nyt: The Real Agenda

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jul 16, 2006.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    nyt editorial

     
  2. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #3
    Whoa. Talk about throwing chum in the water....

    Gotta admire the NYT editorial board. Already under fire, they've chosen to turn up the attack on the Bushies instead of backing down. This doesn't sound like just another anti-Bush editorial; it reads more like something Martin Luther would've nailed to the Church door.

    And it will definitely be red meat for the conservatives. Tomorrow, the Limbaughs, Hewitts and Coulters of the world will be shouting, "See? We told you! The NYT is out to get Bush! They're the worst traitors in the whole elite liberal media empire!"
     
  3. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #4
    it took "only" 6 years for the times to figure it out. i think they're trying to save face in the journalistic world, but my read is that they're internally divided on the matter.

    maybe e&p will give us some insight as to what it took to get the editorial out.
     
  4. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #5
    here's a dailykos piece illustrating the sloppiness (and apologist) "work" the nytimes has been doing for a few years. seems jayson blair (remember him?) was just a symptom.
     
  5. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #6
    So.... I've been wondering...

    Would a military/judicial coup be an improvement or is it just me?:eek:
     
  6. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #7
    I don't know if BushCo planned this, but they certainly have taken advantage of the situation. If this was really about terrorism, we would have done things completely differently. Bin Laden determined to attack, pulling troops from Afghanistan to go somewhere else on tenuous evidence, giving the rest of the world a reason to hate and not trust us, allowing torture and warrantless spying/imprisonment, not actually securing our ports and borders, underfunding anti-terrorist programs and departments, proving we wouldn't be ready for another attack via FEMAs response to Katrina... I could go on, but I'm depressing myself.

    Wonder how people would feel if we were attacked again after giving up all those rights for no real reason.
     
  7. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #8
    Good point. The NYT has not exactly earned a lot of credibility the last few years.

    Doesn't make the editorial invalid or wrong...but it does make it look uncharacteristically bold and on-target.

    I saw one of their head honchos on a Sunday morning talk show last week, defending their decision to publish the bank-monitoring story. And now this editorial. Two such items do not equal an anti-establishment crusade, but it'll be interesting to see if they continue in this direction.

    However, they'd better make sure they have their ducks in a row.
     
  8. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #9
    With a rubber stamp Republican Congress, it seems that our only true system
    of checks and balances comes from public pressure.

    I'm glad The New York Times is standing up for The United States Constitution
    and The Bill Of Rights.
     
  9. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #10
    In these terms (expanding the powers of the presidency, and therefore government), not to mention the explosion in government spending, is it any wonder that fewer and fewer true conservatives are able to continue to support Bush?
     
  10. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #11
    The problem is that true political conservatives who care very much about protecting The Constitution and The Bill of Rights have been lumped together
    with religious conservatives who tend to believe that everyone should
    accept their personal interpretations of right and wrong.

    Of course this administration has been milking it for all it's worth with
    all the charm and deception of the 700 Club.
     
  11. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #12
    They do that to the other side too. Anyone who dislikes Bush and his failed policy might as well be Michael Moore. Or a terrorist sympathizer at the extreme. I laugh a little when true conservatives are put into that ultra "liberal" category, but it's a nervous laughter.
     
  12. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
  13. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
  14. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #15
    Today Joseph Wilson quoted George Orwell

    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
     
  15. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #16
    No, he was quoting my previous sig. ;)
     
  16. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #17
    It really is amazing how close Orwell was to what's going on today.

    Double speak, Big Brother etc.
     
  17. macmesser, Oct 28, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2013

    macmesser macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Location:
    Long Island, NY USA
    #18
    If one revisits all those classic "cautionary tales", not only Orwell's, the inescapable conclusion is that they were co-opted by the villains of the genre and repurposed as pages of a horrific totalitarian playbook.

    edit: Is it really so amazing? After all, we live in a scientific age...
     
  18. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #19
    How exactly did you find this thread considering it is from 2006?
     
  19. macmesser macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Location:
    Long Island, NY USA
    #20
    Why exactly (and I MEAN EXACTLY) is that of any interest to you or anyone else?
     
  20. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #21
    Because you made the post in this thread, and we are trying to discern the relevance of your post to this thread, and why you thought to resurrect a nearly 7 year old thread.

    BL.
     
  21. samiwas Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #22
    Well, I was thinking the exact same thing. So apparently, there is interest.
     
  22. iBreatheApple macrumors 68020

    iBreatheApple

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    Location:
    Florida
    #23
    Same here. And it's just general curiosity. Geez macmesser, chill out.
     
  23. macmesser, Oct 28, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2013

    macmesser macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Location:
    Long Island, NY USA
    #24
    I'll play this straight, even though I don't think I owe you, nor the previous poster, the right time. Unless of course you are the board commissars.

    I've been kicking back this evening after a rather grueling day, quaffing a few glasses of chianti after dinner and amusing myself by surfing my favorite forum. Why this post? Must have been some kind of psychological reaction on my part. I used to, quite stupidly it turns out, freely express my contrarian observations on forums such as these. In this case apparently VERY stupidly, because you "don't ***** where you eat," as the saying goes. Lately, however, and for some unfathomably strange reason, I have felt my better judgement kick in and have been decidedly inhibited in expressing my thoughts and feelings about matters even remotely political. Don't know why; one of those strange things. What happened tonight can be accurately attributed to too much wine. It was a reaction to chronically worrying too much about being misunderstood by… whomever. I will not issue more such pollution in the future. Please, just forget about it.

    Don't actually remember how I found this particular thread, which I had no idea (I think excusably : )) was not current. Must have been serendipity. At my best I am spoiling for a fight, but I agree that this was just downright opportunistic, or so it must seem. Sorry if I offended you or anyone else and wonder if you're sorry that you offended me. Probably not, I'd wager. Is there some lack of social symmetry here or am I just being obstreperous? Dunno.

    As to the question of how a "nearly 7 year old thread" could possibly have caught the semi-inebriated interest of a normally intelligent person, I'd suggest that there is a far more trenchant question: why does this thread seem just as fresh today as the day some woebegone miscreant started it?

    Damn! Buzz is gone.
     
  24. macmesser macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Location:
    Long Island, NY USA
    #25
    Chilled. :)

    Chianti will do that to you.
     

Share This Page