, apparently. His stuff is only good enough when he’s responding to our Messiah.

McCain’s rejected NYT piece:
In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation “hard” but not “hopeless.” 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,” he said on January 10, 2007. “In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”
Now Senator Obama has been forced to acknowledge that “our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence.” 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, “Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress.” Even more heartening has been progress that’s 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 Maliki’s new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City—actions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism.
The success of the surge has not changed Senator Obama’s 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 “plan for Iraq” in advance of his first “fact finding” 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 “surge” 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 “plan for Iraq.” Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t 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 “very dangerous.”
The danger is that extremists supported by Al Qaeda and Iran could stage a comeback, as they have in the past when we’ve 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 “Mission Accomplished” banner prematurely.
I am also dismayed that he never talks about winning the war—only of ending it. But 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. 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.

If McCain doesn’t want “timetables”, “timelines”, “time horizons”, whatever he should at least in his OpEd write about what he defines “success” in Iraq as and what criteria must be met before the troops can come home.
The fact that McCain has been so vague in his policy is the reason why NYT won’t take his OpEd. It appears that it was just a bunch of bashing of Obama rather than real substance.
McCain we need DETAILS…

McCain has no strategy for Iraq. “More of the same” is not a strategy.
The “awakening councils” changed things in Iraq (before the surge).
McCain’s response was to take credit.
Malike has changed things in Iraq by successfully taking on Shia militant groups AND refusing to sign on to an unlimited occupation by American forces.
McCain’s response:
Refusal to acknowlege that the Iraqi government doesn’t want a permanent occupation.
Obama changed things in Iraq by offering a intellegent, thoughful piece in the NY Times that discussed among other things, what victory in Iraq means.
McCain’s response:
Old talking points, written by a staffer.
No new information.
No new proposals.
No understanding of the role of the awakening councils.
No understanding of the relationship between shia and sunni.
No understanding of Iran’s heightened power in the middle east due to the invasion of Iraq.
No acknowlegement of the central point in the war on terrorists: Afghanistan
A vain search for the border between Iraq and Afghanistan.

I have never seen a campaign whine more than McCain’s.

I agree I have never heard a candidate whin as much as McCain.
Signed Hillary Clinton

Glad to see that ABC, so far, has been fair in covering both candidates.
I wish CNN would take the hint. CNN is Obama’s network – bought and paid for.
Posted by: Caroline | Jul 21, 2008 1:49:57 PM
**************
are you kidding me? CNN is Mccain favorite grand child. they ONLY report on Obama’s “controversy”, still waiting on them to report on Mccain, still waiting on them to report on Maliki supporting Obama’s Iraq plan. you republican have already taken over FOX, you are taking over CNN with the likes of lou dobbs (who is doing your dirty job) and that fool on CNN headlines.

Since I never read this thing (newspaper?), I can only assume they have a burr up their a;;. I thank you for printing the NYT response to Mr. McCain because a careful reading will reveal why no one ought to read this thing.

mccain is a big whiney cry baby is this all hes got in this election is to bash obama i agree someone said we need details mccain not constant obama bashing the more you bash him the more it backfires mccain your not gonna win!!!! obama08

Did I just hear Mccain say, “The Iraq/Pakistan border….. HILLARIOUS… They don’t even border each other….and he wants to be my president… I DON’T THINK SO.. Way too many gaffes…

I see the Rush Dumbo’s are still very much alive. Well, the Obamamaniacs are here to stay, and you guys can continue spreading your lies about President Obama as long as you like.. It didn’t work for the Hill – Billy and it won’t work for the Dumbo’s. We will finally have an intelligent looking and intelligent speaking (let alone perfectly groomed and just breathtaking) president. I want to be the first to say, “Hello Mr. President (Obama)!!!!

As a writer and former editor, I can understand the Times’ position. It isn’t too often than a text (even an op ed) gets accepted on the first go around. Rewrites are incredibly common. Most major papers and journals only accept between 15% – 20% of the texts submitted.
Additionally, we don’t know from this article what McCain’s piece contained. It may have been well written, or it may have been very poorly written.
Also – if you read the Times’ request that his piece “mirror” Obama’s, it seems like they are more asking McCain to address some key issues. I’m sure he could address the issue of a time table by explaining why he doesn’t think there should be one.
I’d love to see what McCain’s team submitted to get a better idea of this scuffle. We can conjecture all we’d like, but that will get us nowhere.

I simply do not trust anyone who is a republican. I have seen over the decades how republicans think, and who they cater to. As much as I do not want to side with the extreme left and believe I am much more of a moderate, I completely fear the present day republican mind set.
We desperately need a very new direction in this country, and it is very obvious that republicans like everything just they way it is, and only cater to middle and lower classes in an attempt to sway votes. I hav eyet to hear anything come from any republicans lips in regards to bringing back strength to the middle class.
In a republicans mindset it is not “We the People”, it is obvioously “We the Corporatins” , or “We the Welathy”
The republican mindset is purely one of screw the little guy, and it has been for quite some time. Even though they try to spin it differently.

David. Sure they do. you can tell by the moveon.org ads they run. Nice try.

Sorry – I just now say that Amy supplied McCain’s text.
I have to agree, still, with the Times’ position. It isn’t a very well put together article. It seems to leave out important explanation and critical analysis that is important.-

Justin and David,
Read futher up. A poster named “amy” reprinted the entire rejected McCain op-ed piece. And you are correct. It bashing Obama with no substance whatsoever.

Good job Nat! You’re doing just as I recommended. Keep repeating to yourself over and over what you WANT to happen and you will eventually believe it in your gut.
Baby steps, Baby steps.

McCain’s op-ed piece was as unspecific as most of his policies are (if you can keep track of where he stands on an issue at any given moment). The New York Times is encouraging his campaign to resubmit something of substance. If McCain and company can manage to do that, I would expect the paper to print the piece.

So much for the “Fairness doctrine” that the NHT has been so fast to support.

Daryl, I can’t wait until Obama starts “helping the middle class.” check out his plans for raising (your!) taxes. Have fun.

The DFN Hussein Obama liberal’s are really stinking today!!!!!!!!! Pure manure!!!!!!11

Who’s really supised about this? You’ve got a true Socialist in Barack Hussein Obama so it’s only natrual the most bias liberal rag in the country is going to pull out all stops in seeing him elected. I’m glad this happen because I believe it will backfire and blow up in the NY times face!

what is real. how do you define real. this is the world that you know. the media is bought and paid for. the presidential race will spend 2 billion dollars for a 450 thousand dollar job. why. its all about the money. both sides want to own the bank. neither side care about us. who struck first. we scorched the media and built them up in power and revenues. fate is not without a sense of irony. both sides act so innocent but both are so guilty. endless fields of peoples lives in the balance and yet the media thinks they know best. obama is the medias candidate. the media is the matrix. control. a dream world to control us. to change us to what they need. more revenue.

To Mccain and his camp, you may want to listen to Mike Huckabee. You’re too focused on what President Obama is doing. You all are making the Hillary mistake by trying to shift the focus off Mccain (because he is clueless) and onto our next President.. Mccain camp, it will back fire.. We are not all Rush Dumbo’s people… OK…

Who’s really supised about this? You’ve got a true Socialist in Barack Hussein Obama so it’s only natrual the most bias liberal rag in the country is going to pull out all stops in seeing him elected. I’m glad this happen because I believe it will backfire and blow up in the NY times face!

I hope tons of stars/celebs show up for the Democrat convention. The last thing people want is a guy that all of Hollywood is rooting for. Celebs are entertaining but everyone knows they are leftwing anti Americans who don’t have a clue about the real world.
Hollywood PLEASE flock to the Democrat convention! Please!!! Lol.

Oh, is the New York Times still publishing? I thought it had dwindled into becoming a weekly newsletter for some obscure groups.

So what’s new? The News Media has been undermining “the war” THE LIBERATION OF IRAQ from the very beginning, and spreading Terrorist Propaganda. They are responsible for the Deaths of more American soldiers than any Terrorist organization. The real enemies are here.

I am not surprised that the NYT didn’t want to publish McCain’s article. NY has to be one of the most liberal states in the US. The media bias is ridiculous!!
I think McCain’s piece was well written and informative. I am voting for McCain without a doubt. Personally, I would rather have Hillary Clinton than Obama in the White House. At least we know Hillary loves this country. God help us is Obama wins!!

“victory in Iraq must be based on conditions on the ground,” Such as, for example, that the Iraqi government has invited us to leave? Is that sufficient condition on the ground for you, Senator?

Mcain today in maine with the former president bush senior all he keeps talking about is the surge the surge mccain thats the past what are your plans for the future for the love of god old man please please give us details on what you are gonna do as potus enough with the surge we americans want to know your FUTURE PLANS FOR IRAQ or do you not have any plan on staying a 100 years johnny????????

POLITICIAN. sorry. This looks more like American Idol. What a way to pick our leaders. Idiots.

Is anyone surprised by this? We are talking about the New York Times, which is only good for lining bird cages anyway.

Mccain appears not to be ashamed one bit!Iraq should normally be a tabu word to him.It is his mess and lack of judgement that led us there!What is he talking about?He probably also needs education on foreign policy not only on Economy,as he demands!!

There’s a reason the liberal rags like Newsweek and NYT and LA Times are losing their shirts. People are fed up with this biased nonsense.
And like I said, it backfires almost every time. And it WILL backfire this November when McCain easily wins.

It amazes me that Senator Obama’s supporters can do no better, as well-educated as they’re supposed to be. They choose to ignore facts, but instead resort to name calling, lies, and distortion. Take your marbles and go home, kiddies. This site is for adults who want to talk rationally about the issues. Your ignorance is unbecoming. (I can’t wait until school starts, so they can go back to the playground!) As for the NY Times, it’s a dinosaur that will be out of business by 2015. Good riddance.

Beth – or, maybe, McCain just isn’t a very good writer… so sad.

Beth, if your going to “rebut” something you need to aim your piece toward the things you disagree with. It sounds like McCain just wanted page space without directing his argument toward the things Obama had said. Just to say “I disagree” doesn’t cut it, you need to address WHY you disagree.

George W McCain’s ideas, like all Republican ideas…belongs on the pages of the National Enquirer or on the air at FauxNews.
I saw where he said today on Good Morning America: “We have a lot of work to do and I’m afraid it’s a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border.”
Anyone with half a brain knows Iraq isn’t anywhere near Pakistan…and that Czechoslavakia hasn’t existed for fifteen years.
But what can you expect from someone like McCain, who DOESN’T EVEN KNOW HOW TO USE A COMPUTER. Unbelievable.

Does McCain’s message have to change if it is still true? Obama has charisma but no substance; McCain has substance but no charisma – which is more important?

Did I just hear Mccain say, “The Iraq/Pakistan border….. HILLARIOUS… They don’t even border each other….and he wants to be my president… I DON’T THINK SO.. Way too many gaffes…
Posted by: Obamaall theway | Jul 21, 2008 2:28:29 PM
what about the 57 states comment Obama made?!

There is a new religion abroad on the land. It is called the Religion Of Obama (ROO). It has an arm of the Religion called the Journalist Apostles of Obama (JAO). The JAO is made up of at least several dozen American journalists and editors employed by various media organs. The JAO, as a group and individually, are hypnotically enthralled by the ROO. They swoon over all things ROO. It is probable that while the JAO’s members are not actually in the pay of ROO, they do expect to be repaid for their loyalty several times over by the access to ROO to be granted them should ROO triumph in November. What’s next? A rumor is circulating that the Book of ROO is about to be published. Can’t wait.

There is a huge pushback soon to happen against Obama because of the media distortions and bias towards Osama. For Obama to claim President Bush’s and even some of John McCain’s policies as his own is as outrageous as his claim to be qualified to be President. What’s even funnier is the msm going along with it. barak has proven he is the empty suit many democrats feared he was prior to locking up the nomination. Everyday he says something more astonishing – from his denial of the success of the war in Iraq to his belief that we should not be drilling for oil as gas prices skyrocket, to his more of his empty platitudes about change and hope and hope for change or whatever.

…and the NYT wonders why it is losing subscriptions!!! Man, they have played right into McCain’s hands. The far right has had difficulty getting inspired, and what does the NYT do??? THEY INSPIRED THE RIGHT!! Man, they probably do need to shut their doors! How sad!

Typical liberal media bias. We already know that Hollywood and the 99% of the media has elected Obama. I wouldn’t expect anything else. Not surprised at all that they just blatantly come out in the open now for everybody to see there not going to report the news ther going to report one side of it or make it up. Thank you Fox news, I have something to watch thats not fallen to Phrophet Obama the Savior of the world.

Obama’s gaffe about borders was worse. Remember when Obama said that Hillary would do well in Kentucky because it bordered Arkansas where she was popular? Uh, Mr. Obama, the genius forgot that Kentucky ALSO borders ILLINOIS!!!!
What a MORON!!!! All 57 states agree. LOLOLOLOL.

The funny comments are the ones that say “well maybe McCain’s just not a good writer.” Ironically, that is the gist of this ABC article – the title intentionally skews the readers’ expectations of the substance. Nowhere in the piece is it suggested that McCain is not a good writer – au contraire, McCain is a best-selling author – yet the title insinuates it.
Most importantly, the article doesn’t actually reference McCain’s article, so several people here have taken it upon themselves to confirm that McCain’s writing is poor, despite the fact that they have never sampled it!
All of you who have lauded ABC’s fairness, I present to you unequivocal proof of ABC’s bias!

So now McCain has to MIRROR Bambi’s articles — he has to respond, and not write his own position papers? Obama gets to write about whatever he wants, and theNYT is eager to print those. McCain isn’t allowed the same access, apparently. His stuff is only good enough when he’s responding to our Messiah.
Posted by: Beth |
*************************************************Look all McCains piece was an attack ad on Obama, nothing substantive. He should pay for his own negative advertising. I’m glad that the editatorial board told McCain to come back with something concrete that explained his ideas, instead of a stupid Obama bashing piece.
McCain should get a speech writer to do it for him. Obama is highly intelligent, sophisticated and is a very gifted writer. McCain is not the brightest bulb, so he should get some help with it. But it would be interesting to see just what his actual ideas are. usually I just hear him regurgitating Republican talking points that get emailed out to everybody from the RNC every day. Which is why you hear a lot of them along with the press carry the identical theme throughout the day.

A typical media bias trick, ask McCain to go and re-edit the piece to fit the preconceived notions of the Times. The Times is not suitable for bird cage use, I would suggest it be recycled for toilet tissue use, to get the most appropriate use from the paper. The real hypocrisy here is that the Democrats are the ones trying to revive the Fairness Doctrine and yet refuse McCain space to respond to a direct attack by Obama. Objective reporting is just about dead, and the NY Times is the poster child for this travesty in this case. Bad political judgment seems to be concentrated in the media, where newspapers have become merely a vehicle for expressing agendas and disavowing journalistic integrity. My sense is that not all of the voters are that stupid. You can fool some of the people some of the time …

“THANK YOU”.. New York Times…I never thought I would ever say this to the Times, but..Please do what ever it takes to shut this “WEASEL McBUSH UP”..You can see BUSH’s mouth move with McBUSH sitting on his lap and BUSH’s arm under his coat.

The Fairness Doctrine would be a one-way street, with the likes of the New York Times determining what was “fair.”

Jane Hussein posted:
“Awww. I feel sorry for McCain. While Obama is meeting with world leaders, McCain is on the AARP tour.”
Sadly, the media bias for Obama is so severe that Jane didn’t notice that this is the FIRST time Obama has met world leaders that McCain encounters REGULARLY! HAHA.

Hey josh ponte – Don’t let facts get in the way of another irrational whiny tirade by the wackos on the right. They do not think … but are simply good little soldiers following drudge’s orders.

You can fool some of the people some of the time …posted by curtis41.
***************************************
Based on the number of people who voted for george Bush, you can fool a lot of the people most of the time.

Jo – at least Obama knows that Czechoslovakia hasn’t existed since 1992. LOL

Such pained explantions by the media. Don’t inmsult is further – it’s a plain and simple a power grab by the left wing media for Barrack Hussame (as Jimmy Carter) Obama.

Jefferson, if we were soldiers marching to our orders we’d be voting for Obama since that is what all the media is telling us to do.
It is you who are sheep following orders. Nice try thought, but you lose again.

As the media goes, so goes the nation? Not a chance! The latest bias by a major newspaper is a travesty of honest journalism. After watching the major cable news networks tank unabashedly for Obama, the NYT needs to show that it is a power broker also? The American people should be outraged at this insult. Let the people read both op-eds and decide for themselves. While the media darling is taking his grand photo-op tour, does the NYT think they have to control whatever op-ed McCain has to offer.
This campaign has been about trying to dictate the election to the American people. They did it to Hillary, so we knew they would be doing it to McCain. So much for a “free” press. We are doomed by such biased tactics. The fawning over Obama has really reached a rediculous point. The more he is propped up to look like a miracle worker, the closer we look, and the scarier it becomes. He is still a green, inexperienced candidate, full of soundbites and double-talking rhetoric.

Jo – what polls are you reading? Obama is up in all of them. Duh.

The NYT needs to be run out of town on a rail!!! What kind of freedom of speech are they interested in??? Just theirs!!! I am an independant that believes 2 men are running for President and both have the right to have their op-ed printed in their own words! This is the very reason why the NYT’S and other papers are obsolete and need to go the way of the dinosauers!!!

Nat Turner, what is hilarious is thinking the average American gives a hoot at what other countries would like us to do in our own election.
Keep misreading the public and keep losing! Lol.

The public needs to know stuff like this. The press and the TV News are turning up the normal bias they have for the Democrat Party Presidential candidate. I have never seen it this bad. They have been wrong the last two elections. I guess they want to make sure a Democrat wins this time. Too bad its the wrong Democrat this time. Hillary 2012!!

And Obama should know which states border his own. And that there are 57 of them.
Nice try though, but you lose also. Lol.

McCain is basing part of his stance on this:
T he Bush administration has claimed that “in a new assessment to Congress that Iraq’s efforts on 15 of 18 benchmarks are “satisfactory”" as judged by WHO, Bush?
That carries no weight at all. What does “satisfactory” mean? Sure doesn’t mean “met”.

ANYBODY REALLY SURPRISED BY THE MEDIA? THEY FLAUT IT.

Obama’s base is stupid women and wimpy men. Lord help us. NOT what this country was built on AND the first to whine whine in need of help.

Poor Obama. Without the teleprompter he’s a gaffe machine. Can’t wait to see him mess up in the debates. That should be good for a laugh.

