BRAD BLOG: NYTimes Joins Rightwing Outlet in Phony Attack on Boxer, Ignoring Rice's NEWS...

[BradBlog]

Sorry, but this is just getting outrageous. Are there any media outlets other than myself and RAW STORY who will offer real coverage of the news in this matter instead of the phony Tony Snow-created non-existant "controversy" clearly meant to distract from it?! -- Brad

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New York Times Joins Rightwing Outlets in Twisting and Torturing Boxer's Comments While Ignoring White House Delinquency in Their New Iraq Plan
The Once-Great Paper Misrepresents the Facts, Quotes Only Rightwingers and Misrepresents Some of them to Suggest They are 'Liberal'
PLUS: An Invitation to Bill O'Reilly...

The New York Times today, joins the White House, the disingenuous Rightwing media and blogs and even several unnamed supposed non-Rightwingers in purposely misconstruing Sen. Barbara Boxer's question to Condi Rice at last Thursday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Bush's new policy to escalate troop commitment in Iraq.

We discussed the controversy over the phony Boxer/Rice brouhaha yesterday here, after originally calling on a Congress member to ask the very question that Boxer asked (and which the Times ignored) last Sunday and again after Bush's speech on Wednesday night in the face of his supporting, yet callous, comments on the new policy that "we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties."

If the way in which the Times twisted the facts of the event was not done on purpose, the only alternative then is that the reporters who covered it, Helene Cooper and Thom Shanker, and the editors who allowed the article to go through, are utterly incapable of even the simplest intelligent analysis of a critical and relevant news event and, frankly, shouldn't be working for a paper as still-important to this country as the New York Times.

Picking up on the phony controversy over the prelude to Boxer's question of whether the White House had "an estimate of the number of casualties we expect from this surge?" --- the stunning answer from the Secretary of State, if she's to be believed, is that no, they did not --- the Times joined Fox "News" and NYPost and the other wingnut outlets in both twisting Boxer's comments and forwarding the unsupported notion that there was some sort of personal slur built into them...

FULL COVERAGE OF TIMES' HORRIFIC COVERAGE, PLUS AN INVITATION TO THE "OUTRAGED" BILL O'REILLY:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4025

---
Brad Friedman
THE BRAD BLOG - The uprising continues...
http://www.BradBlog.com
VELVET REVOLUTION - The revolution begins...
http://www.VelvetRevolution.us

[Kagemusha]

1. You've gotta learn how this works.

No matter what Snow says, this whole episode has wounded Rice because people have in their heads now that Rice doesn't have children; she's not married at all. She's just... there. The counter-attacks don't matter; the theme is planted in the public's mind and will follow Rice wherever she goes.

[butterfly77]

2. I hope she doesn't apoligize...

These republiCONS are looking for anything to use against the Dems for the next election...

[Junkdrawer]

3. That's it??? That's all Boxer said???

BOXER: Who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young. You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families.

I've seen "DUers" outraged and ready to "smack Boxer down if she ever said that to my wife" and over that?

[seabeyond]

14. it is stupid. i havent heard du'ers say that. guess i havent been following the threads. but

i know i myself have said it. i am not sacrificing, my kids are too young. isnt that the same thing. my husband has said it. are we suppose to smack ourselves. silliness if duers are outraged by this phoney fight with words

[charlie]

4. I wouldn't regard the NYT as a once-great-paper

Its occasional eruptions of lucidity have always been anomalous, divergences from its duty as caretaker of the status quo. That's not ideological disagreement, but fact.

That quibble aside, props to you Brad, you've been doing yeoman's work, it's much appreciated.

[Junkdrawer]

5. .

[Warren Stupidity]

6. to the greatest page with you

and to hell with that vile barren slut Rice.

[malaise]

8. Would someone repost Laura Bush's comments

re this rice pudding.

[bluedog]

10. here you go

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2006/12/bushs_f...

<snip>
The President also said there is no doubt in his mind that a woman candidate could be president, and the First Lady agreed. Mrs. Bush referenced Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and noted that while she would be a "really good candidate", Rice is not interested in the job.

"Probably because she is single, her parents are no longer living, she's an only child. You need a very supportive family and supportive friends to have this job," the First Lady said.

[Roland99]

12. .

:toast:

[Roland99]

11. Right here!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2687258&mesg_id=2687266

"Dr. Rice, who I think would be a really good candidate (for President), is not interested. Probably because she is single, her parents are no longer living, she's an only child. You need a very supportive family and supportive friends to have this job."

[malaise]

15. Thank you all. Now would MSM

fugg off, leave Barbara Boxer in peace and deal with Condi's lies re the estimate of casualties expected from Bush's,Hadley's Cheney's and Condi's escalation.

http://seesdifferent.wordpress.com/2007/01/13/pentagon-doubling-of-us-casualties-estimated-with-surge

[EST]

7. And yet, the powers that be all get together in a room

and congratulate each other on how they are still relevant and that they are all doing a wonderful job.

They insist that they are losing money and gripe that it must be the fault of the public and that they just don't understand why they're going broke and closing their doors.

The reporters and pundits who got it right about the Iraq war and correctly predicted the outcome and the public image are losing their jobs while the totally wrong but oh so learned ones, who sold the war and kissed right wing odious ass are still employed-at ever higher salaries-and whining.

Has it always been thus and I just never bothered to notice?

[BradBlog]

9. Right on the money...

...And no, it hasn't always been thus. At least not that I know of. And I've spent a considerable amount of time both asking myself the same question and investigating with others just to make sure I'm not out of my frickin' mind in my answer.

[EST]

16. I do know that almost the entire cold war with its atomic weapons

buildup was a product of panicky news stories that did not represent reality. We now know that Russia, though a nasty, vicious murderous empire, was a paper tiger.

I have been around news events of national prominence and, on listening to or reading the national coverage, can barely recognize what they are describing. Misreporting, under-reporting, over-reporting, getting most of the details, even place names, just totally wrong has long been their stock in trade.

It is, indeed, much worse now, with their fawning sucking up to right wing politics, and they are so far off base with their tabloid journalism that people are just throwing up their hands and tuning them out.

[bleever]

13. Boxer is a grandma, and Condi is a successful single gal?

Grandma:



Successful single gal:




All this whining is most unseemly. If anyone, I think it's Granny...er, Barbara who deserves an apology.