F**k You NYTimes. Read this quote

[edhopper]

The criticism has been visibly irritating to the president, a man capable of public displays of great tenderness whose resoluteness after the Sept. 11 attacks rallied the nation. On Monday, as he left the heavily damaged town of Poplarville, Miss., Mr. Bush insisted to local residents: "I understand. I understand the damage. I understand the devastation. I understand the destruction. I understand how long it's going to take. And we're with you."

Once more, Mr. Bush is hoping the people will be with him

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/06/politics/politicsspecial1/06assess.html

Fuck You Times and Fuck You Todd Purdom

[raccoon]

1. You said that right. Another media hoe. nt

[bryant69]

2. Yes if the Media were fair they'd call for Mr. Bush's head on a pike

Anybody who says anything that could even be intepreted as positive about President must be an asshole.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[AverageJoe]

3. Sad and shameful

I remember when the New York Times was still a newspaper....

[Imagevision]

22. ummm...I read this as a reported Bush statement - you read it whichever

way you're capable of? -- personally I detect a tone of sarcasm... but that's me.


http://downingstreetmemo.com/

[SmokingJacket]

4. I don't think that's AT ALL flattering to B*

"Visibly irritating".... "capable of public displays" (not REAL tenderness) "hoping" the people will be with him...

Makes him sound like a petty idiot who cares more about being liked that about what happened, in spite of his idiotic repetitions to the contrary.

[etherealtruth]

10. My reaction was very similar to yours ...

It reads as a description of someone trying to be "appropriate" in order to achieve a positive response ... not someone genuinely moved. That is not flattering, IMO.

[NYCGirl]

5. Maybe you should read these, also in the NY Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/opinion/05herbert.html?incamp=article_popular

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/opinion/05krugman.html?incamp=article_popular

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/03/opinion/03dowd.html?incamp=article_popular

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/04/opinion/04rich.html?incamp=article_popular

And this surprising one:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/06/opinion/06kristof.html?incamp=article_popular

[SF Bay Area Dem]

6. Two words for Bush and conservatives: FUCK and YOU

This response was pathetic and now Bush unleashes the attack dogs again because his ego is bruised?

[maxrandb]

7. Bush Declares War on God

"I hear you, and the people who brought this hurricane are going to hear all of us pretty soon".

It's a shame what passes for "leadership" and "strength" in today's world.

Like going after the people who flew planes into the WTC was an idea that only the "chimpster" could come up with. My "effing" dog could have sent the military might of the US after those people.

By the way...Where the hell is Osama??? Might be time to thaw him out, but alas, even that might not save this "waste of skin" from the wrath of the American people.

[AlCzervik]

8. Actually i like the way that was framed, the writer i think unintentionall

made his response to Katrina look really uncaring and harsh while he was trying to praise him. It showed that he doesn't care a shit about NO but he did in fact care about NY. Now of course he didn't really care about NY but you know what i'm saying.

[etherealtruth]

12. These are skilled journalists ...

I don't believe it was unintentional.

[AlCzervik]

14. maybe it wasn't but in trying to make him look good he looks worse

the writer compares and contrasts his behavior and i think Bush comes out on the losing side.

[etherealtruth]

20. I think we had the same point ....

This is NOT flattering for the Chimp. I think the writer intended it to be unflattering, carefully crafting his words to give that impression w/out hostility.

[MO_Dem]

16. Yes, you're right

He had so much to gain politically from the NY disaster. The response to NO disaster is nothing but a political disaster for him. I think it's only the "political capital" that he's interested in.

[AlCzervik]

18. yup, thats the way i took that one part the op bolded

i'm that optimistic that even from a conservative writer i can find a critique of Bush.

[Don Claybrook]

9. Just look at the opening paragraph

The writer seems to think that extending a job offer constitutes a full day of work:

"Monday morning, President Bush was meeting in the Oval Office with Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to offer him the nomination for the 17th chief justice of the United States. On most Mondays, that might be a good day's work, but Mr. Bush's Labor Day was just beginning, and not everything else about it was quite so crisp or well timed."

And then, Bush bravely "flew straight into a thicket of continuing recriminations over his administration's handling of the disaster...". That's what I want--a president not afraid of thicket-flying.

[Sapphire Blue]

11. Herbert & Krugman should be running the NYT.

[BlueJac]

13. Understand this Bush...

your impeachment is on it's way. Three more years of Bush's disastrous leadership will leave this country in rubbles.

[yurbud]

15. that's the sign of a PR shill--anything about Bush being compassionate...

likable, and down to earth.

It seems to be flatly contradicted not only by behind the scenes accounts, but by nearly every public appearance where his smile is that of a pledgemaster and we are the freshmen he's telling to grab our ankles.

[Catchawave]

17. Did he mention Babs' quote about these people are better off now....

huh, huh, huh?

So out of touch these Bushes are :(

[EnfantTerrible]

19. While I have many issues with the NYTimes

It's important to note that this is not a news column... it is an analysis of the news and therefore will express the opinion of the author. This is not meant to be an unbiased look at the "News". It is a gosssip column in different clothes. Clearly it is skewed to support the White House and the ruler-chimp, but it shouldn't be viewed as journalism. IMO

[edhopper]

21. I have yet to see

one of these "political analysis" in the Times that does not tow the WH line.
As I said, Fuckers!

[EnfantTerrible]

23. My only point

is that it is not meant to be unbiased journalism. If you want an opinion that is more in line with yours then check out Frank Rich or any of the other OpEd writers... If the NYTImes refused to print their opinions then outrage would be warranted. This is just my opinion...

[edhopper]

27. Sorry you are splitting hairs

An analysis is not an opinion. It is meant to be an objective view of the politics around the story. Not an op-ed. If it were it would be on the op-ed page with Rich and Herbert.
This was a front page piece. It should be objective and non partisan, not WH PR. Which it is.

[EnfantTerrible]

28. Okay.

You are right. I stand corrected.

[JugDack]

24. Feel better?

Anybody hoping for any help from the MSM is delusional.

[EnfantTerrible]

26. Welcome to DU, JugDack...

I must take issue with your statement. If it wasn't for the MSM, the Superdome may still be occupied by the victims of this administration. Geraldo (a self serving media hound, to be sure) and Shepard Smith did more to get that evacuated than the Fed. Gov't did... and they're on FAUX News.

[JugDack]

29. Thanks for the Welcome!

You're right of course about the MSM being a big catalyst for getting help in there, however they have the attention span of a fruit fly and I think they've already moved on to other things, sadly.

[welshTerrier2]

25. "the heavily damaged town of Poplarville"

what bush doesn't understand is, that no matter where he goes, how he spins or what photo op he stages, he'll actually be visiting "Un-Poplarville" until we get rid of him ...

the people will never be "with him" again ...

[Impeach_Shrub]

30. I'll second that emotion. N/T

[incapsulated]

31. Todd Purdom is a fucking whore

I wrote an angry letter to the Times last week about an front page article written by him. It purported to be about the mounting criticism of Bush. Reading it, it started out with the few Dems who were making frowny faces at the time and "man in the street" interviews in which every single one gave Bush a pass. He then went on to claim that the loudest criticism was coming from "abroad".

Total bullshit.