The NY Times will go out of business soon as there readers die, so who cares what the NYT says or does, long live the Drudge Report

“Amy- Obama is up by 6 in the Gallup Poll. Scott Rasmussen is a regular on the Hannity show…Need I say more!”
Posted by: Jen | Jul 21, 2008 2:01:05 PM
Jen:
that’s great! obama is winning the contest. He’s the best! I love him. Why? Well, his anti-Bush stance, silly! And his wonderful smile. See, I can be a petty immature dope like you. Have you even read McCain’s editorial? Well, because of the NYT arbitrary, condescending response to an OPINION piece written by McCain, hopefully this issue will be aired and all those media outlets rooting for obama will be revealed as the propaganda tools they are. How can you and the rest of the liberals condone the wholesale muzzling of the opinions of a huge segment of the U.S? I thought you idiots were all for equal rights and were the party of fairness (and I don’t mean in the sense of applying those principles to terrorists or enemies).

No suprise – the biased NY Times is no longer a news media by any stretch – just opinions from the radical left.
No matter, they should be broke and out of business sonn anyway.

Jo Moma,
What you fail to realize in your stupor of denial is that Obama is not only up in America, but throughout the world.
TRANSLATION: Git yer sundy best redy fer the colerd feller in janery. Uncle Jed, Granny, Ellie Mae, her critters and Jethro will all be der. It’s gonna be fried crow served to all tha sinics. RSVP for yer seat Jo. We herd you luv some good “Blacked Crow”.
YOU WHINE/OBAMA WINS
Heckuva Job Jo!
POTUS OBAMA – ITS INEVITABLE

I don’t get it – the NYT didn’t “reject” McCain’s editorial. They just asked for a rewrite. Very common practice. Why would McCain turn around and leak that to Drudge instead of doing what he was asked? Looks to me like McCain is a whiner who can’t follow simple directions. Pathetic!

OnTheGloryRoad posted:
“Lewis…..sorry no you haven’t. You have provided unequivocal evidence of your judgement making process which is flawed.”
Thank you for the detailed explanation you included in your retort – wait no, you simply denigrated me and wrote me off without one! At least I can spell judgment, twit.

bonnie dudley says: “Obama’s base is stupid women and wimpy men.”
Not true, obviously. But from reading the news for the past seven years, it sure looks like McCain’s base is made up of pedophiles, closeted gays, and johns who like their hookers to dress them in diapers.

“The fact that McCain has been so vague in his policy is the reason why NYT won’t take his OpEd. It appears that it was just a bunch of bashing of Obama rather than real substance.”
For Michelle and anyone else wanting details on Iraq from McCain, they have been there from the beginning and you just aren’t recognizing it. The conditions on the ground, that being, Iraq being able to police their own provinces and patrol their own borders, while maintaining a relatively low level of violence is the point where McCain validates the peace being won in the country. It has been the same message for a long time now. I have a hard time understanding why people think he hasn’t shared his definition of victory.

CNN’s Situation Room played a clip of Obama saying this about his plan for Iraq:
BARACK OBAMA: I’m going to call in the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and give them a new mission, and that is to bring the war in Iraq to a close. We are going to get out.
There’s only one problem. The Joint Chiefs of Staff does not have operational command of U.S. military forces. That authority resides in the commanders of the various Unified Combatant Commands. CENTCOM is the command with responsibility for Iraq [and 26 other countries including Afghanistan and Pakistan]. Earlier this month, the Senate confirmed Pres. Bush’s appointment of Gen. David Petraeus as CENTCOM commander. Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno is the new US commander for Iraq, replacing Gen. Petraeus. Those are the people, along with the Secretary of Defense, to whom the orders Obama spoke of would be issued.
View video here: http://newsbusters.org/static/2008/07/2008-07-14CNNSRObama.wmv
Dean Barnett, Hugh’s former colleague, now a Weekly Standard contributor, has written about the chain of command and Obama’s gaffe in detail: Obama Ignorance Watch: What Do the Joint Chiefs Really Do?
During the segment I saw, CNN never noted this troubling lack of knowledge on the part of the man who would be Commander-in-Chief. Will any other MSM outlets call attention to it?
Obama’s bill S2433 would require the U.S. to initially direct .7 percent of our GNP into the United Nations coffers for distribution as they see fit, for “food” to third world nations. Under earlier agreements this would evolve into a national tax on the U.S. with the UN attempting to levy this on all first world nations.
The U.N. would have the power to increase this rate of taxation.
The U.S. would be required to surrender some of its sovereignty over foreign aid by putting it under UN control. The bill would force the U.S. to sign onto the U.N.’s Millennium Declaration, which would commit us not only to “banning small arms and light weapons” but also to adhere to the International Criminal Court Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.
***************
The quotes below are from Obama’s book, “Dreams of My Father”:
Although Obama spent various portions of his youth living with his white maternal grandfather and Indonesian stepfather, he vowed that he would “never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.”
This is from “Audacity of Hope”:
“There were enough of us on campus to constitute a tribe, and when it came to hanging out many of us chose to function like a tribe, staying close together, traveling in packs,” he wrote. “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.”
From “Dreams”:
“The emotion between the races could never be pure,”"Even love was tarnished by the desire to find in the other some element that was missing in ourselves. Whether we sought out our demons or salvation, the other race would always remain just that: menacing, alien, and apart.”
“There was something about him that made me wary,” Obama wrote. “A little too sure of himself, maybe. And white”

*Social Democrats advocating the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq on human rights grounds, citing reports detailing Hussein’s disregard for fundamental liberties. In March and April of 2003 Hussein was deposed by a US-led invasion, launching the ongoing Iraq war. In summer 2003, Social Democrats supported Tony Blair’s humanitarian justifications for the war. they also criticized the Democratic Party for casting doubt on President Bush’s pre-war assertions about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction in an election year (they found 550 tons of uranium last week). Obama was against it. Idiot.

ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN all are in the tank for the new pope Obama. They are willing to do anything for him.
All have reported more on Obama than McCain so with all that, I guess the Pope and his followers, Wright, Aires and such will have high level cabnet positions in the Pope Obama’s white house, or will that name also be changed.

To all who complain that McCain’s too old, think: Truman (an old man) dropped the bomb;
FDR died in office

The N Y Times is right by refusing to publish an old rehashed op-ed from a burned out senile old man. If McBush wants something to be published in a quality newspaper then he needs to give us something new.

Jo Moma,
What you fail to realize in your stupor of denial is that Obama is not winning in America, but throughout the world as well. YOUR OLD, WHITE, BORING, CORNY, PLAYED OUT JOHN WAYNE’S are obsolete.
TRANSLATION: Git yer sundy best redy fer the colerd feller in janery. Uncle Jed, Granny, Ellie Mae, her critters and Jethro will all be der. It’s gonna be fried crow served to all tha sinics. RSVP for yer seat Jo. We herd you luv some good “Blacked Crow”.
YOU WHINE/OBAMA WINS
Heckuva Job Jo!
POTUS OBAMA – ITS INEVITABLE

Obama = 15 point drop in 2 weeks. Love it, love it, love it.
Posted by: Jo | Jul 21, 2008 3:15:27 PM
*********
Poor little Jo,
The Newsweek Poll was an outlier: an outlier is an observation that is numerically distant from the rest of the data.
That poll was never taken seriously, as there was not a proper number of pollees that were willing to claim they were Republican (I understand 100%).
So, no drop. That poll has been thrown out by most intelligent political observrs. Sorry you didnt get the memo!

Obama is so unqualified it is scary. Please can anyone point to one accomplishment or qualification other than race that would justify a positive vote for Barry? At least Hillary was a credible choice.

I have never known americans to vote for who the media tells them to vote for. That’s why Obama will lose. Enough is enough and people will not reward the media for their bias.

Why don’t people faint at Obama rallies anymore?? A year ago people were dropping like flies!! But now, no fainting??? HMMMMMMMMMMMMM!

People like hawk bash “liberal” papers for siding with there candidate( though thats not what this was). But they say nothing about foxnews and the rest of rupert murdocks news companies printing lies about Obama and favoring McCain. What hypocrits.

ambrose -
sar·casm (noun)
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2. a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark
Don’t take yourself so seriously, honey. You’ll hurt yourself.

Kris,
BECAUSE POLLS ARE FOR LEMMINGS LIKE YOU, who depend on a system of insignificant numbers to make you THINK, something is closer than what it is.
POLLS ARE FOR LEMMINGS LIKE YOU who need to be spoonfed. No critical thinking skills of your own.
THE REALITY ANVIL HAS BEEN DROPPED AND WILL BE LANDING ON YOUR HEAD come November.
I’m safe to say, YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT.
POTUS OBAMA – THE ENDGAME

President Bush saved the world-someone tell the women, Jews and Gays..the Democrat base

Neo Politicus; So what’s new? The News Media has been undermining “the war” THE LIBERATION OF IRAQ from the very beginning, and spreading Terrorist Propaganda. They are responsible for the Deaths of more American soldiers than any Terrorist organization. The real enemies are here.
You are right, “So what’s new?” I never follow the media outlet, I go the opposite of what they are selling.

Many of the GOP’s party’s wiseguys and wisegals see polling data suggesting McCain’s chances of winning are no more than 30% . That sounds about right after Ron Paul and Bob Barr drain the GOP vote from McCain so much, he’s going to look like those fake chickens that claim their the real Foster Farms chickens.
My Friends, the S*** Talking Express is on blocks, the engine won’t start, and McCan’t doesn’t know how to drive.
ITS ALREADY OVER
POTUS OBAMA

amy, thanks for the text of McCain’s proposed coulumn. Now we see why it was rejected. It is simply a criticism of Obama, and says nothing about McCain’s proposals. That’s why newspapers have editors.

Why would you vote for Obama?
If you do the hard work in starting a business, or getting a high education and make 250,000 a year, Obama is going to tax you at 60% meaning you pay 150,000 a year in taxes!
If you are someone lucky enough to work in one of the remaining successful factories in the USA, he comes Obama again imposing a “Energy Tax” on your company. How long do you think it will take before your CEO has no choice but to cut back the labor force or worse move the company outside the USA to avoid Obama’s imposed energy tax?
We use 21 million barrels of oil a day. 9 million a day goes to transportation, the rest is used for energy, or electrical power plants to power our communities. We domestically produce 10 million barrels a day. Obama will not build nuclear reactors, nor drill to increase our domestic oil field for future use. Folks, trains planes ships and semi trucks are forever going to need diesel to run. We need a domestic vast oil field for these things while we switch to hybrids ect to commute.
This election is all about common sense, either you have common sense or you don’t. Obama represents the latter.

“What fools think that Drudge has a wider readership than the NYT? The NYT is the most important daily paper in the US. The Drudge Report is a partisan gossip site. That’s just absurd.”
Um, Angela, NYTimes readership is falling off like a leper’s skin. The chart of NYT stock dropping is so steep I wouldn’t ski it. Drudge is the #1 news website in terms of readership.
NYT is no longer the most important daily paper in the US, and Drudge provides the best links first to all the important news. It highlights conservative and (to a lesser extent) liberal pundits.
Outside the NYT’s ridiculous call here (have you read both BHO’s and McCain’s pieces? Both writers attack one another) what about their “Betray-Us” ad at reduced rates for the Move-On’s back in the fall? Not only was Obama wrong, but so were the NYT editors. So now the libs (champions of the “fairness doctrine”) are calling McCain a whiner?
It seems to me libs version of “fairness” is opinions that only agree with theirs.
NYT Times is soon to be irrelevant. And that Barry Obama only leads by single digits with this handicap should have his disciples worried.

All this jabbering nonsense from the right-wing posters here is amusing…but really boring.
Same old failed ideas and attacks. Same stuff they said when raving about Bush Jumior’s “abilities” for eight long years.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…..
I’m going to go play some golf and have a few cold ones.

People who state that they are going to vote for McCain because the media’s bias for Obama are IGNORANT. But I understand. Thats the only reason you have to vote for McCain since he has no substance or Ideas.

How to lose a Presidential Election written by John Buttermilk McCain:
I don’t have any considerable support from conservatives, and now evangelicals. (My base) Could you send more cynical b****y Clinton voters to me ASAP! Ooops, they’re voting for Obama. ARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHH!
After flip flopping on the same lobbyists who helped me when I was flying coach and staying in the Red Roof Inn, they have turned their backs on me. All I have is Black, and he’s hurting me more than helping me. HELP! I’ve fallen and I can’t get up!
George Bush’s “Big Wig Donors” won’t give me the time of day IN PUBLIC. I tell you, I get no respect, no respect at all. Doesn’t look good my friends.
The Repugnican Party is in shambles. Just ask Rush, Newt and American people. CAN IT GET ANY WORSE?
Ron Paul is going to syphon at least 25% of the Republican vote from me in the GE. Wait until see I that little commy b*****d! I’M HURTIN, FOLKS!
Go ahead and add another 10% for Bob Barr, another Republican Libertarian who is actually a better competitor against OBAMA than I am. HOW DID I GET INTO THIS MESS?
MY FRIENDS, after all the votes are counted, I should have enough votes to invite all of you over for a bridge tournament and Town Hall meeting at my LOCAL VFW in Arizona. BUTTERMILK FOR EVERYONE!
I HATE TO SAY IT MY FRIENDS, BUT…….
Can you say I’M GOING TO BE BLOWN OUT IN THE GE?

Why all the fuss? The New York Times didn’t say it wouldn’t run an op-ed piece by McCain; it just asked for a rewrite. Since when is a newspaper required to run unedited press releases on its op-ed page?

Louis – you are completely wrong. An OP -Ed does not have to be diametrically opposed. It is an Opinion. The problem is they want McCains Op Ed to address Obamas. That puts McCain in an reply situation. Not what MCCain wants to accomplish.

The NY Times is an absolute rag, its amazing that it still has an ounce of credibility.

Yes, most people “Gramps” age can think okay about theri everyday lives. But I don’t want them in the most powerful position in the entire world. More importantly, they do not have the energy required to be POTUS. …… I really believe McCain is tired and wishes he had not put himself into this position.

Ya know if the shoe was on the other foot all you liberal freaks would be crying foul. Its funny how it works that way! I think an op-ed piece should be printed regardless of how bad it is. What does it matter, let the people read it and decide for themselves. That seems pretty easy to me. There is no reason that his (McCain) should have to copy Obama’s article. That is dumb. He is a different person w/ different views. We will definantly be screwed if the media has it their way. Seems to me like people see Obama as some sort of savior. I am sorry to tell you people, but socialist ideals will get this country no where in a big fat hurry. We dont need our media being biased it only screws things up.

Mike – I’m voting for Obama precisely because I DON’T make 0ver $250,000/ year.
Nobody in the GOP is looking out for the little guy. They never have and they never will.
I support Obama because he cares about the middle class, not just the rich.

The New York Times runs op-eds by Hamas about how they love kittens and unicorns and only want peace, dispite the fact that Hamas’ charter states it wont accept peace. Yet it won’t run a op-ed from a US senator and presidential nominee?
What liberal bias??????
http://www.bothinonetrench.com

I agree with most of what Dr. Hunter said and I share many of his feelings about the Bush Administration. I too have been a life-long Republican, but instead of voting for Obama, I will be voting Libertarian this fall, for Bob Barr, the former Congressman. Libertarians share many of Dr. Hunt’s sentiments including getting this country back to constituional government and the protection of individual liberties. They also do not believe in foreign adventurism and will bring the troops home.

Life – wrong. If the shoe was on the other foot, Obama would simply have rewritten the editorial as he was asked to. McCain can’t follow simple directions and then he goes whining to the Drudge report like a big baby? What a fool.

NYT must be supporting Mr. McCain.. He is getting this paper published in every news outlet in the country and he doesn’t even have to pay for it. I’m sure he is going to send a thank you note for the rejection.

To McCain: If you cannot define what victory in Iraq means, how would you ever know when it is time to leave? The answer of course, is you do not have a clue.

The “fairness doctrine” will have no effect on this type of “journalism”. It is pointed directly at radio and does not address TV or newspaper programming. In other words, the dems (liberals) already have them locked up, but the radio is bothersome to them because it gives conservatism a voice. The “fairness doctrine” attacks radio specifically to eliminate conservative talk radio.
As we know, the First Amendment only applies to one side – never the other.

jayanderson:
wrong, wrong, wromg and wrong.
-McCain actually opposed the Tax cuts (but recently changed positions to please the conservative base, which i dont agree with)
-McCain is vastly different on economic issues, for 1 thing he favors a free-market and entrepreneurship. Something Bush has actually worked against
-McCain may favor offshore drilling, but according to a recent Galup Poll, so does 71% of Americans
-McCain actually opposed parts of the FISA bill that Bush found to be critical.
Sooooo..try again.

As a McCain Fan, I admit that the piece is poorly drafted. The body language is a bit rude ( Sunni and Shiite Terrorists) are not a good term to use.
There are also contradictions in the piece. I think it would do more harm to McCain if NYT published it the way it was.

*** McCain’s rough weekend: You know you had a problematic weekend when:
1) one of your top economic advisers/surrogates finally steps down from the campaign after his “nation of whiners” remark;
2) you get panned for breaking CODEL protocol/etiquette by announcing (incorrectly) at a fundraiser that your opponent is headed to Iraq on Friday or Saturday;
3) the prime minister of Iraq tells a German magazine that he backs your opponent’s plan for withdrawing troops from that country; and
4) when the Iraqi government tries to walk back that support, it does so unconvincingly.
5) Now the NYT won’t take anything you’ve scribbled together and post it.
IT DOESN’T LOOK GOOD FOR THE MCCAIN GERIATRIC GANG.
POTUS OBAMA – ITS INEVITABLE

This is another example of bias in the media. Why should the New York Times dictate what McCain wants to say? He wants to respond to Obama’s piece and they should let him. This, in my opinion, amounts to censorship. Did they ask Obama to rewrite his essay?

james – yeah, the Dems definitely got the shaft when Clinton lost in 92 and 96… what a dope!

It’s no wonder that the newspaper and newsmagazine industry are in serious financial trouble. I hope trash rags like the NYT and Newsweek go belly up, just like Obama will in the November election. Obama’s going to get beaten like a red-headed stepchild, and I, for one, will be laughing at the the bird-cage liner that are publications like the NYT.

I’d be curious to hear whether the NYT asked the Obama campaign to make any revisions to their submission. Personally, I think the media’s bias towards Obama is obvious. You can actually see Gwen Ifill pupils dilate when she mentions Obama. I do think that some of the bias is due to Bush’s appalling 8 years in office and the chance that McCain might continue some of Bush’s policies.

Pretty obvious bias from the NYT here, but still, I bet the Bush/McCain fear of timetables is less a fear of military reprisal than it is a fear of the political consequences of not living up to the timetables, or accidentally shouting “mission accomplished” again. I think McCain looks at long term occupation, such as in South Korea, as an acceptable result of this war. Most voters haven’t lived as long as that military occupation has lasted, and I doubt they’ll be likely to view it in the same “acceptable” light as Sen. McCain.

