The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

21 July 2008

New York Times Disses McCain, Globe Slams Obama


Head-Scratching Over McCain Snub, Obama Slam

While talk radio and the blogosphere buzz over the outrageous attitude shown by the New York Times toward John McCain, its sister paper has taken a shockingly different approach.

Though the Gray Lady itself has refused to print an Op-Ed contribution by the McCain campaign, despite recently having done so for his Democratic challenger, fellow New York Times Company publication The Boston Globe yesterday ran a column that was stunningly critical of Barack Obama.

Written by Joan Vennochi, who is not known as a right- winger by any means, the column slams Obama's ever- expanding ego.

Even more astounding from an especially liberal newspaper, the piece cites Rush Limbaugh and agrees with him, rather than serving up the personal attacks one would normally expect:

The audacity of ego

By Joan Vennochi
Globe Columnist / July 20, 2008

JUST LIKE the Obama girl, Obama has a crush on Obama.

Barack Obama always was a larger-than-life candidate with a healthy ego. Now he's turning into the A-Rod of politics. It's all about him.

He's giving his opponent something other than issues to attack him on: narcissism.

A convention hall isn't good enough for the presumptive Democratic nominee. He plans to deliver his acceptance speech in the 75,000 seat stadium where the Denver Broncos play. Before a vote is cast, he's embarking on a foreign policy tour that will use cheering Europeans - and America's top news anchors - as extras in his campaign. What do you expect from a candidate who already auditioned a quasi-presidential seal with the Latin inscription, "Vero possumus" - "Yes, we can"?

Obama finds criticism of his wife "infuriating" and doesn't want either of them to be the target of satire. Tell that to the Carters, the Reagans, the Clintons, and the Bushes, father and son.

There's no such thing as a humble politician. But when Obama looks into the mirror, he doesn't just see a president; he sees JFK.

In 1960, John F. Kennedy accepted his party's nomination with an outdoor speech at the Los Angeles Coliseum. But he waited until he was elected before going to Germany to declare "Ich bin ein Berliner."

The fashionistas have already noted Michelle Obama's affinity for chanelling Jackie. And it's hard to watch the Obama daughters "Access Hollywood" interview and not think about Caroline and John F. Kennedy Jr. back in the days of Camelot.

So far, Dad is only promising to get the kids a dog, not a pony named Macaroni.


The conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh regularly ridicules "The Messiah also known as Obama." And "The Audacity of Obama" is turning into a ready-made take-off on the title of the Democrat's second book, "The Audacity of Hope."

The downside for Obama is how much his ego stands to resonate beyond the political right.

Given the flak that will inevitably result from publishing such a hard- hitting piece, it's difficult to understate the Boston Globe's courage in running it. If The Globies took this kind of approach more often, perhaps readership would be up, rather than sinking into an abyss.

Though the paper does employ Jeff Jacoby as a token conservative, non- liberal viewpoints outside of his column are rare.

Vennochi's column wasn't overlooked by El Rushbo himself, who has featured it on his website update this evening and addressed the broader issue on today's program.

Whether the Globe's rare flirtation with editorial open- mindedness negates its sister paper's outrageous antics is less than clear.

But McCain is the beneficiary of both circumstances: while the NYT appears to be in bed with Obama, its Boston counterpart has raised important questions about the Democratic nominee's increasingly- alarming position as a quasi- cult leader.

Another key point: the next time you see anyone in the mainstream media doubt Rush Limbaugh's influence during this election cycle, this example should help to put that viewpoint to rest for good.

FOR New England regional talk radio updates, see our other site.

Amazon orders originating with clicks here benefit The Radio Equalizer's ongoing operations.

Your Honor System contributions keep this site humming along. Thanks!

Technorati tags:


  • Brian is playing the fool once more. The Times did not print McCain's response to Obama's op-ed, because Obama's editorial was about specific plans, while McCain's response was simple attacking Obama. Remember according to McCain and Obama this was supposed to be a "new kind of campaign", Obama stuck to their rules and printed an op-ed about his plans for America, while McCain just used the "old" attack tatics.

