You wrote:

And I'm no longer of a mind to defend the Times from right-wing smears -- not after their breathless WMD reporting and hiring of über-hack Bill Kristol.

But what about sitting on the warrantless wiretapping for over a year. Having that information before the 2004 elections and not reporting it.

From FAIR:

The Times story would be an outstanding example of how the First Amendment works to protect liberty--were it not for the ninth paragraph:

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted.

It saddens me to say it, but in light of that history, Bay Buchanan does have a point about the NY Times timing of the story.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

""Cindy McCain -- whose post-op death mask of a face looks like it will crack if she tries to smile -- was "very disappointed" in the Times.""--

Alternet, first doctored pictures of McCain now unwarranted attacks on his wife?

Have you hit rock bottom only to continue to dig deeper? Please ..lets just keep the otherwise excellent articles factual and dispense with the "rag" comments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

mccain just lost his hard-on (my apologies for all those 'gentle' readers of alternet).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I find McCain's stone-face appearance and disaffected manner of speaking to be quite hypnotic.

Lately there's been lots of speculation about possible motives for right-wing pundits blasting McCain, with one possibility being that they (McCain-haters) want to throw the election to the Dems.

But they need a back-up plan in case McCain wins. So I've been watching McCain and thinking that he is so mind-numbingly dull that the whole world would sleep through his presidency. Meanwhile, behind the scenes the same puppet-masters behind the Shrub could keep running the show.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That's what's so great about this hit piece. I mean, everyone inside the beltway already knows about Sen McCain's "skirt chasing". The Times piece exposes this fact to the rest of the world in the guise of a story on his ethics, super-brilliant.

What makes all the other ItB press hounds so mad? They all knew and didn't tell. NYT broke the super-secret ItB code about politicians sex lives. But Keller says no we didn't. The story of Sen McCain's FWB's is not what this story is about. Ha Ha Ha!; love it.

You know, I've been pissed at the NYT myself many times. Judy the mole & how the paper got played on the war build up. Jayson & the Lynch story (which is actually a very deep, powerful, moving drama) he phoned in after watching the Beverley Hillbillies. The presidential endorsements --- 'tis true the NYT doesn't let the editors in the way of the story. The MoveOn ad and it's aftermath ... I also hate their Chicago school take on trade (which I think caused the Clinton nod).

I tend to read the columnists --- they are all very talented (even Brooks & Kristol [know yr enemies]) & are required reading by the political class. Chomsky years ago made a profound statement about the NYT --- that it is the "truth" for educated, liberal, intellectuals and the working person doesn't care about the NYT.

W/ all the problems id'ed above, and as a working person of low education myself, I still believe the NYT is the closest we have as a national newspaper of record. Our local rag, TWP (WaPo in this internets age) never comes close in perspective, reporting, or opinion. That is why movements have focused on the NYT to push it when needed. Because it is, like it or not, the paper of record. It is also why organizations raise $80k just to get a remainder.

Since now the NYT has exposed what John McCain straight shoots, and one the women he does said shooting into, how much more evidence do we need that the deities will accept nothing but an Obama victory in Nov? I'll tell you now, if there is a $2M check to Mark Penn coming, it will get lost in the mail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I quite agree with a commenter over at DailyKos:

"Is all this BS about sources. How many anonymous sources did Judy and the NYT use in the build up to Iraq? Good Lord, they didn't give a damn then, before 4,000 service men and women died, or the thousands upon thousands of Iraqis were [killed], displaced and abused. Now that St John is getting looked at, NOW they want sources?"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joshua, OK, time to geek out here: McCain is no Jedi. He would be a Sith if he is using mind control techniques because he is a bad guy. Jedi and progressives are for peace. But really, he ain't all that. The media wants to be manipulated by politicians like McCain. He's their boy. Alterman is great on this subject of the love affair between the msm and McCain. Star Wars references are funny to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Should be happening any second now, the very second the DNC decides that Obama will be the candidate. Whether at the convention or before.

And the result of that fracas hitting the MSM (and it hasn't up to now not as a matter of truth, but merely a matter of Rovian TIMING) will make everyone completely forget Monicagate and McCain's tawdry affair. Nothing trumps old man-hot younger babe sex like a certain black senator on the downlow puffing on the crack pipe in the back of some gay guy's rented limo while being serviced.

I see a "60 Minutes" piece in Larry Sinclair's future... for starters.

As well as an absolutely certain McCain Presidency, SHOULD the DNC and the superdelegates be so stupid as to pick Obama for their suicide candidate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cindy "I did this to my face to compete with my husband's 40 year old hot g/f" McCain has got to be the scariest First Lady prospect since half grey alien Laura Bush... and a fitting successor.

Is it botox or surgery run amok? Maybe both, who cares. Pathetic is pathetic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'd say that McCain is learning a little late what you get when you set yourself up as the standard-bearer of ethics. Especially if it's the standard for rabid wolves, when you actually are one.

He may or may not have had sex? Who cares? If she did have sex with him, I hope she got more than what she was after. Yeccch.

He shared the same bedbugs with mega-lobbyists, and then HIRED them? He took an unreported ride on a private jet with a bunch of powerful people? No shit?

And the Big Bad New York Times tried to wield influence in it's timing of the story? HAH! That source lost its integrity so long ago it's hilarious even to mention it.

Do we think McCain is some sort of paragon of .....something? Are we all too young to remember the Keating Five? He's not a paragon, he's a poster boy for the re-invented image.

The main reason I don't give a crap about any of this is that McCain isn't going to be the President. He's going to be the Republican candidate, and he's going to go down in flames.

McCain's arteries and his prostate are going to continue to harden in his Senate seat, until the good people of Arizona get sick and tired of him, which ought to be soon, after they see that his bad behavior in the nineties never really ended. I've got no time I want to spend considering this non-starter's long history of smarmy behavior.

I'm watching the debate between Clinton and Obama, one of whom will be our next President. Compared to McCain with his low-life antics, both of the Democratic candidates seem like powerful Jedi, on the side of peace and justice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AP ...

"The 3,000-word Times story quoted unnamed McCain aides as saying that some of his top advisers feared that the senator was not aware of potentially damaging appearances of conflict of interest, and had asked the lobbyist to distance herself from him."

That's precisely the part of the story that relied on John Weaver, named and on the record. But McCain said there were just "unnamed sources" and the AP believes it.

I'm telling you -- it's a Jedi Mind trick.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And where is Cindy McCain''s eyeballs?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]