“Sunni and Shiite Terrorists”, I prefer Obama-Terrorist. Wait until Allah tells him to wear a dynamite vest into the Capital for the “State of the Union”.

Why does John McCain whine so much? He gets plenty of favorable coverage.
If Obama didn’t get enough coverage on his Iraq trip, they McCain camp would whine that the press was trying to cover up his gaffes. When McCain whines for Obama to go to Iraq, and the press scrutinizes the visit in minute detail, then they whine that there is too much coverage.
The New York Times does not exist to run free advertisements on its op ed page. Obama’s campaign proposed an editorial, the NYT gave him some guidelines, and Obama delivered the goods.
Then, they extend the same opportunity to McCain, but he does not want to follow the guidelines. So he cries about it. Just write the damned article and say thanks or shut the hell up about it.
The Republicans always accuse everyone else of being politically correct… but lately they are the only ones sniveling about how they are victims.
It’s time to man up, dudes.

I have only one question about the success of the ‘ surge ‘. How successful would the ‘ surge ‘ be if Al Sadr hadn’t called for and abided by the cease fire that he ordered?

All hail BO, BO, BO, BO. We kneel to your bidding, your opinions come from Heaven, we walk in unison to your wishes, we kneel before thee.
I was going to right in another canidadate, but I have been converted, I have seen the light. I will stop thinking and turn over all my money to BO. I am officialy part of the Cult and I will ignore anyone else’s voice but yours.
Oh BO, carrier of the staff of “Change”, may you strike me down if I wander from my blind following of your word.

McCain must remember that freshman Composition mantra:
“There’s no good writing, only good rewriting.”
Quit whining, rewrite, resubmit. You’ll be a better man for it.

Imagine that, the NYT in bed with a liberal democrat, who would have guessed? I’m sure the NYT will never betrayus.

John McCain’s “claims” that he is stronger on foreign policy, is just plain BULLSH*T!!!
THE FACT IS John McCain is the one who supported the invasion of Iraq, one of the WORST foreign policy mistakes the USA has ever made!
AND John McCain failed to recognizing that our focus should have been always been on Afghanistan, and the Taliban, and AlQueada, the people who are responsible for the death of over 3000 people on 9/11.
ADD TO THAT, THAT John McCain has NO PLANS to get out of Iraq, even though we have been there for 5 years, and the results of that is that we DO NOT have enough soldiers left to fight the Taliban, and AlQueada, in Afghnanistan.
THE FACT IS EVERY FOREIGN POLICY DECISION JOHN McCAIN HAS MADE OVER THE PAST 8 YEARS HAS BEEN WRONG!!

You Obama supporters insisting on McCain providing details for vitory in Iraq should insist on the same for your pathetic politically correct canidate. Stupid and dangerous. Pay attention and wise up.

Man, Liberals are very unhappy people, the world is coming to an end if Obama isn’t elected. Believe it or not we have had bad presidents in the past and we have rebounded. Don’t be so angry all of the time. We will prevail no matter which party wins. Unfortunately, Obama is not the best qualified candidate. As a matter of fact, he is not at all qualified. He seems a little clueless without his teleprompter. I wouldn’t vote for an extreme right wing and i definitely won’t vote for a extreme left wing. No matter what anyone says, Obama is extreme left wing.

This is so typical of the New York Times, that is why they are becoming obsolete. The media is so biased to the left that can’t see discrimination when they have it in front of them. Obama is starting to parrot Maccain on the middle east more and more, yet no one calls him on it.

Maybe McCain will now realize that the liberal media are not his friends and that they will do anything that they can to help Obama win this election.

Independent here, I have to say that the media craze over Obama makes me want to vote for anybody but him.

Electoral Calculus 2008 by Consultofactus. (You may want to save this for future reference).
Issues, trends and demographics working FOR Obama are in this order:
1. Television and print media.
2. The union vote
3. The eastern Dem establishment – meaning primarily NY, NJ, MA and the Daley Machine/Illinois.
4. The Youth/Internet generation support.
5. Conservative arm of the Republican party not enthralled with McCain.
Issues, trends and demographics working AGAINST Obama are in this order:
1. Youth vote has yet to materialize in any US national election.
2. The Black voter has marginalized itself by voting nearly 100% Dem – the fact that Obama is Black is only going to hurt him with many white working class but can only benefit slightly the historically high Black turn-out for the dems.
3. Obama’s resume is thin at best.
4. Once a strong point, Obama’s stance on the Iraq war will hurt him badly. Remember the words of JFK “Victory has 1,000 fathers but defeat is an orphan”
5. The electoral college is no longer bi-coastal – many of the southern states have picked up electoral votes lost by the Northeast.
Issues, trends and demographics working FOR McCain are in this order:
1. His age – yes, this in reality is a positive. He’ll be a one term president – period.
2. His stance on Iraq and the war on terror – solid. Can rightfully claim the substantial progress being reported in the media today.
3. He’s a proven fiscal conservative.
4. His considerable resume.
5. Genuine American hero.
Issues, trends and demographics working AGAINST McCain are in this order:
1. He’s not fully supported by a good numberof his own party.
2. Lacks the “Rock Star” persona of his rival.
3. Unable to match early fund-raising to Obama’s.
4. The RNC has been its own worst enemy in states like Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio.
5. Flip-flop on immigration will shadow him through-out the campaign.
Electoral Outcome: McCain 320 Obama 218

These comments are a shining example of why America is screwed. Half the people defending one idiot and insulting the other. The other half, vice versa. None of them recognizing that both candidates are idiots, and that’s a kind, generous appraisal, for both of them. Accurate language describing both candidates would be unprintable.

Of course the liberal NYT would shun McCain – they’re too busy fawning over Obama (the messiah).

McCain is a loser and he acts like a loser. He needs someone to blame for his own failures. He always blunders when he talks. He’s stuck in the past. It will be nice when he can get back to his senate career and stop trying whine his way into the White House.

So much for the “Fairness doctrine” that the NHT has been so fast to support.
Posted by: noleafclover | Jul 21, 2008 2:42:00 PM
Too be fair ABC News blogs also censor. So what do you have to say about that?

Debra – the NYT asks writers for changes to OpEd pieces every day. Why does McCain think he’s so special that he doesn’t have to make rewrites like everybody else? What a whiner.

John McCain’s “claims” that he is stronger on foreign policy, is just plain BULLSH*T!!!
THE FACT IS John McCain is the one who supported the invasion of Iraq, one of the WORST foreign policy mistakes the USA has ever made!
AND John McCain failed to recognize that our focus should have always been on Afghanistan, and the Taliban, and AlQueada, the people who are responsible for the death of over 3000 people on 9/11.
ADD TO THAT, THAT John McCain has NO PLANS to get out of Iraq, even though we have been there for 5 years, and the results of that is that we DO NOT have enough soldiers left to fight the Taliban, and AlQueada, in Afghnanistan.
THE FACT IS EVERY FOREIGN POLICY DECISION JOHN McCAIN HAS MADE OVER THE PAST 8 YEARS HAS BEEN WRONG!!

Thankfully the media is starting to call Republicans on these overly simplistic statements.
After six years of asking, what exactly does “victory” mean? And don’t tell me its something only a Republican president will know when he sees it – something subjective, like a “stable” country.
I’d respect the Republicans more if they just said “we’ll stay until the Iraqi government tells us to get out.”

Mike Garcia you posted….”of course the liberal NYT would shun McCain – they’re too busy fawning over Obama (the messiah).”……your flippancy and Karl Rove win by negative attacking demonstrates that you also cannot read the article. McCain’s op-ed was rejected because it did not address what Senator Obama had written. In other words (in case you have to been spoon fed) if I write a Letter to the Editor and you want to respond, the Editor says fine tell us where OntheGlory was wrong or your opinion about what they said. If you submit a rambling letter that does not address the points taken then the Editor has all the right (and indeed the responsibility) to reject it. Of course the Karl Rove theory that worked well in 2000 and 2004 was NOT to talk about the issue, but to move the goal post, put the other side on the opposition and publish some untruths or cast as many distractions as possible. Don’t like the NY Times – buy a conservative editorial board paper or turn on Rush – guarantee you’ll feel good.

The real question is: why can’t McCain follow simple directions? He’s obviously too old and confused to be President. Nobody wants to read the unedited ramblings of a crazy old man.

beancake, did you know that Al Gore Sr. opposed the civil rights act?

I wonder what these posts would say if the shoe was on the other foot. Everyone of these opinions would be just the opposite of what they’re saying.

Wasn’t the New York Times caught red handed in the Democratic Primary giving discounted rates to a Democratic 527 group?
Now we have the NYT allowing Obama to publish an Editorial and then saying McCain can only have the same coverage if he “mirrors” Obama’s article?
Now tell me again how the NYT is NOT carrying water for the Democrats in this election.

commonsensenj,
Equal opportunity, not equal results.
If John McCain can manage to write an op-ed that advances our knowledge the Times will probably print it. McCain’s weak effort contained no news, no new information.
Nor did it answer any of the legitimate questions such as “what is victory” or “how will you move toward an end” or “how do you answer the Iraqi government’s call for a time line / time horizon / schedule?
McCain’s response failed on its merits.

Correction: Al Gore Sr. opposed Voting Rights Act

It’s hard to argue that the NYT isn’t shedding readers and staff at a considerable rate. While the fate of the NYT seems destined, the same cannot be said for this election. Neither party has formulated their final platform, and probably won’t until the respective conventions. Depending on how closely the candidates hew to the party platforms, we may yet see an upset in November. One thing certain though is that voters from either party aren’t keen to back someone who eschews the party platform because they “know better than we do” what America’s Citizens want!

geezy – doesn’t surprise me. Al Gore the younger is well on his way to obliterating civil rights through his totalitarian environmental view.

Tamdar,
the NYT is eager to publish Mccain’s words– but will not be used to publish a PR screed written by his campaign to attack his rival. It’s an insult to our soldiers to respond to address this issue only in terms of “Obama this and Obama that”. Let’s put good minds together to find a solution to this tragedy. If Mccain doesn’t want to have a serious discussion, he can send out a mailer with his attacks. But the NYTimes op-ed section will not be used as a free platform for campaign ads.

McCain’s editorial would have to be revised so that NYT readers, i.e. takers, could understand it.

beancake & geezy – kinda sad when you have to go back to the 19th century to make a case for the GOP not being a racist party. Meanwhile, here in the 21st century, the rest of us remember Nixon’s infamous “Southern Strategy” to peel off white Southern Racists disaffected with the Democrats’ support for civil rights. But by all means, continue living in the past. It’s all you fools have got left. LOL

good ole commu-fascist restricting of freedom of speech by the neo-ignorant liberals from the NYT…

Baloney, Charlie Smite, if you read the Mccain piece on the Drudge Report, you would see a very well written piece that effectively advocates a point of view that the New York Times does not want to publish it. God forbid, that readers of the new York Times would read what McCain has to say and realize that McCain is a man of expereince, knowledge and judgment in foreign affirs, militayr matters and natioanl security and is a vastly superior candidate to an inexperienced Obama.

Consultofactus,
You have no idea of what you speak.
The richest 1% of us make 21% of the income and pay 39% of the taxes. The richest 5% make 36% of the income and pay 60% of the taxes. The corresponding figures for 2000 were 14%, 25%; 27%,44%. Taxes paid by the “rich” have gone up faster than their incomes.
In 2000, the top 5% earned 35% (36% now); in 2000, the top 5% earned 21 ( 21% now). Seems the rich did much better under Clinton, doesn’t it?
Further, the Bush tax cuts dropped millions of people off the Federal tax roles entirely. Lower taxes always lead to higher tax revenues. Do not confuse tax rates with tax revenues. The Demos would like for you to think they are directly related, but they are more often inversely related. Capital gains revenues are way up after the tax cut.
With BHO, you will get higher taxes, less tax revenue and a bigger deficit. Carter proved it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the article McCain submitted to the NYTs if you read it with an unbiased point of view. It is simply a critique of Obama’s changing positions on Iraq, and a re-emphasis of McCain’s Iraq policy.
Many partisan people here are really arguing that McCain’s OP-ED doesn’t define an Iraq strategy that furthers their own biased agenda.
It really is sad that our high schools and universities are producing people who cannot understand the simple concept of subjectivity.

Ellen -
So, I was only a hatemonger for an hour – I think it was between breakfast and lunch today. But, I am remorseful now, so… Nice try lady!

Yeah, beancake, thanks for being informed! Always love to see someone who has done his or her (non-NYT) reading. Lest we forget that nearly 100 years before the Civil Rights Act we know today, Republicans were pushing the CRA of 1875, which finally, thankfully, would afford African-Americans protection from “discrimination in public accomodation.” Too bad the Republican Senator who pushed the bill was beaten to death on the Senate floor.

“I want victory in Iraq” is not a plan, it is a wish. The GOP constantly talks about “Victory in Iraq” and its opposite “Surrender in Iraq”. It never explains what either one entails. Good for the New York Times for standing up to McCain and not accepting his platitudes on their face any more.

What about the larger point: The war sucks. The economy is in the pot. The government is going broke. And the Straight Talk Express is going to take us off a freakin’ cliff. Even if the GOP is the victim of discrimination here, isn’t the whole point of democracy and free speech to allow rational individuals the ability to discriminate between stupidity and survival?
Maybe McCain could submit his editorial to Mad Magazine or the Weekly World News. He could fill in for Ed Anger!

Nike:
Was Obama whining when his staff barred the New York Post reporters from his plan? Were Democrats whining when they put forward the Fairness Doctrine in an attempt to thwart talk radio?

Since I don’t read the thing, I would not have read John’s op-ed anyway. But, this liberal thing did as expected. As a Hillary Democrat, I plan to support John McCain and the republican ticket. Having said this, nyt has now sidelined itself for the duration of the election as far as Americans are concerned.

“NObama08″….That’s the battle
cry. Obama is an arrogant slob
who has a lot of BS and no substance!!!

Why does this surprise anyone? The NY Times is one of the most left-leaning papers in the country. They would have rejected any re-buttal from McCain regardless of how eloquent it read.
I’m sure if the NY Times could, they would be running to Iraq with the big 3 networks to follow Obama around like a love-sick school child.
I have no qualms with them rejecting; but at least have the honesty to say it’s because they favor the other candidate….But then again most things left-leaning have no backbone anyway.
Keep up all of the “Obama’s winning hands-down” rhetoric; it seems to have helped the right candidate get in for the last 2 years. Its comical that in every election the left gets so cocky (whether it’s their polls, or news media declaring a winner), yet we’ve had a conservative president the last 2 terms. Regardless of how you try to play down your competitors in the media, they still have one vote just like you. McCain may be boring, and the right-wing nuts may be embarrassing, but I still would never vote for a socialist like Obama (it’s too bad too…I wish I could vote for the young, exciting guy…but not this time).

Phil,
Sorry, I should have been a little more specific. I mean the Liberals would have been saying just the opposite and crying racism.

America_not_Socialist – yeah, God forbid that John McCain not follow the same rules as everybody else. I keep forgetting how special and unique and magical he is. What a tool. This is just red meat for the dwindling number of Republican idiots who still support him. Enjoy it while it lasts, kiddies.

This is bold-faced hypocrisy. There is no legitimate reason to reject an opinion piece by John McCain now that the New York Times has run an opinion piece by Barack Obama. This rejection runs afoul of any semblence of journalistic ethics. John McCain is the Republican nominee. His opinion can be debated, but it cannot be ignored. If the New York Times wants to discriminate against Republicans, I dare them to say so. However, this nonsense about asking for a re-write, of an opinion piece, no less, is not going to pass the smell test. A good rule of thumb for an editor is: don’t become the news yourself. I have a feeling that the editorial staff at the New York Times are in for some sleepless nights in the next few days.

This whole idea of “WAITING” for this and “WAITING” for that reminds me of what Dr. King said:
“This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy.”
So, there you have it McCain….it’s time to get out of Iraq and let them have their own country…..

HERE IS HOW UNQUALIFIED JOHN McCAIN IS TO BE PRESIDENT:
1. JOHN McCAIN VOTED “FOR” THE IRAQ WAR, WHICH HAS BEEN ONE OF THE BIGGEST FOREIGN POLICY MISTAKES THE USA HAS EVER MADE.
2. JOHN McCAIN FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT WAS THE WAR IN AFGHNAISTAN THAT WE SHOULD HAVE FOCUSED ON SINCE IT WAS
the Taliban, and AlQueda IN AFGHANISTAN WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF 3000 PEOPLE ON 9/11.
3. FOR THE PAST 5 YEARS JOHN McCAIN HAS THOUGHT THAT THINGS WERE GOING GREAT IN AFGHANISTAN, EVEN WHEN FACTS SHOWED THAT AlQUEDA, AND THE TALIBAN WERE GETTING STRONGER.
3. JOHN McCAIN DOES NOT KNOW THAT CZECHOSLAVIA IS NO LONGER A COUNTRY, AND HAS NOT BEEN FOR 10 YEARS.
JOHN McCAIN THINKS THAT THE COUNTRY WHICH BORDERS PAKISTAN IS IRAQ, it is not! THE COUNTRY WHICH BORDERS PAKISTAN IS ACTUALLY AFGHANISTAN!
4. JOHN MCCAIN WANTS TO BE A PRESIDENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY, BUT HE CANNOT USE A COMPUTER, HE CANNOT USE THE INTERNET.
HOW WILL McCAIN BE ABLE TO COMPREHEND, AND DEAL WITH ISSUES OF THE CYBERSPACE THREATS POSED BY COUNTRIES SUCH AS CHINA, AND OTHERS WHICH HACK INTO GOVERNMENT DATABASES ON A DAILY BASIS.
5. JOHN McCAIN HAS ALREADY ADMITTED THAT HE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE ECONOMY.
6. JOHN McCAIN CALLS HIMSELF “MR. FREE TRADE”, JOHN McCAIN SAYS HE IS “THE BIGGEST FREE TRADER YOU WILL EVER SEE”, EVEN THOUGH IT IS FREE TRADE, AND OUTSOURCING WHICH HAS RESULTED IN MILLIONS OF AMERICANS LOSING THEIR JOBS TO COUNTRIES LIKE MEXICO, CHINA, INDIA, AND OTHERS.
7. AND WORST, AT A TIME WHEN WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT NATIONS DO NOT GET THEIR HANDS ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS, JOHN McCAIN SAYS THAT AS PRESIDENT HE WILL KICK RUSSIA OUT OF THE G8, AND ACTIVELY ISOLATE CHINA AS WELL.
(SO IN ESSENCE JOHN McCAIN WANTS TO START A NEW COLD WAR WITH RUSSIA, AND CHINA, TWO OF THE RICHEST COUNTRIES ON THE PLANET, BOTH OF WHICH HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!)
JOHN MCCAIN IS A DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN!! JOHN McCAIN IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT!!!