    Why would it amaze you that in the Globe, an op-ed was printed against Obama? This is a different circimstance. The Globe article is a standardop-ed opinion piece. The McCain-Obama editorial was an opportunity for both candidates to explain their platforms, not the typical op-ed written by a staff writer or reader.

    Why is it a shock than an Anti-Obama piece would be in a Times publication? William Kristol has a regular column in the time after all .

    By Anonymous ShriekBack, at 22 July, 2008 09:23  

  • Looks like shriekback is playing the bigger fool.

    The NY Times admits they did not print the article because it did not include a specific timetable for withdrawal.

    McCain has repeatedly said he is not for surrendering, but winning. And one does not tip one's military plans to the enemy during a war.

    The NY Times is in the tank, just like the other media.

    Want proof? Watch this.

    By Blogger The Benson Report, at 22 July, 2008 13:19  

  • Benson

    I read what the Times said, they said they did not print the article because it was an attack piece. Did you not read their response? all McCain did was attack Obama , Obama wrote a piece on his agenda



    lib media? or op-ed standards?

    Benson, you're a rank hack, and can never stand up to an individual armed with facts.

    This was a case of editorial standards. They reujected BILL CLINTON OP-ED pieces in the past and rejected McCain's

    and Bush, Miliki and the majority of the Iraq government want a timetable, just like Obama

    McCain is the odd man out, who wants to stay in a war that the Iraqi prime minister wants to end

    By Anonymous shriekback, at 22 July, 2008 16:16  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger The Benson Report, at 22 July, 2008 17:04  

  • shriekback continues with the fool's position and complains that I did not read the NYT's response. But it is obvious that shriekback is the guilty party. He did not read the response himself.

    NYT David Shipley's response stated: "It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article from Senator McCain would have to articulate in concrete terms how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq. It would also have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory, with troop levels and timetables, measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate, and it would need to describe the Senator's Afghanistan strategy, spelling out how it meshes with his Iraq plan."

    In other words, exactly what I had posted earlier.

    shriekback needs to brush up on Basic Journalism 101. Know the facts, fool!

    By Blogger The Benson Report, at 22 July, 2008 17:21  

  • In other words Benson, they did not print the McCain piece because it offered no specifics, no plan, nothing but an attack on Obama

    exactly what I told you. Your reading skills are sub par.

    The Times is saying it would be wonderful if McCain actualyl had a plan in his op-ed, instead all he did was go "Obama, Obama, Obama, Obama:, I read McCain's op ed in the Post, I read Obama's.

    Obama definded his position, McCain attacked Obama. and of course you ignore the facts about the TIMES rejecting Clinton Op-eds. They rejected not 4 but SEVEN BILL CLINTON OP-EDS

    again it is not a bias issue, it is a standards in their editorial section issue

    By Anonymous Shriekback, at 23 July, 2008 09:48  

  • Get out of Iraq now so we can go back in to Iraq in a few years when the Government collapses and Iran is running the place. Great plan


    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 23 July, 2008 12:42  

  • Get out of Iraq now so we can go back in to Iraq in a few years when the Government collapses and Iran is running the place. Great plan


    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 23 July, 2008 12:42  

  • NY TImes routinely refuses to print op-eds until they are reworked, which is true of most newspapers. And it isn't a partisan issue. Bill Clinton, for example, repeatedly was told to rewrite op-eds...

    much ado about nothing.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 23 July, 2008 13:59  

  • It is certainly not much ado about nothing. It is a vivid confirmation of the incredible lengths the liberal biased media will go to prevent any views that oppose their sanctimonious positions.

    The New York Times' refusal to publish John McCain's rebuttal to Barack Obama's Iraq op-ed may be the most glaring example of liberal media bias this journalist has ever seen. But true proof of widespread media bias requires one to follow an old journalism maxim: Follow the money.

    An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans, with a quarter million dollars going to Democrats, only $15 thousand to Republicans.

    By Blogger The Benson Report, at 24 July, 2008 10:31  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger