Over the last few weeks, the New York Times newspaper has done the incredible. First they came out and gave Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) their nod of endorsement for the presidential nomination. At the time, the republicans still had other contenders in the race: Romney, Giuliani, and even Huckabee still had a chance back then. Then, the Times decides to run this article claiming that the senator had some type of romantic involvement with Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist. In another article printed on Friday 22 January 2008 the Times ran this article, basically downplaying sexual angle from the original article. This may have had something to do with the thousands of responses condemning the Times, for what most people saw, as a ‘smear-campaign’. Not to mention the fact that the major TV and Cable news outlets, started going after the Times as well. Over the last few weeks, the New York Times newspaper has done the incredible. First they came out and gave Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) their nod of endorsement for the presidential nomination. At the time, the republicans still had other contenders in the race: Romney, Giuliani, and even Huckabee still had a chance back then. Then, the Times decides to run this article claiming that the senator had some type of romantic involvement with Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist. In another article printed on Friday 22 January 2008 the Times ran this article, basically downplaying sexual angle from the original article. This may have had something to do with the thousands of responses condemning the Times, for what most people saw, as a ‘smear-campaign’. Not to mention the fact that the major TV and Cable news outlets, started going after the Times as well. I believe that it has another meaning all together.Let’s take a breath for a moment, and evaluate the implications and results, of all the ‘first-class’ reporting done by the New York Times. They started off trying to sway the public and the republican primary, by endorsing Sen. McCain, over the other republican candidates. Just what did the Times editorial have to say about Sen. John McCain on January 25th: “Still, there is a choice to be made, and it is an easy one. Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing…” The Times was pushing to keep Romney, an actual conservative republican, out of the race because they knew he was an actual threat to the democrats in the general election. Once that was done the other little fish were gobbled up by the Senator himself. Howbeit, that Gov. Huckabee (R-Arkansas) has not come to the realization that his run in the primary, was over months ago. Perhaps he will figure it out soon enough.
Once the fix was in on the republican side of the house, the Times staff sat back waiting to drop the next bomb, which was their sex scandal story, involving the Senator and Iseman. They had to wait for the republican race to thin out. To drop this bomb while the other candidates were still viable, would have thrown the majority of the support, to the next in line, in this case Mitt Romney. Are we seeing a pattern here yet? Nothing sells subscriptions and papers like sex, and with the hint of a Senator in the mix this was a sure fire hit. In fact, nothing sells like sex in any media venue. TMZ.com made its bones on the likes of Brittney Spears, Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, and all the others starlets in Hollywood. It has been some time since a major political player has been involved in a sex scandal, and this one was ripe for the picking. Forget about the fact that the Times staff had no proof or solid verification; all one needs these days is an accusation and, “Two former McCain associates, who were quoted anonymously”, the rest will take on a life of its own.
Today, 24 February 2008, the Times Public Editor, Clark Hoyt, comes out with an Op-ed and blasts the Times managing editor and staff, for the research they conducted on the first article about McCain and Iseman; true genius if you stop and think about it, really true genius. Mr. Hoyt said the following in his Op-ed: “The article had repercussions for both McCain and The Times. He may benefit, at least in the short run, from a conservative backlash against the “liberal” New York Times. The newspaper found itself in the uncomfortable position of being the story as much as publishing the story, in large part because, although it raised one of the most toxic subjects in politics — sex — it offered readers no proof that McCain and Iseman had a romance.”
The Times has influenced the republican primary, then disparaged and turned on the guy they endorsed, he was nothing more than a simple patsy. With friends like these who needs enemies? I hope the New York Times never endorses me for anything. The idea that no proof was offered no longer matters anymore, because the damage is done. You can’t un-ring a bell. This article will haunt Sen. McCain and the republicans, all the way to the general election. In the short term McCain will gain some sympathy from this article, but there will still be those who believe that the affair happened, which will continue to hurt the republicans in the general election. Once again the liberal-left media, and their king of kings, the New York Times, has done what it does best, that is bashing republicans without cause. Now the Times staff stave off the attacks of the public and the rest of the media, by slapping their own wrists, first with the down play of the sexual angel, and then with the most recent Op-ed from the Public Editor, and all the while they are laughing behind closed doors over on Eighth Avenue in New York City. The Times can sit back now and watch the rest of the dominoes fall as the republicans limp towards the general election with a candidate that has been despoiled. If the democrats lose this upcoming election, I can’t see how they will ever recover from the embarrassment. The deck is stacked, and the only way they can lose is to fold the hand. My guess is that the Times wanted to endorse Barack Obama all along. The liberal wing broke ranks with the Clintons sometime ago and the media wing followed suit.
The truly pathetic thing here is that the Republican Party just sat by and watched all this go down. Conservative republicans are going to lose this coming presidential election. They are going to lose it because they did not take the other side seriously enough from the beginning. From allowing the Times to behave in this manner, allowing people who aren’t registered republicans to vote in primaries and caucuses, the republicans just watched as the deck was stacked in favor of the democrats. All the big republican pundits, Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, O’Reilly, and others have been saying for months that the left was endorsing McCain with an agenda. Now we know what the agenda was. Hang on my conservative friends and get ready for four years of liberals run-a-muck, because they just won the White House.