It is becoming apparent that those who support Obama not only enjoy economic socialism but the political censorship that occurs in many of those countries. Maybe if he is elected he can pass laws to make it illegal for opposing candidates to campaign. Denying the opposition a response to a political editorial is the most outrageous thing that can occur in a democracy.

Who cares what a newspaper does with its editorial page. It’s a free country.
McCain asked Obama to go to Iraq. He demanded Obama clarify his views. When Obama lays it on the line in print AND the press travels to scrutinize Obama’s every word and gesture and is giving McCain a golden opportunity to find fault with Obama’s position. All the NYT is asking is that McCain be more specific about what he means.
McCain got what he asked for. Now he doesn’t like being subject to the same scrutiny over a fight that he started.
Wimp!

Dumb old man can’t write coherent essay and gets called out on his stupidity and old and in the way-ness. Details at 6.

@Henderson: Blatant political agenda in an attempt to manipulate the vote for the most important executive position in the free world. Is that a big enough “deal” for you? Thick as a brick it seems…Oh well…

NYT did McCain a favor. When you can get Drudge to pub your piece, you get way more than the Gray Lady.

Tom2008 – And yet McCain can’t write a coherent editorial to save his life. Go figure. LOL

Another question: Why are people firing at Barack Obama because the NYT decided not to run an op-ed by Senator McCain? Is it because Obama has a bunch of conservatives running scared, or are people seriously THAT AFRAID of the idea of a black president? Anyway, enough ranting for now….have fun.

As a lifelong democrat and Hillary supporter, this campaign finally made me see the light. The NYT, and the media in general are so biased it’s disgusting. This is typical of the NYT, and it’s why I don’t read their paper. It’s why their circulation is dropping drastically and they are laying off huge amounts of their staff. The public wants unbiased journalism, but it’s really hard to find. People who still read the NYT without a jauniced eye are hypnotic.

It’s so funny but McSame seems to be a man incapable of any deep intellectual or moral judgement. He is at least as incompetent mentally as G.W. Bush, if not more. And this is why.
1. McCain actually believes Sunnis and Shites are terrorist. The fact that these iraqis are fighting each other and also against our guys does’nt make them terrorist. People fight against other people in the same country and that is not terrorism, that is civil war. You don’t aim to stop civil wars by killing everyone fighting but you try to find a solution, in most cases a political solution. This happends all the time. For McCain to actually say that killing hundred of disgruntled and angry iraqis, who do not understand why we are in their country, is the depth of intellectual depravity and it is extremely dangerous to have McCain as POTUS. This guy would kill everyone. He insanely even suggested killing Iranians with cigas…why does he want to kill everyone. This guy is something else. No compassion, nothing.
2. McCain actually believes he is smart because he suggested a surge of 30k extra marines would ensure victory. And he even suggested that violence after 5 years in down by 80%. What a shame. 5 years of continually fighting helpless iraqis, who are being battered by Al-Qaida from all sides, with our 150k plus army, barricading them, and yet the bombing is still one, and yet we have succeeded.In McCain’s word, we have actually succeeded. Thank God, but this guy is worse that GW a thousand times. How did we ever win the GOP nomination. Whao!!!!

Mcain is going to drive our country into the ground and give the filthy ritch tax breaks and hang the rest of us out to dry

None of this surprises me. CNN, the 3 network media outlets (ABC,CBC,NBC)and the NYT have their noses so far up B. Hussein Obama’s a#@ the can see out his ears.

Actually, the N Y Times has published 7 op-ed’s from John McCain over the past 10 years. Also, for those of you who don’t remember, they endorsed John McCain over former NYC Mayor Rudy Guliani in the republican primary. They don’t sound biased to me. All the N Y Times has asked is for McCain to explain what would constitute a victory in Iraq. What’s so hard about that?

Why do they take his views seriously? I don’t.

American Not Socialist: and you know, for a FACT, that the NYT is “blatantly manipulating” the vote? I’m sorry, friend, but that’s a pretty tough sell, especially when you consider the fact that when it comes to voter manipulation, the Republican Party comes up the clear winner. Anyway, I’m not trying to get into a Republican -v- Democrat debate, I’m just trying to get people to make some sense…..thick enough for ya?

But they are not publishing any of McCain’s articles now. I wonder why that is?
Maybe because he is running against Obama?

“To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms how Sen. McCain defines victory in Iraq. It would also have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory — with troop levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate.” – NYT editor
It is extremely obvious from the quote above that the New York times editor was asking McCain to change his position, and not how he wrote his opinion.
McCain has clearly been against giving a time-table since the beginning of the war.
If you cannot see the bias in this action by the NYT then you are a partisan idiot, and your opinion will come back to bite you one day when your candidate is edited.
The Golden Rule applies to so many situations in life. Simply reverse the situation if you have a hard time understanding the outrage here:
What if Obama had submitted an OP-ED to the Washington Journal and the editor had replied, “We will publish your opinion if you more clearly define how a premature pull-out of Iraq will effect the stability of the country and its neighbors. Specifically, we need to know the specifics of your plan for surrender in Iraq.”

Jo,
You truly are uneducated and ignorant to the point that just isn’t funny. You have responded like 50 times with everything you say being just stupid (for lack of a better word). (shaking my head from your ignorance)

The NYT and the MSM are all run by communists and Obama is going to install the planks of the Communist manifesto when he is sworn in. I read that he wants to replace the eagle on the flag pole with a russian bear and that he is going to be sworn in on Mao’s red book. And then the US is going to be combined with Cuba and Venezuela and all the Republicans will be put in the gulags out in the desert and the troops will be forced to wear UN blue helmets and worship a one-world religion. But most people don’t realize it because of the fluoride in the water and the mind waves they put on the TV. But this much is obvious if you can hear the TV backwards. Try it!

Sandra Ferracutti:If it makes you feel better to feel that the thousands of former Hillary supporters are BS, be my guest. Search the internet sometime. There are now hundreds of organizations of her fellow supporters who are united against him for stealing this nomination. I guess the proof will have to wait for November.

I don’t think it is fair! I think the NY Times should have printed it and let the world see what a joke Mr. McGoo really is.
Next time he should try a speech writer. The man just isn’t that bright.

Given the level of denigration directed toward McCain by Obama supporters on this site, I’d like to respond in the same spirit. Obama is a typical affirmative action candidate chosen only because of his race and because he can read from a teleprompter speaches written by clever white guys; and gets virtually 100% of votes from mindless blacks who vote more like herd animals than reasoned, thoughtful people. Without this 100% black support, he’d have no chance, since his approval among whites is in the low 30′s. The fact that Obama is a shallow, uninformed bumbler when left to his own devices, and has to leave his teleprompter behind, was when he refused to debate Miss Hillary in Indiana, after having been embarrassed by his shucking and jiving during the ABC ‘debate’. Just like Buckwheat seen a ghost, Obama’s eyes got all big and round, and his teeth, they done went all a chattering, and he skedaddled in the classic ‘feets don’t fail me now’ tradition. Then, when Obama said he’d debate McCain anytime and anywhere on foreign policy, and McCain said ‘how about here’, ‘how about now’, ol’ Buckwheat Obama done another ‘feets don’t fail me now’ hustle. Similary, Obama pulled subsequent Buckwheats when he indicated he wouldn’t attend a town meeting with military personnel and their families because ‘he was afraid of being ambushed.’ What Buckwheat meant was dat he’d be asked a question without having his teleprompter and some white guy telling him what to say. And, of course, Obama has long pulled repeated Buckwheats by refusing to hold open press conferences, refusing to appear on the most highly rated Cable News programs, refusing to appear on Sunday shows where policy is discussed. Clearly, Obama is less a confident, proud, take-on-all-commers black guy, but a fraid-of-his-own shadow Buckwheat impersonator. Call McCain Elmer Fudd or Mr. McGoo if you want, and I happen to think he’s an idiot, but at least he’s not some chicken-sh*t, shiftless, darkie whose only long-term intimates have been black power thugs, muslim nazis (e.g., Farrakhan), unrepentent white Weatherman terrorists, Syrian criminals, assorted self-hating Jews and other anti-American vermin.

Instead of a bunch of lies and innuendos from McCain they want the truth. I wonder if he will be able to respond directly to those questions without dancing around the truth.

bedy:
So you’re going to vote against Obama (the reason is irrelevant). And no one here is going to change your mind, right? So what do you expect us to do? Cry? Beg? …… Get a life.

You mean to tell me that The New York Times is biased and they’re all but openly rooting for Obama to win the election?! Wow! Who knew??

Frank – as a lifelong Republican, I think you’re full of it. While I think that the news media in general is tilted towards Obama – I can see pretty plainly that McCain is playing an obvious political trick here: he’s refusing to cooperate with the NYT’s request for a rewrite in order to make political hay. He could have just as easy made the rewrites as he did in the other 10 Op-Ed pieces he’s written for the Times in the past, but by leaking to the drugde report he gets to generate more publicity and win points for being “discriminated” against by the media. It’s a very cynical and transparent ploy and, frankly, I’m kind of embarassed by it.

Lem, you said
“…the NYT is eager to publish Mccain’s words– but will not be used to publish a PR screed written by his campaign to attack his rival.”
Just curious – is it objectionable, unusual, or surprising that during a presidential election the candidates might “publish a PR screed” or “attack their rivals”? When did this become an offense worthy of suppressing the written views of a presidential candidate?
If McCain’s words do not win your vote, so be it. But do you admit that a responsible press is only one that advocates – not just endorses – for one candidate to the point that they demand particular content in order to have their words read by voters? And this is not an issue of clarification. McCain has said time and again that he is against timelines and arbitrary withdrawal dates, and yet you believe the NYT is correct in demanding that McCain set a withdrawal date in order to be heard by the voters through their publication?
Will you admit that you believe that only a press that advocates for Democratic candidates is responsible?
“But the NYTimes op-ed section will not be used as a free platform for campaign ads.”
This positions the NYT as an arbiter of presidential campaigning. How is demanding particular content from one candidate fulfilling the responsibility to be an objective and thorough informer? Or do you believe that the NYT is only being responsible if it is actively reinforcing the campaign positions of just the Democratic candidate?
Dennis, you responded
“tamdar:
“Why not let McCain’s words stand for themselves?”
Because the editors are responsible for seeing that unsuitable material is rejected. That is their job.”
Surely you can see a huge difference in screening the public’s thousands of “letters to the editor” and in demanding particular content from a presidential candidate before they’re willing to publish their writings, don’t you?
If I send in a letter to be published and they do not find that it offers a unique point of view or is adequately written and they choose not to publish it, do you really find that to be the same thing as telling a presidential candidate what issues they must address (correlated directly to the issues freely chosen by that candidate’s opponent no less) in order to be covered by that newspaper during a presidential campaign?
Do you claim to hold that view objectively – that you would support that principle by demanding certain content from Obama if you felt a piece of his wasn’t sufficiently specific on particular issues?

The neocons are up in arms about this one. How in the world will they evade the truth and answer the questions? They will come up with something. Con’s always do. Better call in Karl Rove.

Anyone else notice that McCains supporters are all a bunch of ‘whiners’? BTW, didn’t McCain fire his chief economic advisor Senator Phil Gramm over the weekend? How come you McCain people don’t want to talk about that?

Bedy,
Why? Because he’s Black? I hate to make it RACIAL but that’s what it boils down too. Why would a democrat & Hillary supporter not support Obama? Because they are Racist, that’s why. What is Obama saying that is so different from Hillary? Don’t give me the “she has experience malarky” either. As a democrat and supporter of the Democratic vision, I would have supported Hillary if she is the candidate but that’s the difference between me being black, we support the vision no matter what. My greatest fear for Obama’s campaign is the democrats that he will lose simply because of his brown skin. What a shame that everything is RACIAL. Bedy you truly dissappoint me….(

Boy I know I’m uplifted after reading the nastiness here. Certainly sounds like change to me. Do you people hear each other? You’re utterly detestable and hateful.
I don’t believe I’m interested in joining this list of Obama supporters.
I’ll stick w/McCain.

@Henderson: First of all, you’re clearly a Obama supporter. So maybe you’re not ready to get into a long discussion on a blog post.Fair enough.
Just don’t give me this crap line about wanting to “understand” things. You’re either a Democrat, or will be voting for one. You asked why this was a big deal. I offered my OPINION. Obviously it can’t be pinned down that there is clear bias here, but it certainly seems that way, given the criteria laid out by the NYTs to accept Senator McCain’s Op-Ed piece. Read my above posts. Does the logic presented by the NYTs make sense, in context? To me NO. One motivation could be certain staff members would like to influence the election. It’s not some grand conspiracy, however neither is it an unlikely scenario. Then again, I can’t really help to have you think straight, seeing as you still think the 2000 election was “stolen” huh? (PS.Even though the vote by the US Supreme Court was 7 VOTES TO 2 VOTES that the voting standards in Florida were unConstitutional because there were different standards by county huh?)

MESSAGE TO JOHN MCCAIN: Senator Obama is the Chosen One. This title has the rights and privileges of being allowed write about and be published on any topic of his choosing. You are an Also-Ran who can be scrutinized and edited as the media sees fit. Furthermore, the Chosen One may dictate to you the terms of the debate, not the other way around.
You may not criticize or satirize the Chosen One in any way. To do so will bring his mind-numbed followers down on you. Even his Mickey Mouse ears are off limits.
Senator Obama is the Messiah we all have been waiting for, the one who brings us Hope. He will bring us Change. You as an Also-Ran are expected to bring us more BUSH or CHENEY, or horrors HALIBURTON.
Please remember your place and your relationship with the media will uneventful.

tamdar:
What if McCain’s oped was simply “Obama sucks!”? Do you think it should be published?
I know that is extreme, but it makes the point. They are looking for policy statements, not attacks.

I would be careful if McCain writes anything in the Times. They can put the spacing on the words and columns using their computers to make it say subliminal things if you read it like a crossword. So it might say McCain’s messages explicitly, but subconsciously it can say things. All the MSM papers are like this, but NYT has a lot of really shocking communist messages.

DrRod:
If your post were not so long and so dumb and stupid, I probably would read it all. Your much words demonstrate a lack of intelligence; they show a shallow and mindless view of senator Obama and people of color. Based on what I’ve read, you are angry and in desperate need of psychological and spiritual counseling. I hope you get some help, bud…..

Roger:
Thanks for the input. I guess I’m just not dedicated enough or something, because when I saw the story, my immediate thought was this: Well, editors turn down hundreds of pieces per day….why is this one different? I know that they should’ve just run the piece and let McCain have his say, but….meh….whatever, he’ll get it run anyway.

Ross, you are obviously a confused! Obama is not the chosen one! He is another communist part of luciferian agenda. And soon he will try to set up as the spiritual leader of the one world religion under marx! If you hold his op-ed to a mirror and circle the hidden words, you will find those same sinsiter ideas written in code. It is time to wake up!

It’s ridiculous to think you can put an exact time when we can win a war and hope that the Iragis can take over comfortly without our help. No can pinpoint when this will be. Just as no one can say for sure that if we pull-out, will Al Queda fill in the gap, and start rebuilding their network towards another terrorist attack. I think Obama is premature in his thinking and wishful. Good politics. And I commend McCain for not giving in and giving out hopeful details that are unrealistic.

Mike:
It’s time 4 you to wise up…
Your words are so nonsensical and just plain silly…..
Whose your teacher, bud? Sean Hannity?

American Not Socialist:
Don’t assume so much. I believe that Republicans and Democrats are alternate wings on the same bird of prey. And no, the election wasn’t stolen….anyone who still believes that is only fooling themselves. Back on point, though, I really don’t see why this is causing such a big mess….as I said in a previous post, editors turn down pieces from hundreds of people every day, and although I know this one might interest a few more people, it’s still their perrogative to deny the spot. Given the choice between Obama and McCain, I will be voting for Obama simply because he’s nothing like the Bush administration. He might not be able to do even 15% of what he promises, but for god’s sake he might just do a little bit of good for America in terms of how we’re seen in the world. Feeble reason, I know, but as modern politics go, I’ll take what I can.
BTW, I’m seriously NOT trying to pick a fight with anyone. You seem to be very knowledgeable and reasonable, and I didn’t want to get off on the wrong foot or anything.

Another point of interest on policy and issues. I notice that on these boards conservatives will debate issues. But when liberals post we see words like “McSame”.. “McBush”…”McOld” and I have even seen “Gramp’s”
Why can’t liberals debate on the issues, without needing to add insults?
And they tell us Republicans are the party of hate! They tell us Republicans have the hate machine.
It seems the Democrats had their hate working overtime during their own primary! It was Democrats firing racist and sexist attacks at each other, not Republicans!
I found that amazing! The party of civil rights? The party of womens rights?
And now this same party is attacking a candidate based on his age. How do Democrats explain this to their elderly constitutants?
It seems the Democrats eat their own!

The New York Times wanting McCain to “mirror” Obama is a case of the bankrupt leading the blind. It’s amazing the kind of unreality some of you Obama supporters live in thinking your messiah is going to blow out Senator McCain in the election. The Ramussen report, which was the most accurate polling organization in the last two election (called The presidential of 2004 within less than 1%)has Obama ahead by 1 per cent. That’s down from 6 percent a few weeks ago. Now the rule is, don’t start crying that the election was stolen when McCain wins. Remember, this is a presidential election, not another ENTITLEMENT program.

Notice how all the hard-left extremist icons sh*t in their panties and hide in their closets when anyone tries to debate them. First, there’s the sweaty, bloated, borderline psychotic Hal Gore. Then there’s the dirty little muslim loving jew hater, Jimmy Carter and the obviously closeted Keith ‘and his angry inch’ Olbermann, whose ideal of a ‘fair and balanced’ debate is for him an a d*ke like Maddow to debate of which of them hates George Bush the most. And now we have another closeted, unqualified affirmative action, former crack head candidate refusing to debate anyone since he crapped out in the ABC debate. Why are all these closet cases scared to debate anyone whose views vary in the slightest from theirs? No real men there. Just limp-wristed chickensh*ts all. Pathetic.

Heather:
“Why can’t liberals debate on the issues, without needing to add insults?”
We can. But there are ranting idiots on both sides of the aisle.

