Redstate

Posted at 9:10pm on Mar. 7, 2008 McCain 5, Elisabeth Bumiller 0

Putting The NY Times In Its Place

By Dan McLaughlin

We've had a bunch of people weigh in on this in the diaries and around the blogosphere and I don't have much to add except to say that if you actually watch the video of Senator McCain's exchange with NY Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller it's pretty clear that McCain is doing exactly what he should be doing when confronted with a "gotcha" question about an old story on which there are no new facts and the reporter is just trying to pick a fight:

The Times and Ms. Bumiller are not on John McCain's side, and there's every indication by this point that he is well aware of that fact, and is now dealing with them accordingly. (Unlike the Obama camp, McCain is no stranger to the national spotlight - he was quoted on the front page of the Times as far back as 1967). Not to point out the obvious, but John McCain has been tested by strains far worse than Ms. Bumiller's questioning here. Sure, it's well-known that the man has a temper. Many successful presidents have. But there's a time and a place for getting your Irish up - righteous indignation is no sin - and this seems like one of them. I can't even imagine a single voter who would watch this video and be somehow distressed by the man's judgment.

Posted in 2008 | Elisabeth Bumiller | John McCain | liberal media bias | NYT — Comments (35)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 3:08pm on Jan. 14, 2008 Democrat Dementia

We're fixing Iraq because they know we're leaving

By haystack

Hillary Clinton is a lot of things, but brilliant just never seems to make it to the short list. Crafty, cagey, resilient, exonerated (err-I mean un-charged) criminal perhaps, bold-faced liar even...but she ain't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed.

So it came as no surprise to me that she would say so many idiotic things on Meet the Press this Sunday past. Dumb though this woman is, I must say Hillary Clinton's narcissistic naivete should scare the bloody hell out of everyone. The woman...seriously...needs counseling.

This week's trainwreck moment came regarding Iraq. When asked by Russert

"[i]f General Petraeus says, Senator, in September you called the surge the suspension of belief. It has worked, and you know it's worked, you can see on the ground. I'm saying to you, Senator, or president-elect Clinton, don't destroy Iraq. It's working, the surge is working. Keep troops there just a few more months to get this reconciliation complete"

the political savant that IS Hillary!™ gave us this little gem of genius [emphasis mine]:

The point of the surge was to quickly move the Iraqi government and Iraqi people. That is only now beginning to happen, and I believe in large measure because the Iraqi government, they watch us, they listen to us. I know very well that they follow everything that I say. And my commitment to begin withdrawing our troops in January of 2009 is a big factor, as it is with Senator Obama, Senator Edwards, those of us on the Democratic side. It is a big factor in pushing the Iraqi government to finally do what they should have been doing all along.

In other words, Hill babes...the more Democrats fight against a thing...vilify, attack, discourage and disregard...the more likely it becomes that said "thing" will ultimately succeed? I got that right, darlin'?

Hillary is claiming responsibility for Iraqi political reconciliation by making sure they know she means to pull the plug on...

wait for it...

American support for Iraqi political reconciliation. You just can't make this stuff up people.

Get out the popcorn, and let's work through this beauty below the fold...

Posted in Democrats | Harry Reid | Hillary | Iraq | NYT | War — Comments (7)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 12:52pm on Dec. 12, 2007 Huckabee Picks His Own Poison

Don't Go There. Please, Don't Go There...Oh, He Went There.

By Dan McLaughlin

If you've read CY's post below, you know that a New York Times profile on Mike Huckabee includes comments about the Mormon faith that are likely to stir up passions over religious differences between Evangelical Christians and Mormons - two faithful parts of the GOP coalition - that are best left untouched.

Preemptive note to commenters: please don't discuss the theological merits of Huckabee's remark here, or comments on this post will be closed as well. As Thomas noted on CY's post, once you start in on this, it's only a matter of time until somebody kills a guy with a trident.

Huckabee's camp responded to the initial leak from the NYT by pleading for context, as well they should:

In fact, the full context of the exchange makes it clear that Governor Huckabee was illustrating his unwillingness to answer questions about Mormonism and to avoid addressing theological questions during this campaign.

"Governor Huckabee has said consistently that he believes this campaign should center on a discussion of the important issues confronting our nation," said Senior Advisor, Dr. Charmaine Yoest, "and not focus on questions of religious belief. He wants to assure persons of all faith traditions of his firm commitment to religious tolerance and freedom of worship. Governor Huckabee believes that one of the great strengths of our nation lies in its diversity of thought, opinion and faith."

Now, the full article is online, so we can get the context that was missing from the teaser. Unfortunately, we can see from the context that Huck went and volunteered his thoughts on this point, even after admitting that he's not well-versed in LDS theology. Perhaps, as a man trained and experienced as a guider of souls, the former Baptist preacher couldn't resist the temptation to evangelize, just a little. But as a presidential candidate, he really should have known better than to go there. But he went there anyway:

Read On...

Posted in 2008 | Mike Huckabee | Mitt Romney | Mormon Beliefs | Mormonism | NYT — Comments (138)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 2:21pm on Nov. 16, 2007 9th Circuit: Responding to NY Times Waives State Secrets Privilege

Heads We Win The PR War, Tails You Lose The Real War

By Dan McLaughlin

When the New York Times disclosed a top-secret program of surveilance of international phone calls with suspected terrorists, the Bush Administration faced a critical choice: defend the program in public - including correcting misimpressions left by press reports - or try to preserve such secrecy as had not been shattered by the Times. Both choices had substantial downsides, but today the Ninth Circuit held (in a decision that is otherwise somewhat of a split decision* in a challenge brought to the program by "Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, a designated terrorist organization, and two of its attorneys") that the Bush Administration waived its legal defense that a full judicial review of the program would involve disclosure of state secrets because the Administration responded to the Times in a way that confirmed the program's existence and some facts about it:

Read On...

Posted in 9th Circuit | National Security | NYT | Surveillance — Comments (3)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 10:28pm on Jul. 18, 2007 Slapping classified information on the front page just isn't enough.

By Jeff Emanuel

The New York Times has decided that they are so above the rules that they can ignore the embargo on the most anticipated book of the century, and are running a review of the final Harry Potter volume in tomorrow's paper -- 48 hours before the book's release.

Many have waited ten years for this to arrive. The NYT, in a fit of "look what I can do that you can't!," has decided that they want to rub in your face the fact that they can get the book three days before you.

Pathetic. In my opinion, Rowling should sue.

Open thread.

Posted in arrogance | Media | Miscellanea | NYT — Comments (28)/ Email this page » / Read More »