In the proud tradition of candidates in both parties making the most (money) out of allegedly unfair attacks, both the McCain campaign and the RNC already have letters out fundraising around The New York Times blast. David Kurtz at TalkingPointsMemo.com reprints the McCain one: "Well, here we go. We could expect attacks were coming; as soon as John McCain appeared to be locking up the Republican nomination, the liberal establishment and their allies at the New York Times have gone on the attack. Today's front-page New York Times story is particularly disgusting -- an un-sourced hit-and-run smear campaign designed to distract from the issues at stake in this election. With John McCain leading a number of general-election polls against Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the New York Times knew the time to attack was now, and they did. We will not allow their scurrilous attack against a great American hero to stand."
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Dough! -- McCain making hay off 'NYT' attack
In the proud tradition of candidates in both parties making the most (money) out of allegedly unfair attacks, both the McCain campaign and the RNC already have letters out fundraising around The New York Times blast. David Kurtz at TalkingPointsMemo.com reprints the McCain one: "Well, here we go. We could expect attacks were coming; as soon as John McCain appeared to be locking up the Republican nomination, the liberal establishment and their allies at the New York Times have gone on the attack. Today's front-page New York Times story is particularly disgusting -- an un-sourced hit-and-run smear campaign designed to distract from the issues at stake in this election. With John McCain leading a number of general-election polls against Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the New York Times knew the time to attack was now, and they did. We will not allow their scurrilous attack against a great American hero to stand."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think it's interesting that the Republicans cry 'smear' campaign instead of looking at the facts. Is the NY Times bias? Probably. But the real question that should be asked is this: Is there truth to the story. And if so, do the Republicans want a candidate that's unfaithful to his wife?
I guess Republicans have cast their lot. If they wanted a squeaky clean candidate, they should have gone with Romney. McCain already had a history of infidelity.
I disagree with all the "smear campaign," "eight years" ago and "innuendo" reactions to this interesting story. The devil, of course, is always in the details, but we seem to be dealing here with an appearance of impropriety which requires not a "vehement denial," but a thorough explanation. It involves the granting of favors to associates of a lobbyist with whom the individual concerned may have been having an intimate relationship. To make matters worse, the lobbying activities were themselves essentially unethical, just like the inappropriate manipulations and sneaky duplicity revealed in this article: http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/charity-fund-involved-dead-sea-scrolls-conflict
have you seen her pic. I would have a problem if he didn't try to get into her pants!
Hey, libslime, before you get too carried away, better hope Obamma kept it in HIS pants. Chances of that??? The New York Slime and the BBC used to be media of record, the BBC is making progress back toward objectivity, the Slime isn't.
Post a Comment