I’m voting for Obama. And I do believe freedom of speech includes the freedom not to publish. If can’t demand that the NYT print my op-ed on Iraq, McCain can’t either. Sure.
BUT COME ON. I read that article on Drudge (thank Darwin for that man), it was succinct, well-written and made good points. And, um, McCain’s opinions on Iraq, unlike 99.9999% of the opinions out there, actually matter! I want to know them.

New York Times bias for Obama? Naw, it can’t be.

WHO CARES OBAMA, MCCAIN!! YOU PEOPLE ARE SUCH NERDS CHEERLEADING AND FIGHTING FOR THE MAN YOU THINK IS BEST. VOTE FOR WHO YOU WANT IN NOVEMBER NO ONE GIVES A FLYING “F” WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT OBAMA OR MCCAIN ON THESE BOARDS. JUST LOOK AT ALL THE POST ABOVE DOSENT IT SEEM SILLY, ALL OF YOU.

Here is what McCain originally wrote. I don’t know why the Times asked for revisions:
“My fellow Americans, On the subject of Iran… or maybe Iraq… my opponent, Barack Osama stated that he wa against the bombing of Hanoi… wait… what was I talking about? Oh, right… On the subject of Czechoslovakia, the American people stand behind Mr. Dubchek and reject Soviet intervention… what? Oh.. . right… back to Iran… as I was saying, we need to bomb Hanoi… I mean Terhan, to show the Iranian leadership that we are not afraid to stand up to Sunni terrorism… I mean shia terrorism… I mean Soviet tanks in Czechoslovakia… wait… I need to sit down and take my metamucil… Okay, where was I? That’s right… I was talking about Czecholslovakia’s border with Pakistan… as I was saying, what we need is more penny candy in the dimestores and less of this newfangled internet business. We need to return to traditional American values like brylcreem and hoopskirts… can you believe the ladies’ today going around and showing off their knees like a bunch of hussies? I’m getting sleepy now… where is that c–t wife of mine with my milk and zwieback? How come I can’t get my favorite stories on the radio anymore? Furthermore, our biggest threat is the Kaiser! Thank you for your attention.

The New York Times and standards in the same sentence! Now that is amusing.
This is a newspaper that printed a photo of the virgin Mary covered in cow manure; but refused to publish the Mohhamad cartoons out of “respect” to Islam.
So, please do not try to suggest they have standards!

DRod, you are right on so many levels. Have you seen the Backyardigans? The Wiggles? I think these shows highlight the exact problems that you are trying to get it at. They promote “diversity” as a way to indocrinate the kids into a marxist anti-family system. They even put rainbow colors to desensitize kids to their obvious collectivist and immoral world thought-system.

Polls?…Keep in mind that John Kerry lead in the polls all the way up to and during the last election including exit polls ..Who won?…made CNN and the networks look like the idiots that they are

Jovia said “Amused, newspapers have ALWAYS decided for themselves what constitutes news. Your revionisms are sly, but false.”
Clearly, newspaper no longer can decide what is news; otherwise, this discussion would not be occurring, would it?
Like the NYT, you don’t get it.

The NYT is like a starry-eyed $10 hooker sitting next to a $25 John (Osama). How can they resist him? After all, Osama promises to represent the best interests of all “57 states” in his next “8-10 years” as president.
The NYT should get a glass pane implanted in its belly. The Times, a cheap hooker with its head sliding ever further up its butt, could then look out and see the rest of the world.

Whiners, whiners, whiners. That’s all you McCain people do is whine, whine, whine. Speaking of whiners, what ever happenned to Phil Gramm?

Mike:
do you fly a confederate flag around?

John Gress – on second thought, maybe you can’t paint a picture with words. Stick to fingerpaints, they’re more your speed.

After reading both essays, I find no reason to think that McCain’s submitted essay was not just as valid as Obama’s. The realization, however, is that Obama did not state all of his previous backpedaling, double-talking stances on Iraq and Afghanistan. McCain, true to his straight talk reputation, is firm in his stance–no timetable in advance of all of the benchmarks being met. Trust in someone who knows what is going on and speaks with consistency and knowledge.
Trust in McCain’s judgement!
McCain ’08

HERE IS HOW TRULY UNQUALIFIED JOHN McCAIN IS TO BE PRESIDENT:
1. JOHN McCAIN VOTED “FOR” THE IRAQ WAR, WHICH HAS BEEN ONE OF THE BIGGEST FOREIGN POLICY MISTAKES THE USA HAS EVER MADE.
2. JOHN McCAIN FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT WAS THE WAR IN AFGHNAISTAN THAT WE SHOULD HAVE FOCUSED ON SINCE IT WAS
the Taliban, and AlQueda IN AFGHANISTAN WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF 3000 PEOPLE ON 9/11.
3. FOR THE PAST 5 YEARS JOHN McCAIN HAS THOUGHT THAT THINGS WERE GOING GREAT IN AFGHANISTAN, EVEN WHEN FACTS SHOWED THAT AlQUEDA, AND THE TALIBAN WERE GETTING STRONGER.
4. JOHN McCAIN DOES NOT KNOW THAT CZECHOSLAVAKIA IS NO LONGER A COUNTRY, AND HAS NOT BEEN FOR 10 YEARS.
JOHN McCAIN THINKS THAT THE COUNTRY WHICH BORDERS PAKISTAN IS IRAQ, it is not! THE COUNTRY WHICH BORDERS PAKISTAN IS ACTUALLY AFGHANISTAN!
5. JOHN MCCAIN WANTS TO BE A PRESIDENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY, BUT HE CANNOT USE A COMPUTER, HE CANNOT USE THE INTERNET.
HOW WILL McCAIN BE ABLE TO COMPREHEND, AND DEAL WITH ISSUES OF THE CYBERSPACE THREATS POSED BY COUNTRIES SUCH AS CHINA, AND OTHERS WHICH HACK INTO GOVERNMENT DATABASES ON A DAILY BASIS.
6. JOHN McCAIN HAS ALREADY ADMITTED THAT HE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE ECONOMY.
7. JOHN McCAIN CALLS HIMSELF “MR. FREE TRADE”, JOHN McCAIN SAYS HE IS “THE BIGGEST FREE TRADER YOU WILL EVER SEE”, EVEN THOUGH IT IS FREE TRADE, AND OUTSOURCING WHICH HAS RESULTED IN MILLIONS OF AMERICANS LOSING THEIR JOBS TO COUNTRIES LIKE MEXICO, CHINA, INDIA, AND OTHERS.
8. AND WORST, AT A TIME WHEN WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT NATIONS DO NOT GET THEIR HANDS ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS, JOHN McCAIN SAYS THAT AS PRESIDENT HE WILL KICK RUSSIA OUT OF THE G8, AND ACTIVELY ISOLATE CHINA AS WELL.
(SO IN ESSENCE JOHN McCAIN WANTS TO START A NEW COLD WAR WITH RUSSIA, AND CHINA, TWO OF THE RICHEST COUNTRIES ON THE PLANET, BOTH OF WHICH HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!)
JOHN MCCAIN IS A DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN!! JOHN McCAIN IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT!!!

Is the the NY Times and the National Enquirer the same thing????

IM A HATER!!
I HATE NIGG-ER S
IM A BIGIT!
PROUD OF IT!
COOKIE!

IM A HATER!!
I HATE NIGG-ER S
IM A BIGIT!
PROUD OF IT!
COOKIE!

“The NYT is like a starry-eyed $10 hooker sitting next to a $25 John (Osama).”
Vituperator! You are drinking too much tap water if you think John McCain is Osama.
McCain is a war hero. He is opposed to the communist threat. Osama, on the other hand, is just an unwitting dupe of the communist threat. Ever since the crusades, the Vatican has controlled the Moslems through the Knights of Malta. It is all well documented public knowledge. But the press doesn’t cover that.
McCain was hip to this, which is why he sought the endorsement of Hagee. Predictably, the MSM went after him (did you know the MSM is full of Knights of Columbus). Make no mistake, the Jesuits were all over Russia when they attacked the Czar. Same with Abraham Lincoln. It’s all there in the history books. And guess who is coming over the border? Catholics/Muslims!
McCain is not the same as Osama. Not by a long shot!

IM A HATER!!
I HATE NIGG-ER S
IM A BIGIT!
PROUD OF IT!
COOKIE!

IM A HATER!!
I HATE NIGG-ER S
IM A BIGIT!
PROUD OF IT!
COOKIE!

isn’t it about time we had some brains in the white house; there is a reason mccain finished at the bottom of his naval class; he’s a dummie just like bush; give intelligence a chance, please!!!

Having the NYT censor this piece will guarantee more people read it than if it was printed.
Thanks, Pinch!

I pray Americans will not let the news media select our Presidents for us.
What a disaster for democracy.

mike – what do military and intelligence funding have to do with the little guy?
Also, you’ve got your facts completely wrong.
1.) While some Dixiecrats did indeed stand against Civil Rights, the majority of Dems fought for civil rights and JFK and RFK and LBJ led the charge. Democratic, not Repulbican leadership led the charge for civil rights. Go learn some history.
2.)Obama only wants to raise taxes on those making over $250,000 year – unlike McCain, who wants to make Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy permanent and force the middle class to bear the brunt of the tax burden, instead of the wealthy who can best afford it.
3.) It was actually George Bush’s father who started making cuts to the military spending after the Cold War. The peace dividend was a bi-partisan concept and a necessary correction to Reagan’s overspending on defense.
Meanwhile the Dems created the New Deal and the GI bill which are the foundations of the modern American middle class and the epitome of government “watching out for the little guy.”
You have alot of crazy gripes but you have no idea what you’re talking about. Go learn some history and stop spouting off angry, incorrect BS. You just sound stupid.

@Henderson: I read your post. OK.
Thanks for being patient. I am only cynical at your intentions due to previous promises of people wanting the “truth” and then going on a one-sided rant. You didn’t do this. Kudos.
I’m sure you can see however, rightly or wrongly, how this move (given the context) could be seen as biased on the NYTs part. Yes newspapers reject editorials every day, BUT they don’t do it every day for Presidential candidates, especially so close to election time. It certainly doesn’t help the NYTs, whether this makes political “hay” as someone here put it, for McCain or not. Appreciate however, the continued attempt at good dialouge.
I wish more people could do the same…

Heather,
i agree with you that the race card is played too much and in the wrong situations but I don’t think I am wrong about Bedy. I challenge you to really think of why you are not supporting Obama if you truly are a Democrat as you say. Is it policy or are you uncomfortable with a Black president? Again, its a valid question that many Americans will have to decide in November. I challenge every Democratic hillary supporter with plans to vote for McCain or just not vote to look at the bigger picture. Is it his policy you don’t support or is it the color of his skin that takes you out of your comfort zone? We will see in November.

The NYT was simply defending Barry O’Bambi from attack. McCain called O’Bambi out: O’Bambi was WRONG on the surge. He’s WRONG for ALWAYS saying “END THE WAR” instead of “WIN THE WAR”. He’s WRONG to want to had Al Qaeda an Iraq victory by SURRENDERING in Iraq.
No wonder the Europeans adore him: he’s a surrender monkey.
O’Bambi is WRONG for America

I think this is why the NYT is failing.
We want to read what both sides have to say.
If a piece is poorly written, then I will make my judgement on the author.
I don’t want some nanny newspaper editor grading the editorial for me.
The entire paper seems to be editorializing lately.
It used to be a credible paper.

McCain had his homework returned to him–just like the bad old days at the Naval Academy!

Uhhh, Obama’s article was nearly identical and baited McCain personally…read it, please, there are about four “unlike McCain, etc.” practically begs for a response.
It’s weird that many of the comments here seem to favor the NYT decision…what could possibly have been the harm of printing it? It obviously DOES have McCain’s plan in it, at least as much as Obama presented in his.
There is so much bias for Obama, it is ridiculous, but that’s okay for many people here, because they don’t want any competition…weird, living in a world insane…if Obama supporters are anything like Obama, no thank you.

Rachhpal,
Obama does not have any accomplishments at all, he is self made into an empty suit. Community organizer? Ward heeler? South side fixer? Yikes.
If you call raising taxes and gas prices the solutions to middle class problems you are wrong.

American_Not_Socialist – you keep claiming that the NYT “rejected” the editorial. They did nothing of the sort. They simply asked for rewrites – which is pretty standard. McCain has had 10 other Op-Eds printed in the NYT. He knew the drill. Why did he refuse to submit rewrites this time around if it wasn’t all a big, desperate publicity stunt? If you ask me, the man’s campaign is a mess and he’s grasping at any publicity stunts that he can. So sad.

I really resent people who assert that dislike for Obama is, on its own, racist. “Peoples_Prez” says that racism is the only possible explanation for why someone would vote against Obama and cites as evidence some gaffes and mis-statements that McCain has uttered. I don’t care much for McCain either but that doesn’t mean I’m anti-Irish, anti-elderly, anti-vet, or anything else. Obama will be a disaster for America. McCain will be somewhat less of one.

Add this decision to the recent survey showing how much airtime the networks devoted to Obama vs. McCain (MUCH more to the Chosen One — hey, he was chosen!) and you wonder why so many of us area screaming about bias. I think it’s gotten worse than during the primaires.
I don’t see this page, usually, but I saw a reference to it and hunted it down. Michelle Malkin had a contest to design satirical “world tour” T-shirts. The finalists can be seen here: http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/20/the-obama-world-tour-t-shirt-finalists/
They are REALLY funny…

I suppose there’s no harm in McCain’s people offering up a modified Op Ed. Its free advertising, right?
I’m sure McCains people can figure out a way to side step the questions and blab about whatever they want to blab about. politicians always do.
Or are they getting more mileage playing the babybooboo victim card and getting sympathy?

It’s well within the rights of the NYT editors to reject McCain’s op/ed piece. Obama detailed his foreign policy, while McCain tried to use the op/ed piece as a free avenue to bash Obama. Why is it so hard to define “victory” in Iraq?

Does John McCain know the difference between and op-ed and a letter to the editor? After reading his piece, I think not. I’m sure they would have printed it if they wanted to dispute Obama’s piece as a letter to the editor.

Everyone know the news media is forcing Obama onto the voting public. My vote will not be for the New York Times pick, come November.

Heather, you have an intelligent, Harvard grad competing against a womanizer who graduated 894 out of 899 in his Naval class. As rick said, despite Barack’s incredible acheivements many white voters still see him a N@gg@r. Shame on you for insulting us with crap about the ‘race card’, as if it does not exist. Try convincing ‘Rick’ to see Barack as a American first before whining about ‘race’.

Josh – You just can’t vote for a black person. Just say it. It’s ok. Neither can a lot of crackers. You’re not alone.

This democratic rag of a newspaper will do anything to get Osama elected.

To John Gress: You are right, you aren’t a cartoonist (or a good story teller).

Posted by: Mike | Jul 21, 2008 5:31:41 PM
“The NYT is like a starry-eyed $10 hooker sitting next to a $25 John (Osama).”
Vituperator! You are drinking too much tap water if you think John McCain is Osama.
———————-
Mike, a “John” is the customer of a hooker. In this case, as was placed in parenthesis to explain, the “John” is Barack Osama.

That’s funny…people are clamoring for McCain to give details on this position but give a pass for Obama when he touts “change” and “hope”. Before this NYT OP/ED by Obama, where was his Iraq strategy? Why is he publishing his strategy before he meets with Gen. Petraeus?

@ KeepinitReal (laugh)
You sound like a member of the trinity so-called church. You just proved my point !!!

@Peoples_prez: many white voters still see him a…
NO. Two posters out of about twenty expressed repugnant racial messages.
That’s not “many” white people. If by “many” you meant the majority, then NO, incorrect. Senator McCain was married, once previously. Ideal? NO.
Does that make him a “womanizer” ?
NO. Unless you count the baseless NYTs story accusing him of such without proof,that is. The race card exists, and it cuts both ways. The racism apparently being displayed here isn’t the “race card” in action, however, that’s just ignorance. Most Americans would be totally fine with a black man as President, seeing as he’s a equal human being as everyone else. Many however, do not find Obama’s policy views acceptable. It for me at least, is no where near primarily about race.
It is about policy.

GO TO CNN, AND READ THE McCAIN OP-ED PIECE. IT PROVIDES ABSOLUTELY NO INFORMATION ABOUT HOW JOHN McCAIN’S PLANS TO GET OUR TROOPS OUT, OF IRAQ. IT PROVIDE NO INFORMATION ABOUT WHERE WE ARE GOING TO GET SOLDIERS FOR THE WAR IN AFGHNASIATN (WHICH IS NOW GETTING WORST AND WORST), IF WE DO NOT HAVE A TIMETABLE TO GET OUT OF IRAQ.
JOHN McCAIN SAID LAST WEEK THAT WE HAVE HAD SUCCESS IN IRAQ, YET EVEN WITH “SUCCESS” AS JOHN McCAIN PUTS IT, JOHN McCAIN STILL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO PLANS TO GET OUT OF IRAQ. HE STILL WANTS TO STAY THERE INDEFINETLY.
** THE FACT IS JOHN McCAIN WANTS TO STAY IN IRAQ, AND DOES NOT CARE THAT WE HAVE A SHORTAGE OF U.S SOLDIERS, AND HE DOES NOT CARE THAT WE NEED MORE SOLDIERS FOR THE WAR IN AFGHNAISTAN WHERE U.S SOLDIERS ARE DYING EVERYDAY BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORT, BECAUSE THERE IS JUST NOT ENOUGH SOLDIERS IN AFGHANISTAN.
A SHORTAGE OF SOLDIERS IN AFGHANISTAN, HAS BEEN, AND WILL CONTINUE TO RESULT IN SOLDIERS DYING IN AFGHANISTAN.

Hey People’s Prez:
I know this may be hard for your pea brain to comprehend– yes, people have valid reasons to oppose Barack Obama other than “because he is black.” Based on your logic, we should vote for him because he’s “not as bad as John McCain.” Brilliant! Actually, a lot of people don’t support Obama because they don’t want to have to pay for healthcare for other people. And they don’t want their taxes raised. And they don’t want more government programs. And they really are off-put by his ego and arrogance. See- none of those things have anything to do with him being black!! I’m sure this was a hard concept for you to follow.

to all you liberals (socialists). a war is “won” when your enemy has surrendered, or they are dead. john mccain understands this. obama is advocating surrender, therefore he believes you can withdraw your troops at any date.
if there is one thing that america should have learned from viet nam is not to let the media and congress dictate war policy. i wish you people would read a little about the history of this country so you won’t sound so ignorant. john mccain is not the best candidate for the job but this country can’t afford obama. too many men died fighting socialism and many more will die right here to continue the fight against socialism if he is elected by you idiots.

