This "my friends" line is going to be so fun to mock during the general

Obama said it best - somewhere along the line, the wheels fell of the straight talk express. It's gonna be a nasty wake up call for John "I know Jack Kemp!" McCain when he realizes that voters actually care when you're a two-faced flip flopper. You can't run a campaign on honesty if you're a liar. It just doesn't work. Look what happened to John "I served in Vietnam!" Kerry when it turned out he wasn't a complete Rambo-style war hero.

Mehbe McCain says NYT is a hack paper now because NYT failed to check sources for saying There are WMDs in Iraq.

Bill Frist: This "my friends" line is going to be so fun to mock during the general

I'm pretty sure the SNL writers are going to have an easy time writing McCain skits, yes. "My friends, [shiat that sounds like it came from Grampa Simpson], my friends, [ditto], my friends, [ditto], my friends, [ditto], my friends, God bless America, my friends."

Andddddddddd...scene.

Naticus: Mehbe McCain says NYT is a hack paper now because NYT failed to check sources for saying There are WMDs in Iraq.

Actually, I'll buy that.

/next scandal, please!

Bill Frist: This "my friends" line is going to be so fun to mock during the general

Has anybody told him that about 90% of the time people use the phrase "my friend" or "my friends" you're usually calling them asshole(s)?

Subby fails at reading

"The New York Times" reported just a few days ago that administration officials worry that Saddam Hussein continues to develop weapons of mass destruction"

I read McCain's comment in the context of, "Saddam's developing WMD, and if those who distrust the Bush Administration are skeptical of that, even the New York Times - your unquestionable, almighty newspaper - says so."

I've seen comments such as this in that context by non-liberals numerous times.

Was McCain more comfortable with the NYT than most Republicans would be? Yes.

How'd that work out for him?

The NYT is a disgrace to journalism.

apparently, he's learned something.

FishingWithFredo: I read McCain's comment in the context of, "Saddam's developing WMD, and if those who distrust the Bush Administration are skeptical of that, even the New York Times - your unquestionable, almighty newspaper - says so."

That's kind of how I read it as well. I do think that the NYT is getting a bit of undeserved flak about this though. So many are questioning the timing of the story, but it seems to me that regardless of when they released it they would be getting the same crap. If it was before McCain had all but wrapped up the nomination, they would be screaming about attempting to influence the primaries. If they released it during the actual campaign, they would be getting the same flak.

If this story is true, the NYT did screw up in their reporting of it though. Instead of focusing on the romantic aspects of it, they really should have gone the route of questioning McCain's anti-lobbyist rhetoric and the possible corruption and influence peddling.

I don't like McCain and I certainly don't want him to win, but until the NYT comes out with some more evidence of alleged improprieties or corruption, I'm taking all of this with a grain of salt.

Of course there is the tin foil hat wearing part of me that thinks this was a wonderfully planned plan on the part of the McCain campaign itself. What better way to get the conservatives on your side than by being smeared by the evil liberal New York Times?

God I hate it when he says "My friends." We're not friends! None of the people you're talking to are your friends! No one says "my friends"!

No rational adult sees a contradiction. He obviously implied "even the NYT who hates us believes..." in 2000, clearly a different meaning than "an authoritative paper of record has informed us..." .

We forget the consensus on WMD's because history is written by a clique of intellectuals who are slaves to fashion.

We sip our lattes and say W is anti-intellectual, not without cause, but for very shallow reasons.

The NYT editorial page kvetches about how W hates science when he does nothing to stop stem cell research in the private sector, but respects tax payers with moral objections having their taxes go to that cause.

Anyone who knows where "j'accuse!" comes from, and likes to complain about republicans, and has no idea how many teets a cow has, but considers him/herself to be educated - get the plank out of your own eye before complaining about the splinter in ours.

/if you watched Kingpin and think the answer is 1, try again!

Shaggy_C: Obama said it best - somewhere along the line, the wheels fell of the straight talk express. It's gonna be a nasty wake up call for John "I know Jack Kemp!" McCain when he realizes that voters actually care when you're a two-faced flip flopper. You can't run a campaign on honesty if you're a liar. It just doesn't work. Look what happened to John "I served in Vietnam!" Kerry when it turned out he wasn't a complete Rambo-style war hero.

Kerry actually did serve in Vietnam and he did perform some amazing acts of bravery.

NYT is a great paper.

Most people, like http://godofusa.com/, who cry about it have never read a single issue or checked out thier online site.

In no particular order: USA today, WSJ, wash post, slate.com and I just recently bumped into salon.com . These are good papers and online news sites.

godofusa.com Quote 2008-02-23 03:28:18 PM
The NYT John McCain is a disgrace to journalism America.


Fixed that for you.

BillyBob_The_Magnificent Quote 2008-02-23 03:38:38 PM
NYT is a great paper.

Most people, like http://godofusa.com/, who cry about it have never read a single issue or checked out thier online site.

