thinkprogress.org — While the Times wanted something “new” from McCain, the New York Post — owned by Rupert Murdoch — has no problem republishing McCain campaign talking points — even if they’re not totally accurate. Today, the Post published McCain’s rejected article in its entirety.
Jul 22, 2008 View in Crawl 4
blishJul 23, 2008
i actually work for the NY Post and i can tell you the reason the letter was published didn't really have to do with the fact of Rupert Murdoch owns the Post ... it's because the NY Post, is more of a controversial type of paper. They enjoy stirring up shiat ... including this unpublished letter from the NY Times. They would be fools not to publish something like this that has stirred up so much interest and curiosity around the country.It's all about distribution and sales.
cklein121Jul 23, 2008
Then why are you on digg.com (the ultimate source of crap news)?
danfive555Jul 24, 2008
No, for his next trick he'll give an error-filled concession speech.
pnunnJul 24, 2008
@poprocksandsoda- look- don't try to turn it into a larger point. you f**ked up. Leave it there. Your geographic location doesn't change the fact that you gave "Props to the NYT for publishing his editorial." That would be the reason why you have to say something more like "oops- I meant post" and not "that was my whole point!" Looks pretty weak. You never criticized NYT- you gave them props. Pay attention to yourself if you are going to expect everyone else to listen to you.There are plenty of morons living in NYC and being one of them in no way corrects your error. It isn't a big deal- so just accept that you f**ked up and proofread/fact check next time.
pnunnJul 24, 2008
@inboxnews Q: How can an Op-Ed be error filled?A: Let McCain write it. (I simplified this for your sake)That's one less question you'll have to wrestle with at night. Now read the damn article before you post anymore stupid questions.
pnunnJul 24, 2008
@Chip53-Maybe when you get an eligible candidate you would have someone to defend instead of your cryptic empty threat to the "liberal media." You are off topic because you have NO defense. Nice buzzwords though. EDIT 01:Between the idiot and the rookie, I'll go rookie. (PS- experience pays s**t to the American people so far...) Hell, I'll even ride shotgun for it. Now, get back to your lovely meal of sour grapes...
pnunnJul 24, 2008
How about this for a valid counterpoint?- Expecting media outlets and candidates to change their opinions on issues as new information is presented to them is EXACTLY what I want. We're wrapping 8 years with an administration that doesn't yield to information and maintains opinions formed long ago on a daily basis despite anything new that comes to light- and it has gotten us f**k all save for excessive military spending and and gross expenditures in private contractors overseas as well as strengthening alliances between governments and corporations that do not serve the interests of this nation or its people.You made no point save for pointing out an opinion change on behalf of a newspaper and then trying to distract from the issue by criticizing Obama (and we never get tired of that one!) - how do you figure you are entitled to a counterpoint?Actually I would go with "butt-puppet" or "McCain's mindless f**k-puppet" over "sock puppet" in your case- but that's cause you're such a special guy...