Wow, me thinks the media has forgotten to try to cover their bias with at least the window shade. This is laughable, as is the horde of media following Obamakins around Europe right now. Wonder if they see how silly and slanted they look. How many of them accompanied McCain on his recent trip? We won’t bother telling them. They’re in their own little world. When your taxes go sky high, you can’t find a doctor to take out your tumor, and your paychecks get skinnier, just remember those two little words: Hope and Change. Love all the hype, especially the hypocrisy!

AMAZING!!!
After working in the conservative newspaper business in New York City for over 40 years, I know that the NYT is a LIBERAL, gray ‘ole lady that’s losing circulation like a seive! As one of the above readers commented: “…someday the NYT will have about 30 readers…”. Believe me when I say that somsday the NYT will cease to exist….period!
Another surprise, the amount of LIBERALS subscribing to NBC; CBS; ABC; MSNBC; CNN, etc., etc., etc!! LOSERS!
SWITCH TO FOX AND O’REILLY…HE’LL TELL U THE TRUTH!!!!
As Jo said up above: “…it’ll be PRESIDENT MC CAIN…GET USE TO IT!!!”
HEY JO, WAY TO GO!!!!!!!!!!

Barrack “Surrender Monkey” Obama should say that he was wrong on the surge. Should say he lied about it. Should say “he wanted America’s defeat and not America’s victory”. He should say that he gives aid and comfort to the enemy. If he doesn’t say this, then he has credibility.

You know Obambi didn’t write his article himself.

James Barrett in Jacksonville – It wouldn’t matter what church Obama went to or who is friends were. His biggest crime will and always be being black. When’t you’re black in America, that’s always and will always be one strike against you.

Whoever is posting as nat turner is an idiot.

Let’s the people judge McCain!!! Let’s McCain respond to Barack Hussein Obama’s charges against him. NYT is trying to muzzle McCain!!! NYT’s rejection of McCain’s response is childish and clearly BIASED!!!!!!!1

FYI:
Gallup Tracking Obama+6
Rasmussen…….Obama+1
CBS/NYT Times…Obama+6
ABC News/Wash Post…Obama+3
Reuters/Zogby….Obama+7
Quinnipiac……Obama+9
IDB/TIPP……..Obama+3
Newsweek………Obama+3
Electoral Map: Obama w/255 and McCain w/163..Toss up of 120 from the swing states..

Keepin it Real – too stupid to realize your clown isn’t black?

For those on the left that do not know John McCain’s measure for leaving Iraq, here is his statement in his website: “When Iraqi forces can safeguard their own country, American troops can return home.” If you can not understand this, I question of you have the capacity to reason and make judgements about someone else’s positions. Go to his website and learn more about this great American! His stance on issues and his experience!
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/fdeb03a7-30b0-4ece-8e34-4c7ea83f11d8.htm

Barack Osama is Jim Jones reincarnate…

I’m glad McCain is making a big deal about the media bias. It needs to be addressed. As a Hillary supporter, it is quite obvious that the media has been in the tank for Obama for quite some time. I’m tired of the media controlling the minds of all of us. Our education system has done little to make us critical thinkers, so a lot of us just believe everything we hear from the media.

trythetruth. No I didn’t get a chance to read the article. I subscribe to the Times. If the article is so poorly written, I would think that you Dems would want it to be printed to demonstrate what a fool McCain is. Believe me, we Repubs will never stop Obama from speaking without a teleprompter.

Posted by: Obama Kool Aid | Jul 21, 2008 6:30:07 PM
Vituperator – I hope you’re correct and the purple kool-aid is being mixed up right now!
———-
We better make certain Osama does not get elected. His poison will make all of us mortally ill!

First the NY times prints some ridiculous story on McCain possibly having an affair with a female lobbyist without any shred of proof only that he spoke to her. Now this!!! The Times should give respect to a man that is a senator, war hero, and presidential candidate. Clearly this paper is bias against McCain. As for Obama’s Iraq strategy its simply to leave! Great give the terrorists a time line so they lay low and when we leave they take over the country. “ok kids Im leaving now dont party when im gone” , LOL. Great plan!! Way to allow Iranian influence to rain in even more when our troops are gone. Wow Great plan!! Hey TImes readers please learn a little about foreign policy and middle east history before voting and drinking your latte. Thx

Doug Lominac – sheesh .. cmon!! Their job is to report the news and let the public make up their own mind. You have one – right? A mind ..

Typical 2-faced leftist hypocrisy. No wonder the NYT is swirling down the toilet. Nothing but a yellow journalism propaganda sheet. Funny how the burned out hippies are acting just like the hormonal, naive, bimbo Obamarama types.

Susan
I hope Barack mentions how the media never follow up on McCain’s gaffes. Like the country McCain continues to mentions Checkoslovakia as current when it no longer exist.

Of all the negative opinions given by the NYT, this paper is so stupid for lack of a better word. I hope that MCcain, sticks to his ideals. Why should McCain give a timeline for any reason. MCCain is smart enough to know that one cannot put themselves on the line, when speaking about the safety of the USA, against terrorists. What is it with the NYT. Obama is so inexperience and stupid has no idea what he is talking about, this is a matter of national security……

Ahh ha… The fairness doctrine is alive and well at NYT! They are “FAIRLY” certain that they can repress the free speech and opinions of Republicans and get their pet DOCTOR IN The White House.
I’ve got a new motto for NYT… “FAIRLY UNBALANCED”
What a big stack of birdcage liner that rag is.

McCain – a .22 caliber mind in a .50 caliber world.

What’s hilarious is most of you mentioning the Czechoslovakia comment didn’t even know that yourselves until YOUR media told you! LOL! Cmon – admit it!

I have voted for every Dem candidate since since 1965 with the exception of Carters 2nd term. Yes I voted for Kerry and I will not vote for McCain. It troubles me deeply to see someone with no experience playing soldier with the lives of American troops. Whether his name is Bush or Obama they are both Chickenhawks.

I think the word Whiner sums it up!!!!!

So now the NYT believes it is entitled to grade Senator McCain’s writing and edit his opinions. The NYT earns a F for reporting, and A for arrogance and subscribers and advertisers are walking away.

When Obama becomes POTUS and all evil corporations are vanquished, then everyone will have to work for the only employer in town (the government) and all will be paid in CHANGE. That is the change we keep hearing about.

I truly hope someone blows the sh!t out of the Times, it could only help their image.

Barrack Hussein Obama= talk and inexperience.
John McCain= action and experience.

Obama blindness is strong in this comment thread.
The NYT is attempting to force a candidate to frame his editorial position after another, obviously preferred candidate and Obama’s supporters are too busy cheering him on to see the obvious problem. If it were the other way around the same folks would be melting the servers with complaints.

2006 CHICAGO, Illinois (CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama called Monday for U.S. troops to start leaving Iraq in 2007, arguing that the threat of an American pullout is the best leverage Washington has left in the conflict.
He said the November 7 midterm elections — when Democrats won control of both houses of Congress for the upcoming session — were a call for a “realistic” strategy, not one “driven by ideology and politics.”
OBAMA lost. The Surge went forward and succeeded.

If you hold his op-ed to a mirror and circle the hidden words, you will find those same sinsiter ideas written in code. It is time to wake up!
Posted by: Mike |
*******************************************
Hey Mike, its time for your meds! Go back
to bed….

Pure fiction is what spews from old flip flopping McSames mouth. He certainly does not know how to win a war, unless you count his help in ending the Civil War where he fought bravely.

Robert Mugabe recently ordered his nations newspapers to ignore his opposition as well.

THE MAN SAVED HIS REAR WHILE HIS BUDDIES BURNED ON TTHE FORRESTAL… FROM HIS PLANE’S FUEL..
HE BROKE HIS ARMS WHEN HE FAILED TO PULL THEM IN UPON EJECTION
HE WAS NEVER TORTURED AND ADMITTED THAT IN US NEWS UPON HIS RETURN
HE SPILLED HIS GUTS IN 37 PROPAGANDA FILMS HE VOLUTARILY MADE AND ADMITTED THAT TOO.
HE WAS CALLED THE HANOI SONGBIRD BY FELLOW POWS…
THE FBI AND CIA KEPT A COMPLETE RECORD OF ALL HIS TOKYO ROSE TRANSMISSIONS.
HE VIOLATED THE PW CODE AND WAS SPARED FROM COURT MARTIAL BY HIS DAD’S INFLUENCE.
HE CAME BACK TO DISPARAGE THE POW / MIA MOVEMENT SAYING THEY WERE ALL A ‘BUNCH OF KOOKS’ AT NIXON AND KISSINGER’S URGING, SO THAT WE COULD DUMP VIET NAM LIKE A HOT POTATO..
HE TOOK HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS IN BRIBES, AIRPLANE FLIGHTS AND VACATIONS FROM KEATING WHO BOUGHT MCCAIN SO THAT HE WOULD INFLUENCE THE SENATE BANKING COMMITTEE…
HE WAS CAUGHT AND CENSURED BY THE SENATE.
HE WAS NOT A HERO, NEVER A WAR STRATEGIST, JUST ANOTHER DISGRACED PILOT LIKE HIS BUDDIES GW BUSH AND DUKE ‘GOLD BATHROOM’ CUNNINGHAM.
ALL 3 OF WHOM ARE CORRUPT.
THAT’S THE GOD’S HONEST TRUTH.

What a bunch of BS. The media could not possibly be more blatant in its preferance for Obama! It has now crossed over into intentional activism for one candidate over another. Media bias? How about just remaining ethical!

Who the hell really reads the NYTIMES OPED anyway?
No big loss. The media coverage he is getting out of
NOT BEING PRINTED is far more beneficial to getting him votes than some old fart in a tweed jacket over at the NY SLIMES deciding who’s ‘COOL ENOUGH’ to loosen the velvet ropes for.

The idiot liar posting as CHUCK is a perfect example of one the problems with having a democracy but not having criteria, other than age, for being allowed to vote. CHUCK is a stupid moron who should have his right to vote stripped away.

There can only be one forgivable explanation for not printing McCains letter – that is, that he would be making a fool of himself and the NYT would be trying to act to prevent him from suffering that fools fate. Otherwise, as the NYT is obviously in Obama’s camp, they would benefit if the piece were substandard. there is, of course, a third explanation that would be that they thought the piece and it’s criticism, too “spot on”.
Let’s be honest folks, The NYT times would love to see McCain stumble. Their suggestion that they wanted him as the Republican elect is indeed a fact but their motives for that were suspect at the time and are still suspect (quite a flip-flop or not??).
No, the problem now is that Obama is not experiencing that overwhelming surge (did I say surge?) in popularity that they thought he would in “running against Bush’s third term” and particularly in the wake of Hillery stepping aside. People, especially female people, aren’t as stupid as the DNC thought.
The people know that McCain is his own man – the 2004 surge position of McCains is simply further proof of that as if any more would be needed.
Now that McCain has shown more prescience and judgement than either Obama or Bush – now that they facts on the ground no longer support Obamas stale one note “defeat dirge”, McCain has indeed become dangerous.
Now the NYT must act to silence him.
If we let them, we stand with the Vietcong who tried to silence him so many years ago. We stand with the Vietcong, both the RNC and the DNC (at various times) Soros, the NYT, Pelosi,Reed, etc…..
Americans – get angry now.
Start by writing the paper that was always known as the “grey lady”….now the grey lady as corpse that is beginning to stink up the room.

chuck,
Even if any of that crap were true McCain is a better choice than Hussien Obama… ha ha ha ha ha ha now isn’t that scary but true!

McSame is a crook and a LIAR. Period. There are many honorable Republicans, unfortunatley McSame is not one of them. He is a joke even amoung his betters in the Senate.

Jen…freedom of the press right…you have heard canidates whine everytime I liberal opens their mouth, there called “Protesters” Jobless protesters, that accounts for 60% of liberals, with a good job market. With New York times doing what they do best, report one sided (Which I will remind you, that’s why their in the tank)it will be good for McCain.

Just read McCain’s op-ed. It’s not an op-ed because it is 90 percent in quotes preceded by he said then and he says now and I said that and he said this. The point of the op-ed is to lay out your vision of the war strategy. NYT rightly rejected this piece because it lacks substance. McCain needs to explain what his strategy is and contrast it with Obama’s. Also, putting Obama’s fact finding trip in quote, i.e., “fact finding trip” is childish and doesn’t belong on the pages of any paper. I understand that McCain doesn’t use the Internet, but the rest of us do and ALL information about Iraq is available through various media sources outside of nightly news. Any self-respecting paper would have rejected this writing for an op-ed. It qualifies as a paid ad, but it’s scarily short of substance.

I have not even watched the MSM news in years. It is so obvious they back the Democrats in every story that they report on. Cable news is where you can get the truth. Try Lou Dobbs on CNN and get the truth on what the MSM hides from you puppets. On al of the matters that are important to American citizens. Sure I do not agree with him 100% but it is real close… Have a good night.. Lou is on..

Rejecting an Op-Ed piece is NOT censorship. The NYT published Obama’s piece because it had news that had not been published and established his position regarding the war. McCain was asked for a re-write because he did neither. The NYT does not need to publish an attach piece on its Op Ed, just because McCain wrote it.

McCains campaign shouldn’t worry about this, I canceled my subscription to the nyt long ago, got tired of their yellow journalism.Their paper is a piece of XXX

This just in:
“Man threatens to jump from Hart atrium”
Please God make it Harry Reid…

Polls are beginning to show lack of support for O from the youth.
Looks like his following is starting to wise up.
Hey Barry – When you are an empty suit and the press is in the tank for ya then even naive kids start to wonder…

TO: David | Jul 21, 2008 2:31:48 PM
No, they don’t want to print an op-ed that showx that Obambi is naive and without an original thought of his own. Why else woul dthey ask McCain to “mirror” Obambi’s editorial. If the truth were told, which it is not in the MSM, Obambi would be seen to flip flop like a fish out of water.

NYT? Who are they? Use a news group like Fox and any newspaper not supporting the Liberal philosophy and have the Oped article posted there. It will draw the few remaining readers away from NYT and other Liberal biased news groups.

NYT? Who are they? Use a news group like Fox and any newspaper not supporting the Liberal philosophy and have the Oped article posted there. It will draw the few remaining readers away from NYT and other Liberal biased news groups.

look how the GOOD ol’ BOYS are whining right now! Oh how I never expected to see the high and mighty far right fall to bitter gun clinging whiners! this is too good!!! obama A CHANGE THAT LEAVES THE GOOD OL’ BOYS IN THE FETAL POSITION!

TO LIKEN BUSH TO CURIOUS GEORGE WOULD BE CONSIDERED DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER TO CURIOUS GEORGE… DOES YOUR WIFE HAVE A CRUSH ON OBAMA? (SMH)

Iam4thisCountry: A TRUE PATRIOT.
couldn’t have said it better myself.

NOOOOOOOOOO! Barack Hussein Obama looks exactly like Curious George! Do an image search of both on Google and you will see! I can’t speak for the estate of Curious George as to whether Hussein’s haircut is a copyright violation…

Why all the excitment over the magic N-word going to Afghanistan and Iraq, he will talk to please them, he has big words but no substance.
C’mon DeHart-Starr don’t go to there.
Maybe it’s because I’m from the NE (maybe not) but, quite honestly, I don’t give a damn about a person color or creed. Yes, I am a Republican. Party of Lincoln. Born of the Abolitionist movement with Lincoln as the first Republican. I believe in individual merit. A meritocracy is my ideal. Compassionate always – but not foolishly so.
So if you want to write racist diatribes you should probably try to get them published on the website of “Robert Bird” the West Virginia senior Senator of the Democratic party (who ghas half the state named after himself)and reputed past KKK …whatever…
I don’t like racist BS…. and it is not a native philosophy to the Republican party that I belong to.

Why all the excitment over the magic N-word going to Afghanistan and Iraq, he will talk to please them, he has big words but no substance.
C’mon DeHart-Starr don’t go to there.
Maybe it’s because I’m from the NE (maybe not) but, quite honestly, I don’t give a damn about a person color or creed. Yes, I am a Republican. Party of Lincoln. Born of the Abolitionist movement with Lincoln as the first Republican. I believe in individual merit. A meritocracy is my ideal. Compassionate always – but not foolishly so.
So if you want to write racist diatribes you should probably try to get them published on the website of “Robert Bird” the West Virginia senior Senator of the Democratic party (who ghas half the state named after himself)and reputed past KKK …whatever…
I don’t like racist BS…. and it is not a native philosophy to the Republican party that I belong to.

All this hooplah how the Obama is the media’s darling..Yeah right!! McCain keeps making gaffes left, right and every which way in between and the media either ignores it or makes excuses for him!
Here are just but a few gaffes made this week that the media overlooked:
1) He thinks Czecholsolvakia is still a country
2) He thinks Iraq and Pakistan are bordered countries.
3) His main economic advisor called Americans “a nation of whiners”
4)He refuses to accept Maliki’s statement of advocating a troop withdrawl.
5)He called social security a disgrace.
6)He can’t decide which type of troop surge he wants in Afghanistan. Either US troops from Iraq, NATO troops, or both. He changed his position twice in one day.
This is all in one week people! Lament about Obama all you want, because it’s more than obvious that McCain has been granted a free pass for quite some time now..

Jennifer: LOVED IT!!!!

Why am I using his name? BECAUSE IT’S HIS NAME! If he doesn’t like it or is emabarrased by it he should change it. Calling a person by their actual given name should never be offensive to anyone, especially Muslims! They should be proud that there is a person with a Muslim name running for president! I will say it loud and clear (like the W. in George W. Bush) Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

So is this story suppose to be about Po’ John McCain, the media is ignoring “me?” And playing favorites to Obama? Is this a sympathy call or something? After all the hateful things the GOP have said about democrats in general and it made national news at times? McCain and friends have had centered stage long enough.

It’s hard to tell what John McCain really stands for. He’s changed his mind too much. He’s got that nice long record but hasn’t maintained a firm stance on much of anything. Can anyone tell me which of these important issues John McCain HASN’T flip-flopped on?
Immigration
The War in Iraq
The Bush Tax Cuts
Reproductive Rights
Campaign Finance
Off-Shore Drilling
Social Security
Hamas & Talking to Terrorists

Iam4thisCountry
I’d love to help you with that but the fact is that “the first casualty of war is the original plan”. So true, so true.
The point of that observation is that – should you actually endeavor to win a war you have (jointly) decided to enter, you better be close to it and you better be creative on the fly. This is the lesson of Vietnam.
Look, it’s been a tedious five years. A lot of ups and downs for everyone (particularly our soldiers and their families)but we have indeed made progress.
Within the last two weeks the US airlifted out “Yellowcake” shipment from Iraq to Canada. This was leftover from the Gulf War I stash of Sadaam Husseins Osirek (Nuclear) reactor site. SH had put it on a list of WMD’s that was supplied to UNESCO (the UN) and which he obligated himself to turn over. He never did. He kicked the Un out before he had to. When you hear people talk about “there never having had WMD’s”, think about this recent fact.
When we finally moved it out this month, we did it with little fanfare but rest assured that there were some of us that breathed a bit easier knowing it wouldn’t be incorporated into a “dirty bomb” at some time in the future, and sent over here.
I won’t drone on…
I will say, however,that I have personal knowledge of the ME that goes back to the 1970′s and it’s serious stuff over there.Our regions are joined by open and free (relatively) mass transit systems, so, you too can have a Wahabbi school near you soon.
Beware of the politician that purports to become a military authority in the spate of a two week tour – the (other) politician that would seek to silence engineers and scientists with his furrowed brow while clutching his “swedish statuette” spouting nonsense as pieties. These are your transnationalists “working the crowd”. The young fall for it first….