In no particular order: USA today, WSJ, wash post, slate.com and I just recently bumped into salon.com . These are good papers and online news sites.


WSJ has turned to trash since Murdoch bought it and USA Today is the newspaper equivelant of US Weekly. It is written at like a third grade reading level (literally) and just crazppy all around.

Slate, Salon and Washington Post are all good though.

Bill Frist: godofusa.com Quote 2008-02-23 03:28:18 PM
The NYT John McCain is a disgrace to journalism America.

Fixed that for you.

I'm no fan of McCain. I'm just saying the NYT is full of crap. They should focus on reporting the news, you know, objectively what happens in the world. They should leave their leftist agenda for the Op-ed.

Link (new window)

Bill Frist: WSJ has turned to trash since Murdoch bought it and USA Today is the newspaper equivelant of US Weekly. It is written at like a third grade reading level (literally) and just crazppy all around.

But USA Today has pie charts! PIE CHARTS!

I'm no fan of McCain. I'm just saying the NYT is full of crap. They should focus on reporting the news, you know, objectively what happens in the world. They should leave their leftist agenda for the Op-ed.

Please.

Even if you dislike this McCain article and think it silly, clearly it isn't nearly as silly as the Obama "Maybe he didn't do as much drugs as he said he did" crap article that was front page news a few weeks ago.

Why is it proof of a crazy left wing politics when they attack McCain on flimsy ground, but no one talks about a right wing agenda when they attack Obama on even flimsier grounds?

McCain '08: "NYT is a liberal hack paper, don't take it seriously." McCain '00: "We must attack Iraq because the NYT says there are WMDs there."

So which is it failmitter, is the Times right about McCain, or right about the Iraq war?

Spanky_McFarksalot: Subby fails at reading

"The New York Times" reported just a few days ago that administration officials worry that Saddam Hussein continues to develop weapons of mass destruction"

Yeah this is kind of a stretch. It's not like the NYT had an exclusive story about how the Bush administration thought there were WMDs.

Bill Frist: godofusa.com Quote 2008-02-23 03:28:18 PM
The NYT John McCain is a disgrace to journalism America.


Fixed that for you. I'm juvenile.

FTFY

godofusa.com: The NYT is a disgrace to journalism.

cause Rush(drive-by bloviation)Limbaugh says so ...

And once again, the liberals grasp at straws. They see that it's very likely for McCain to win this Presidency and they're panicking.

Simply put, the New York Times has outlived its usefulness. Once it actually reported news, now its mission appears to get Hillary elected. It should be put out of business. It's not a paper anymore, it's a Democrat tabloid.

So which is it failmitter, is the Times right about McCain, or right about the Iraq war?

Neither, but John McCain is an unprincipled hack in both cases.

Actually, I would never quote myself in that fashion, and I'm simply pointing out that this is another useless attack aimed at McCain with the substance and formidability of a box kite.

Well McCain himself has no substance or fomridability, so you fight fire with fire.

100 years in Iraq, "I don't understand economics" and "I was a POW once" is not a campaign platform.

Shaggy_C: Obama said it best - somewhere along the line, the wheels fell of the straight talk express. It's gonna be a nasty wake up call for John "I know Jack Kemp!" McCain when he realizes that voters actually care when you're a two-faced flip flopper. You can't run a campaign on honesty if you're a liar. It just doesn't work. Look what happened to John "I served in Vietnam!" Kerry when it turned out he wasn't a complete Rambo-style war hero.

the pressing question in light of the straight-talk express derailing, though, has to be...

does he still hate the gooks?

It's from the Daily Kos, so it didn't happen.

Bill Frist: So which is it failmitter, is the Times right about McCain, or right about the Iraq war?

Neither

Exactly, tell it to the failmitter.

Wow, I didn't think it possible in racist America, but McCain could potentially be enough of a fark-up to lose to a black man.

/if there is a god

It should be obvious after the last seven years that "Liberal Media" means any printed medium or article that doesn't parrot RNC talking points.

/get it straight

USP .45 [TotalFark] Quote 2008-02-23 05:16:27 PM
Bill Frist: So which is it failmitter, is the Times right about McCain, or right about the Iraq war?

Neither

Exactly, tell it to the failmitter.

Alright, no one is THIS stupid. You are clearly intending to miss the point.

FishingWithFredo: I read McCain's comment in the context of, "Saddam's developing WMD, and if those who distrust the Bush Administration are skeptical of that, even the New York Times - your unquestionable, almighty newspaper - says so

Ummmmmm. 2000 was the Clinton Administration.

BTW, Saddam Hussien was the only person that ever lied about WMDs!

adiabat: BTW, Saddam Hussien was the only person that ever lied about WMDs!

He came out and told Bush that he had none at all. He even offerred to step down for $1 billion and a promise that he would be given immunity in order to avoid the war. Bush blew him off, and the bombs started falling. The execs at Halliburton needed to put food on the table!

Shaggy_C: He came out and told Bush that he had none at all. He even offerred to step down for $1 billion and a promise that he would be given immunity in order to avoid the war. Bush blew him off, and the bombs started falling. The execs at Halliburton needed to put food on the table!

Even if Saddam shot himself in the head, Bush would have gone into Iraq. There was no stopping it... kinda like now.

Shaggy_C: adiabat: BTW, Saddam Hussien was the only person that ever lied about WMDs!

He came out and told Bush that he had none at all. He even offerred to step down for $1 billion and a promise that he would be given immunity in order to avoid the war. Bush blew him off, and the bombs started falling. The execs at Halliburton needed to put food on the table!

for a fraction of the cost, we could have peacefully removed him, set up a government on top of an existing infrastructure, and been done.

jesus christ, i hate george bush.

burndtdan: jesus christ, i hate george bush.

"I'm optimistic because I believe I'm right," Bush replied. "I'm at peace with myself."

Shaggy_C: He even offerred to step down for $1 billion

Why would he step down for $1 billion, when he had $20 billion stashed in his country and Syria?

adiabat: Shaggy_C: He even offerred to step down for $1 billion

Why would he step down for $1 billion, when he had $20 billion stashed in his country and Syria?



I wonder....

Unright
Naticus: Mehbe McCain says NYT is a hack paper now because NYT failed to check sources for saying There are WMDs in Iraq.

Actually, I'll buy that.

/next scandal, please!

But doesn't being Republican require you to believe the same thing forever, no matter what new evidence comes to light. Otherwise you are a flip-flopper.

Sleeping Monkey: It should be obvious after the last seven years that "Liberal Media" means any printed medium or article that doesn't parrot RNC talking points.

/get it straight

Yup.

keloyd: No rational adult sees a contradiction. He obviously implied "even the NYT who hates us believes..." in 2000, clearly a different meaning than "an authoritative paper of record has informed us..." .

We forget the consensus on WMD's because history is written by a clique of intellectuals who are slaves to fashion.

We sip our lattes and say W is anti-intellectual, not without cause, but for very shallow reasons.

The NYT editorial page kvetches about how W hates science when he does nothing to stop stem cell research in the private sector, but respects tax payers with moral objections having their taxes go to that cause.

Anyone who knows where "j'accuse!" comes from, and likes to complain about republicans, and has no idea how many teets a cow has, but considers him/herself to be educated - get the plank out of your own eye before complaining about the splinter in ours.

You think there are actually any rational adults on DailyKos?

Because things can't change in 8 years?

Satosuke: keloyd: No rational adult sees a contradiction. He obviously implied "even the NYT who hates us believes..." in 2000, clearly a different meaning than "an authoritative paper of record has informed us..." .

We forget the consensus on WMD's because history is written by a clique of intellectuals who are slaves to fashion.

We sip our lattes and say W is anti-intellectual, not without cause, but for very shallow reasons.

The NYT editorial page kvetches about how W hates science when he does nothing to stop stem cell research in the private sector, but respects tax payers with moral objections having their taxes go to that cause.

Anyone who knows where "j'accuse!" comes from, and likes to complain about republicans, and has no idea how many teets a cow has, but considers him/herself to be educated - get the plank out of your own eye before complaining about the splinter in ours.

You think there are actually any rational adults on DailyKos?

Adults? Those pansies all biatch about the big kid from the Republican family stealing their lunch money.

Shaggy_C: Obama said it best - somewhere along the line, the wheels fell of the straight talk express. It's gonna be a nasty wake up call for John "I know Jack Kemp!" McCain when he realizes that voters actually care when you're a two-faced flip flopper. You can't run a campaign on honesty if you're a liar. It just doesn't work. Look what happened to John "I served in Vietnam!" Kerry when it turned out he wasn't a complete Rambo-style war hero.

Pft. McCain isn't that bad. Obama would probably defeat him, but it will just be a win, not a total sweep to victory or anything. Hell, all things equal McCain would probably take the election, it's just the greater unpopularity of the republican party that'll lose it for him.

People change their minds occasionally, and that's legit, but that's not what this is about. This is about reacting appropriately to an aspersion on your character. By just denying and taking only a relatively minor jab at the paper's credibility, he's actually kind of taking the high road on this one. I know I would have gone a lot farther out of my way to see a number of people financially ruined after something as blatant as that, but the old dude has more restraint than me in using his power... good times.

Jim_Callahansaid:

I know I would have gone a lot farther out of my way to see a number of people financially ruined after something as blatant as that, but the old dude has more restraint than me in using his power... good times.

Hehehe.

Do you *actually* believe that John McCain has the power to financially ruin the New York Times?

Seriously?

And do you also actually believe that a Republican would *ever* seriously attempt to go after any of the six large mega-corporations that own the lion's share of the news media in the US?

Or were you talking about something lame, petty, and cowardly... like leaning on the IRS to do extra tax audits of some reporters, or hiring private investigators to follow a few reporters around until they find them jaywalking, or throwing litter on the ground instead of in an official trash receptacle?