UUUUUUUMMMMM????? CAN I USE A LIFELINE? LOL.

HUSSEIN 08′
SADDAM DIDNT ATTACK THIS COUNTRY. BIN LADEN DID… WHOS FAMILY IS QUITE CHUMMY WITH OUR PRESIDENT OF THE LAST 8 YEARS…HMMM
There now, see, it isn’t so hard. HUSSEIN ’08.
Just call a spade a spade, don’t look for hidden meaning when there is none. This is just a symptom of the overly PC world we live in.
The likeness of BHO to Curious George all started when a little girl in her innocence called into a talk show with her observation. She had no racial under or overtones. Just like someone having a perpetually dirty mind, not everybody sees it that way…

IT WAS ONLY WHEN A BACKWOODS HILL-BILLY WAS SELLING THE T-SHIRT IN HIS FLY INFESTED GREASY-SPOON DINER DID THAT BECOME AN ISSUE…. FAIR ENOUGH. AGREE TO DISAGREE.
OBAMA 08′ OOPS…. HUSSEIN 08′

Wait I missed one. This flip-flop really makes me question John McCain’s competence. In a 2004 interview, McCain responded to a question asking what he would do if “a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there” by saying, “If it was an elected government of Iraq … I don’t see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.”
???????????????

Now, “Backwoods Hill-Billy” is a pretty direct insult to the hard working blue collar folk that make up the backbone of this country, wouldn’t you say?

seattle sam – John McCain gets his homework handed back to him with a failing grade once again Once a D student, always a D student. LOL

Mark – no, it’s an insult to backwoods hill billies who don’t actually work but watch NASCAR and drink beer all day. Hard working blue collar folks hate hill billies, too.

Why does McSame think he’s so special? Lots of folks get asked for rewrites by the Times editorial page – most normal people do what they’re asked and don’t whine to Matt Drudge about it. What a pathetic old fool.

Kirt: Actually the WWII analogy is false since there were no insurgencies in either Japan or Germany once their respective armies surrendered. Also, there was no foriegn power like Iran funding an insurgency. Vietnam is a much more apt analogy – how did that work out again?

Kirt – McCain doesn’t even know where Iraq is – he thinks it’s next door to Pakistan. He also thinks that Czechoslovakia is still a country even though the Czech Republic and Slovakia split up in 1992. The guy is an idiot when it comes to foreign policy.

thanks jennifer…. I see the boards picked up with some intelligent folks so im signing off. GOD BLESS AMERICA… BETTER YET… THE WORLD. OBAMA 08′

hawk; Did you read the piece, I did. All it did was critizes Obama. That in itself would not be enough to stop the NY Times (who endorses McCain) from printing it. What stopped it was there was no substance. They asked McCain to write a piece in response to Obama’s. Obama, atleast, gave his plan on what he wants to do when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan. They wanted McCain to write about his plans (what plans) to counte Obama’s. But, he has no Idea how he plans on winning those wars, he just plans on winning. They gave it back to him and asked him to rewrite it, But, of course, he cannot state how he plans on winning. Sooo sad!!

kookman – a handful of random killings doesn’t equal an insurgency.

Too bad the Times does not think the public should know all the facts. Please be fair and balanced on GMA.

I HEARD STUPID WAS A STUPID CRACK ER!

LR – actually, the situation is just the opposite of what you claim: the Times was asking McCain to provide MORE facts and less spin.

I dont like either of these two obama or McCain. This is a little off subject, but I just saw the Video
of McCain on the Conan Show, He fell asleep on the Conan show. LOL thats hallarious. Wow! Thats all I can say Wow. The news should run this video more. If anyone want to see the video you can go to http://www.mccanes.com its under the videos. LOL Halarious. Today Ive seen a video of McCain taking a nap on the Conan Obrien show, and a Video of Obama making a three pointer. This race is a carnival. lol. Go see the video. http://www.mccanes.com

Amy: What poll were you looking at. The Poll of Polls shows he is up by 6. Which is not alot but we shall see come septemer.

kookman – what are you talking about? FOX News has Bill O’Reilly on every night. That guy is a total bigot. Also, FOX News used to host Jesse Helms regularly – and he was undsiputably a biggot. FOX News hates blacks.

For the first time in my adult life I am REALLY ashamed of the media.

LarryT – why is that? Because McCain couldn’t handle a simple rewrite and went whining to Matt Drudge? ROFL

The great thing about Obama is that no matter the hate filled rhetoric, he just keeps going. His points of view are credible and well thought out. His ability to articulate his position is beautiful and his sense of morality has that touch of the Divine. I am voting for him this time because of all of the above. I wrote in John McCain the last two elections because having lived in Texas, I knew exactly what would happen to our country if Bush Jr. was elected. I would have gladly voted for John McCain again but unfortunately he has signed on to the GW cool-aid and he has lost his soul. And to be factual, every decent newspaper has a set OpEd policy and I think for McCain backers to whine just shows how little they do subscribe to the theory that businesses have rights to manage their business any way they wish. McCain surrogates whine is making this all the more of an issue so it will not be going away in the normal news cycle. This incessant whine precludes that entirely. Apparently Obama’s OpEd piece was great and met their standards since they published it or he probably happily rewrote it till he got it right. McCain’s spoiled brat acts are getting disgusting.

Here is the full text of John McCain’s NYT letter. You decide if it needed a rewrite:
“My story begins in Nineteen dickety two. We had to say “dickety” because the Kaiser had stolen our word for “twenty.” I chased him down the road but gave up after dickety-six miles…Three wars back we called Sauerkraut “liberty cabbage” and we called liberty cabbage “super slaw” and back then a suitcase was known as a “Swedish lunch box.” Of course, nobody knew that but me. Anyway, long story short… is a phrase whose origins are complicated and rambling… Then after World War Two, it got kinda quiet, ’till Superman challenged FDR to a race around the world. FDR beat him by a furlong, or so the comic books would have you believe. The truth lies somewhere in between… We can’t bust heads like we used to, but we have our ways. One trick is to tell ‘em stories that don’t go anywhere – like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on ‘em. ‘Give me five bees for a quarter,’ you’d say.
Now where were we? Oh yeah – the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones…”
Oh wait… that’s Grampa Simpson… hard to tell the difference…

Peggy – he doesn’t but thanks for asking!

ha! Nice one Rich!

I dunno Rich – I see McCain more as a C. Montgomery Burns type…

Well. If this isnt a sign about how the media is “in the tank” for Obama, I’m a blind Apache!!

Peter – hey, speaking of Charismatic leaders, don’t forget this:
The partnership had its origins in 1973, when the junior political flunky was working for George Bush the elder, who was chairman of the Republican National Committee. The 22 year-old Mr Rove was given the job of meeting the chairman’s son and handing him the keys to the family.
A starstruck Mr Rove has since told the New Yorker he could remember what the young Bush was wearing that day: cowboy boots, jeans and a pilot’s jacket. “He was exuding more charisma than any one individual should be allowed to have,” Mr Rove marvelled.

gsdfgsdfgsdfg

Marvin – then you’re a blind Apache. Remember McCain was given the opportunity to make rewrites, but he chose to whine to Matt Drudge instead. Also, McCain has had no less than 10 other Op-Ed pieces printed in the Times. Clearly there is no favoritism here – just a whining incompetent who can’t follow directions. LOL

“kookman – actually the 30 years war took place during the early modern era – 1618 – 1648 – not the Middle Ages.”
The “Early Modern Era”…….
Listen, for your sake I hope you can get that one to catch on. I was getting rather bored with the ol’ Early, middle, Late” Middle Ages thing.
Anyway, you have fun now….
Gotta go – work beckons.

steve WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE ON HAL TURNERS SITE…LOL

meerschaum – that’s what I like about Democrats – they’re generally better educated and not afraid to enlighten others. Too bad Republicans are so resistant to learning.

Obama is an idiot, and doesn’t think anything out. He is told to stick to the teleprompter and even when he goes off the teleprompter and stays something incrediably stupid, his kool aid drinking supporters don’t have enough sense to see Obama for what its—-a tax hiking, marxist, crook. This is all he is. If you want to pay thousands more—vote for Obama, If you have any common sense vote for anyone else.

chattyway – still having trouble distinguishing your wackadoo opinions from facts, hon? Good luck with that. lol

chattyway – thanks for posting this. Your rabid insanity always reminds me why I’m voting for Obama. I’ve been forwarding your posts to my friends and they are the single greatest recruiting tool to convince others to vote for Obama, too. The more people see how out-of-their-minds McCain supporters are, the more they want nothing to do with him. Keep up the great work – you’re a peach!

“The early modern period is a term initially used by historians to refer mainly to the period roughly from 1500 to 1800 in Western Europe (Early modern Europe). It follows the Late Middle Ages period, and is marked by the first European colonies, the rise of strong centralized governments, and the beginnings of recognizable nation states that are the direct antecedents of today’s states in what is called Modern times. This categorical era spans the two centuries between the Middle Ages and the Industrial Revolution that has created modern European and American society”
hmmm…. 1500 to 1800…. two centuries.
You know, Wikipedia is written by “just folks” people like you and me. Scratch that – people like you and “maryanne lutz”. You know, real acamedicians – smart people. You win, I’m a simple Repoooblican. Now you folks go ahead and elect BO. He’s going to get you those lucrative “Alternative Energy” careers. Like stuffing insulation in my rafters……
Good night,,,and God bless.

Nando- mine are alot better.

Mark – no. Yours sucked. Nandos were better.

IMO THE BEST THING THIS NATION COULD DO ABOUT RACE RELATIONS IN THIS COUNTRY IS LET THE FAR RIGHTWING BIGGOTS ESTABLISH THERE OWN COUNTRY IN ALASKA… THEN NOT ALOW THEM NUCLEAR CAPABILITES. AND HOLD THERE VERYOWN ELECTIONS. THAT WAY THE ONLY FEAR THEY WOULD HAVE OF A BLACK PRESIDENT WOULD BE CLARENCE THOMAS LOL…NAAAHHHH…. HE WOULD BE LYNCHED ON THE FIRST INDEPENDANCE DAY CELEBRATION.

New York Times is unbelievable bias and actively working to get the crook Obama in——this isn’t how our media is supposed to work. It is very telling and down right scarrey that any would support this nonsense whether voting for obama, McCain, Hiliary, or other.

Let Nando speak for himself.

Is the NY Times on Obama’s payroll?

martha – at least Obama knows the difference between Czechoslovakia and the Czech Republic. Old man McCain has been making alot of big gaffes lately – either he doesn’t know anything about the world or he’s having too many senior moments. Either way it proves he’s not the foriegn policy expert he claims to be.

chattyway is f–n nuts and John W. is an ignorant racist.

No, but I guess we can just agree to disagree. That’s the pure beauty of our political process and I believe what the the founding fathers originally had in mind for political differences. After all, we’re ALL still Americans, right?
Oh, and I forgot one:
“Glad there’s no such thing as an “old card”!

Obama, is a former community organizer and part-time senator. I really don’t care what he has to say in the new york times.

Why read Obama’s opinion, it will change, just like the wind. I understand why Obama is for change, he is a Kerry type flip-flopper.

if chattyway represented america… I too would hate this country.

The Champ Is Here!!!

“This is truly offensive. There’s not even the pretense of equal treatment. The Times deserves its long, inexorable decline.”
It actually deserves a very swift exit!
But not too fast, of all the worlds’ papers the NYT has become my daily comic relief their bias and ineptitude only overshadowed by their taking themselves so seriously – Monty Python in UK or Larry Sanders in the USA couldnt have created a satirical version of a Newspaper as well as these people!
The Fiji Times from a minute Island Nation that doesent even officially have democracy in place right now, has superior reporting (that is unbiased reporting allowing readers to form their own judgements)to the NYT.
In the not so funny picture they are a vivid example of the sort of thinking that is signalling the decline of the Western World as we knew it, given their head the militant muslims merely have to sit and wait, with the enemies from within led by the left press and left legal representatives doing their job for them.
You should have learnt from Vietnam but you didnt, you should have learnt from the treatment of Hillary Clinton (and I didnt like her, but the treatment she received was quite incredibly biased) but you havent, so the odds are these mental incompetents & utopian dreamers chosen candidate will win, you will lose yet another war.
Whether you are Democrat or Republican how long do you think you can keep losing before you become irrelevant?
In that scenario, why should we in Australia keep supporting the USA? Surely our, and any other small to medium country mindful of its vulnerability, is then faced with either the unlikely situation of going Nuclear or switching allegiances to another power that understands what power is and how it should be used?
At the moment the two most likely are China and India.
This is the most important election the USA has faced perhaps ever, it will determine whether you remain relevant as a super power or not, and so far the actions like those of the NYT and the mainly mindless responses of potential voters on blogs like these, doesent augur well.
One can only hope their are millions of Independent voters who can make rational judgements that we outside of the USA havent heard from yet, but if our experience is any guide they will not make enough difference.
In our case a similarly inexperienced candidate long on rhetoric, short on pragmatism did win and already after 8 months the signs are we are going to pay for that penchant for unthinking change big time.
11 years of prosperity is looking very shaky indeed as the left pursues its utopian and warm inner glow policies, hope you guys are more sensible than us and dont join in!

will the far right still love “their” country once an african american runs it??????……….DON’T WORRY……I’LL WAIT…

NOW THEY WHINE ABOUT THE STANDARDS OF HARVARD…. SIGNS THE WORLD IS COMMING TO AN END.

Ben,
And your quick quips are BS!!!

FOR EVERYONE THAT HAS A KNOCK ON OBAMA…LOOK IN THE MIRROR…DARE TO COMPARE…AND THEN STFU!!!

WHAUGHT PAYOWER!!!! <——WHEW! <—- YOU TAILEM… AYENT NOEAW WAYIN HAIL…IMA LIT THAT HAPPEN! <——WHEW!
YOU TAIL EM!

Hey, let’s get the government to close down the NYT just like they used to do in Russia, and still do in Iran! The NYT is a private enterprise, so explain again all you sons of the good ole capitalistic, constitutionally correct spirit why can’t they print or not print as they see fit, in deference to their shareholders and readers? I read the article, and its nothing but a Republican attack ad. Why should McCain get free ad time for that kind of garbage, that frankly is getting a little stale after 8 years?

Bobcat,
You sound as if Obama took your place. I doubt it, STFU!!!

BOBCAT DOES STUNTS FORSEAN HANNITY IN HOMO-EROTIC CLAN MOVIES.

ATISHA,
THAT SHOULD MAKE UP 20% OF THE BILL FOR SLAVERY…DON’T YOU THINK? HAHAHAHAHAH!
DEAL WITH IT! ; )

Atisha -Michelle Obama cost the American public $340,000 – now THAT is a stretch! She and Senator Obama paid off their school loans. I know, I know sometimes, it just sucks to be a McCain supporter when all you can do is just throw BS around.

I’m not surprised. How can John McCain be expected to produce a newsworthy OpEd piece when he’s too stupid to remember his positions and votes in the Senate w/out a teleprompter ?

Actually, Michelle Obama cost the taxpayer $337,900. Barak Obama cost the taxpayer only $112,000. Affirmative Action allows those to slack in school and let the government pay their way in college.

James A. Muncy, Jr. – and McCain is experienced? being a POW does not qualify for on-the-job training for becoming a president. I’ll take a calm tempered Harvard grad any day over a hot head who can’t remember what countries border Iraq….

grandmaisgold:
Ill take a hot head with memory lapses over a black libertarian paritioner who sits back and listens to hate spewed about his own country and the white devils in it. Indecisive obuma is a major threat to the well being of this country please dont assist him in his madness because there is a method to it,
calculating and deliberate and one that spells ruination for these great states.

Gloria,
On second and third thought, McCain crashed FOUR other aircraft belonging to the American tax-payers. That’s well into $100 Million dollars…but, I guess you can forgive McCain for that, and can’t support two African Americans receiving educations!!!

BruhMan – so true! Additionally, McCain has no plans for the economy, defies a sovereign country’s right to want us out of THEIR country, and I love how all the crazies on the right are going bat s**t insane about Obama’s trip now, they know Obama is kicking ass and looking every bit the part of a commander in chief and it’s killing them. Maybe McCain shouldn’t have challenged Obama to go to Iraq. I love the irony.

grandmaisgold
Are you that surprised that the muslims would not receive him with open arms. JEEZ LADY how naaive can you and some of these other obuma hucksters be?

grandmaisgold & BruhMan
Two idiots that sit on the computer and show their stupidity on a continual basis. If you had any brains, you would realize, you are doing more harm than good for Obama’s political campaign. Typical Obama followers…

John McCain has been getting a free pass by the media for some time now. I listed at least six gaffes this week alone that went unchecked by the media. If Obama were to say that Iraq bordered Pakistan,(which McCain said this morning on Good Morning America)there would be at least three days of coverage on the topic.
Just on Larry King this evening Ben Stein (a McCain supporter) and Jamal Simmons (a Obama supporter) said that they have submitted op/ed pieces to the NYT and the newspaper has very strict guidelines. They both admitted to having to re-submit their pieces. The NYT even endorsed McCain in the primaries, and McCain has submitted 7 op/ed pieces since 1996.

How am I being the one racist Jennifer? If I was a member of a black libertarian church that denounced the United States of America and all of the white people who were holding a brother down or was a member of the ku klux klan that spread hate about minority groups then yes you could call me a racist. Just because I recognize racist groups and those involved in them doesnt make me a racist per say, just an innocent observant bystander just stating the obvious. It seems that you are all too ready to holler racism when someone denounces your messiah for his obvious indiscretions that flies in the face of his campaign for “CHANGE”

BruhMan:
Your over the line, McCain put his life on the line for every American. I have great respect for every member of our military. You forget, without our military, your rants and raves would not be allowed. Duty, Honor and love of country is McCain, but Obama does not have a clue !!!!!
*** God Bless every member of our Armed Forces ***

Maybe McCain has a bit of trouble remembering what nations border each other halfway around the world, obuma thinks that there are 57 states right here where he lives! Kinda trivializes McCain little gaff doesnt it?

tom – oh, knock it off! Senator Obama was referring to 57 primary contests. Good grief! You whiners find more nonissues to cry about. Tough being a McCain supporter these days!

Tom,
You make it seem as though the views of Obama are identical to Rev Wright! Do you agree with everything your pastor says in your church? Rev Wright wasn’t the only aspect of the church, no pastor is.
The church does a considerable amount of charity work for the Chicago community, which was a core incentive for Obama’s proposal to fund faith based initiatives.
Do I agree with Rev Wright’s comments? No. Did Obama reject, denounce and repudiate the comments that Rev. Wright made? Yes. Is he still a member of the church? No.
I only believe in one messiah, and that’s Jesus thank you very much!!
I don’t know if you’re a Republican or a PUMA, but Rev Wright seems to be your only talking points!! The topic of the blog is John McCain’s op/ed being rejected from the NYT, not Obama’s former church and his former pastor.

BruhMan
I bet your grass grows beautifully, with all the manure you spread.

Michelle – sorry to disappoint you but my IQ is very high. The low IQ belongs to people like you who can only personally attack others rather than discuss the issues.

tom,
This is my last exchange with you EVER. You can NEVER and I mean NEVER question if I’m a Marine with a capital “M”…thanks for the insult. And, I was all for Senator John McCain in 2000. That John McCain is dead. I’m from Missouri, where we raise Democrats and corn!!! There are many things I disagree with Senator Obama, but the main reason I disagree with McCain was his being against the 21st Century GI Bill of Rights. You see, that bill gives a four year college education to servicemembers who serve at least 3 years since September 11, 2001. John McCain offered another bill, and when his wasn’t considered, he didn’t show up to vote on the bill offered by Senator Webb. That bill passed (75-22), and McFraud didn’t even show up!!! I’ve got a degree, but many of my Marines…fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan don’t. The chief argument?!?!?…cost…it would cost $50 Billion dollars over 10 years…the war in Iraq costs $12 Billion a month. So, four months out of Iraq and every servicemembers college is paid for…support who you want, for whatever reason you want!!!

BruhMan-
Your being a marine is questionable, if not unbelieveable. You need mental help.

Love,
And, I kill for a living. Of course I need mental help!!! You have no excuse for needing it.

I personally am proud of the GI Bill that is now in place that includes spouses and children of veterans. Your vehemence against McCain is totally out of character for a member of an elite order as you espouse to be. Obama just does not have what it takes to lead this country, I am not racist nor affiliated with any particulair party. I do happen to get my dander up when accused of being something I am not, even by anonymous bloggers. I tend to feel that my honor is at stake and I think that you can understand how that would make a man of character and morals feel.

Here are a couple of recent McCain gaffes that the media has overlooked:
1) McCain called Social Security “an absolute disgrace.”
2)McCain’s top economic policy adviser calls Americans a bunch of “whiners” for being worried about the slumping economy.
3)McCain in 2004 at the Council on Foreign Relations said that if the Iraqis asked us to leave, we would have to go. Now that’s changed.
4)McCain denies, flatly, that he ever said that he is not an expert in economics.
5)McCain thinks that Czechoslovakia is still a country.
6) McCain thinks that Iraq and Pakistan border each other.
7) McCain flip-flopped in the same day in reference to how he would utilize troops in Afghanistan. First he said he would send troops from Iraq, then he said he would use NATO troops, and towards the end of the day he said he would use both.
8) A reported rape joke that he made. It references to women, not really minding be raped all that much.
McCain has been getting a free ride for quite some time. If Obama even made one of these gaffes, it would be all over the news for at least 3 days!!

BruhMan:
If your a marine, what country do you serve? Is your passport in order?

And even Maureen Dowd appears to have bought into the McCainites’ Euro-phobia, suggesting Obama “can’t be seen as too insidery with the Euro-crats” lest Obama-wary Americans “wonder what he’s doing there, when they can’t pay for gas, when the dollar is the Euro’s chew toy, when Bud is going Belgian and when the Chrysler Building has Arab landlords.” And don’t forget all those German cars on our roads. Which we can’t afford to drive because gas is too expensive (for which, according to McCain, we can blame Obama).
Of course, at no point does the McCain campaign or anyone in the media point out what, exactly, is the danger to America if our closest allies actually, you know, don’t hate us.
They also fail to mention that along with being our allies, the European countries Obama is visiting are also democracies — so it’s a lot easier for their leaders to make nice with us if their constituents don’t view our president as an object of disdain and ridicule.
And, as Jason Linkins points out, George Bush keeps giving them reasons for ongoing disdain and ridicule. As does McCain. Is it really better for America’s standing in the world to have a president who doesn’t know that Czechoslovakia no longer exists and who thinks there is a border between Iraq and Pakistan?
Iraq has shown us what an essentially go-it-alone war looks like.
And the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan — resulting in more U.S. troop fatalities there in May and June than in Iraq — is a tragic reminder of the consequences of a U.S. military spread too thin, and of not having our allies fully backing our efforts.
Given a recent poll showing the German public prefers Obama to McCain 67 percent to 6 percent, it’s no surprise that McCain would try to spin his opponent’s popularity there as a black mark on his record. It’s also no surprise that McCain isn’t willing to admit that our allies’ antipathy toward Bush and his policies — exacerbated by the contempt the Bushies always seemed to delight in directing at them (see Rummy on “Old Europe”) — has cost us dearly in blood, treasure, and goodwill. But it is a surprise that the media are so eagerly parroting the “popular is a problem” meme.
Thankfully, most Americans understand that having a president who is lauded around the world is infinitely better than having one who is loathed.

BRUH,
THERE ARE A LOT OF DECENT PEOPLE WHO WERE BASICALLY INCINERATED IN NAM.
TO HAVE THIS TRAITOR NOWADAYS RUN AROUND THE COUNTRY LIKE HE’S PATTON IS RIDICULOUS.
FACT IS, HE WAS NO PATTON, HE WAS A FLYING BENEDICT ARNOLD.
SOME OF US WILL NEVER FORGET.
I’M GONE.

Check into the post 911 GI Bill you idiot. What do you have a degree in, stupidity? I reached out but now I am reasonably sure that you are neither a marine nor a graduate of any reputable seat of learning. My first impression of you was correct, my gut instincts have saved my life more than once, I never should have given you a second thought and I swear you shan’t garner a third.

tom,
YOU FUGGIN IDIOT…THAT’S THE GI BILL JOHN MCCAIN WOULD NOT, COULD NOT, AND DID NOT VOTE FOR!!! THAT’S WHY I WILL NOT, CANNOT, AND AM NOT VOTING FOR HIM!!!

tom,
Time to check that gut at the door, along with your brain…FOOLISH for you to post about things you know little, but I see you continue on a daily!!!

tom,
What, no rebuttal??? Checking the facts, like you check your gut???

tom,
You see, I know why I’m not voting for John McCain. And it’s not some made up “gotcha”…like Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, a “whitey” tape, flag lapel pin, “Muslim” terrorist, fist jabbing…
He is simply a FRAUD, that WANTS to be President, not lead the country. Why in the hell did it take him 26 years as a Congressman (House and Senate) to gain his party’s nomination? I like “Maverick” in 2000, he has simply morphed into McBush because he thinks that’s how to become President!!!

Sooo anybody know if Obama was asked for a rewrite?

Jennifer- not everyone buys into your definition of racism. Flag away! Suppress the discenting opinion with your Holy Mantle of PC! Socialism at it’s best!!!!

I would be very interested to know how Shipley of the NYT handled Obama’s op-ed piece. Was it accepted as written? Were revisions requested? What was the tone of the emails between Shipley and the Obama camp? It would be very interesting to compare the treatment received by Obama and that received by McCain.

McCain is lucky the media’s focus is on Obama. That’s why the senile fool can say Iraq borders Pakistan on GMA and he gets a pass. Phil Gramm’s whiners comments got 1 day play on TV. Jesse Jackson’s nuts comment went on for a week.

Chuck and BruhMan: You’re anger has clouded your minds terribly. Moreover, it’s guys like you who talk-talk-talk about what hereoes you are – and you all usually turn out to be the least heroic of anyone. I served – and I salute EVERYONE who has served. McCain a traitor? You sicken me. Have you seen interviews with McCain’s cell mates in Vietnam? They praise him for enduring all kinds of Hellish tortures. I hope you both stop breathing soon.

I guess if the NY Times doesn’t like it, they don’t print it.

At this point, Obama could plagerize a page from a children’s book and it would get published anywhere and be praised as the next Gettysburg Address. I can’t wait for the election, when all of the glazed eyed media and Obamites watch in shock as McCain wins by 10-15%. The majority of the American people know this media created Emperior has no clothes.

The surge worked? No, John McCain, the surge helped. Progress in Iraq is due to many elements, including the fact that the United States pays enemy combatants to NOT fight, political reconciliation is gradually working, the cities have been effectively segregated to keep enemies away from one another and the Iraqi armed forces are finally beefed up to 560,000 trained soldiers.
If Senator McCain wants to claim the success of the surge, then he must also accept blame for the overall failure in Iraq.
McCain needs to accept the blame for being one of the principal advocates for the war in the first place.
As a leading Republican Senator, John McCain could have impeded the Iraq war. Instead, John McCain and George Bush started an unnecessary war that caused the deaths of more than 4,000 American soldiers and wasted more than $1 Trillion.
However, blaming McCain for starting the war or giving him credit for the surge is all backward looking.
Looking forward, however, the primary issues are:
(1) Are the Iraqis ready for Americans to leave and
(2) (2) How fast can we safely withdraw?
Not surprisingly, pretty much everyone except John McCain now thinks the United States should begin the withdrawal process.
The Iraqi Prime Minister and Iraq’s top religious leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, have clearly told the United States to set a timetable for U. S. troops to leave Iraq. They are aligned with Senator Obama’s plan.
72% of Iraqis oppose our continued presence in Iraq. They want us out.
A majority of Americans want American troops to leave Iraq.
Even the “Decider” George Bush now supports Senator Obama’s position that we can start drawing down our military role in Iraq. Bush now says we can set “time horizons” for the withdrawal of troops.
John McCain needs to get a grip on reality. Again, McCain should not be given credit for the surge unless he accepts the blame for the war he caused in the first place.
Most important, he needs to start looking to the future like Barack Obama.
As Obama has been saying for a long time, the future calls for the United States to begin the orderly withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. It is their country – let them run it.

People criticizing Senator McCain for being a POW need a good splap in the face and some solitary confinement.
Then they can say what THEY’RE made of.
YOU PATHETIC COWARDS.

If Senator McCain wants to claim the success of the surge, then he must also accept blame for the overall failure in Iraq.
BS. Absolute nonsense. Why? The war was the President’s to wage. There were stratetgic errors made, primarily as the fault of the President, which were costly, yes, sad to say. Senator McCain stepped up and was a supporter of the surge, in the face of scorn and opposition. After the surge set in, conditions allowed local political adjustments. It gave the locals breathing room. Yes we used a combination of strategies. The Senator however, was a main proponent of correcting the course in Iraq. He wasn’t President, and the full responsibility lies with him. SORRY YOU CAN’T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. You want to blame the President, but at the same time lay the strategic mistakes at the feet of Senator McCain?
The facts prevent that. Senator McCain doesn’t want to withdraw without actual knowledge of conditions. I want the war to end too. I’m just not so damn naive that I think we can just say “load up the planes” over night. Senator McCain has supported a draw down as part of the end game since he proposed the surge. His written and public statements (all on record) confirm this.
So maybe when the distortions stop, the debate can begin. That is, ahem, if Senator Obama ever has the guts to show up and meet his own criteria, to debate Senator McCain. Waiting….

MCCAIN APPARENTLY HAD NINE (9) OP-EDS IN THE NY TIMES SINCE 1996.
THEY MERELY ASKED HIM TO RE-WRITE THIS ONE TO THE NYT EDITORIAL STANDARDS.
THEY DO THAT TO EVERYONE.
I THINK THAT’S FAIR.
HE REFUSED.
MACK MUST NEED PUBLICITY PRETTY BADLY THIS WEEK.
WHAT A MCSHAM..

Regarding the specific conditions on the ground that would have to me met for McCain to withdrawl from Iraq, there are a lot of potential conditions that we could posit related to political reconsililation, reduction of violence, but the point is McCain hasn’t said what HE believes they are.
Of course him not saying what those conditions are, and the press not demanding he say, make me suspect the condition that will allow us to leave is THAT THE OIL IS ALL PUMPED OUT OF THE GROUND.
Now if we think that reduction of violence and political reconsilation are the conditions required, whatever those vague terms really mean, we allow ourselves to be held hostage to a couple of car bombs, or an Iraqi politician driving the requirement to stay because suddenly the conditions are not met!

@Rich: Senator McCain said as far back as 2004 that we should leave if asked to by the Iraqi government. Recently, the Prime Minister of Iraq (who is facing elections himself) has called for a specific time table, but that the time table would also take into consideration conditions on the ground.
Senator McCain has said also withdrawl must be based on ground conditions.
What these conditions are, that is debatable. Perhaps Senator McCain hasn’t given a specific “when” because (AS I HIGHLIGHTED above with my post on the benchmarks), the “when” isn’t known yet. You can’t give an answer to a question you don’t know the answer to.
Yes it is vauge. I’d rather that vauge response, which is realistic, than Senator Obama’s approach of an arbitrary time table. The fact that Prime Minister (who is facing election) agrees with Senator Obama (also facing election) isn’t surprising.

I think that the American people and the troops are owed an explanation as to the conditions that should be met to withdrawl from Iraq. If McCain can’t figure this out, or won’t say because of political fear, I think it says a lot about his qualifications to be president. His strength is supposed to be national security issues, but this makes him look weak.

@rich: OK. Last time trying to explain.
The conditions are shifting. By all accounts, conditions over the last 12 months have improved. This is part of a trend. Senator McCain has said conditions on the ground. He has defined those conditions on the ground, and a reasonable analysis concludes he forsees good progress within the next 12-18 months. Just because he won’t give you an exact date simply doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a plan or a strategy. I’m sure he’ll be more specific in the coming weeks. As everyone agrees however, that we will not be leaving in a matter of a few weeks, it’s perfectly acceptable not to give a specific date. Your demand for a specific date, is unreasonable, by all military and political standards. You’re asking for something even Senator Obama has not commited to. If you haven’t sensed that based on the current conditions, we’ll be going sooner than later, then I really can’t help you. The Senator’s job is not to spell it out for you.

@tom: Don’t challenge what you said?
Oh OK. I’ll make sure to let someone who blatently lies and his filled with false thoughts and vile hatred get away with it. Your obviously fale statements about WHO Republicans are, is enough for me. I also wasn’t aware that the Bible was the exclusive book of Republicans. Interesting. Please explain this alternative universe you live in. Scientists may be able to contact you through this forum, and learn about your strange land of distorted truths, and lies. Fascinating…

keep it up loser we americans are not listening to the republican rove crap anymore we were lied to and screwed over for 7 years by your evil party we wont fall for it again loser

so funny you repukelicans make me laugh you still think taht insulting someone and spewing rove like crap matters keep it up why dont all you republicans leave the u.s.a. and let us good people alone we dont need your devil like policies or your evil ways anymore.

Rich, McCain has stated, in summary, a stable Iraq. Of course this is not quantitative, it is qualitative. And is the whole reason why you can not have a time table. You are not comfortable with this answer, I can understand this. But, it is no different than what Roosevelt said. War is ugly, and it is a terrible thing but what are the alternatives. Leave Iraq and wait for it to get worse so that a bigger war can take place. I do not like that solution, maybe you do. By the way, the 100 years was in reference to military bases. Similar to those that have existed for years in Europe, Japan and other places in the world. It is tough being a world power. The question is do you stay out in the open or go home and close the door and hope nobody comes a knocking

If McCain has said a “stable Iraq” is the condition for withdrawl, meaning what?
What does stable mean? No one can say, it is meaningless. It just boils down to trust me. And what happens if a couple of car bombs go off as we do leave, are we then going to reverse ourselves and stay? No of course not. The stability of Iraq is the responsibility of the Iraqis, the sooner we all come to grips with that we can end this nightmare, bring our troops out, fight the “real” war on terror, spend the Billions of dollars it is going to take to repair the damage to our military, fix our dependence on foriegn energy, and pay off the trillions in debt the we are left with.

@Rich:And what happens if a couple of car bombs go off as we do leave, are we then going to reverse ourselves and stay? No of course not…
You just answered your own question.
It’s your choice to believe anything other than the obvious on McCain’s position. You have heard the response, you just don’t like it. If it doesn’t meet your criteria, don’t vote for McCain. No one is forcing your hand.
Take care…

I read McCain’s piece. I wouldn’t have printed it in a neighborhood newsletter. No wonder he finished so near the bottom of his class at Annapolis.

@Vic2665: Wait so Obama criticism is OK
but McCain responding is an attack, that only Republicans do? You mind walking me through that logic? Well actually, you used the term “neocon” so I’m not sure you’ll be able to. Try please…

After reading the above posts I am surprised at many Republicans attitude of letting McCain off the hook for giving no details of what success and our troop pull-out would entail.
We are occupying another country. They have a working, democratically chosen government. They want us gone in 16 months. That’s it, we go, unless we are occupying their country and are no longer there to stabilize it. We, as a democracy, must respect their democratically-elected government. As for McCain not giving details, it is because he has no intention of pulling our troops out, just as Bush has given us few details and has built many permanent bases for our troops against the will of the Iraq government.

@Lydia: The idea not Senator McCain has given few distinct details, in NO way reflects his repeated desire to see military personnel levels drop, as conditions dictate. In fact, these levels will most likely drop well before the next President takes office.
To say that, because there are lack of specifics, this means there is a hidden specific objective, is specious logic.
It doesn’t follow, and it contradicts what McCain has stated. That you choose to believe the exact opposite of Senator McCain’s intentions, is just that, a choice, but it doesn’t make your assertion true.

I consider myself a conservative and tend to lean towards the Republican but I am not a party member.—– NY Times did not surprised me for their bias against the Republican. NY Times was also known lately for publishing articles against candidates with out the facts to back up their story. They are no longer a credible source of factual news.

Hey, the leftist media has been helping the Democrat candidates for the last 40 years and where has it gotten them. They won maybe three or four elections in that time. True, they are going above and beyond in this election, but it probably won’t hurt McCain. People see the bias and want nothing to do with it. Dan Rather’s forged documents actually helped Bush, they didn’t hurt him.