Re: NY Times takes a side..finally

The_Carpathia <writingken@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> NYTimes asked McCain to revise his article and resubmit it.
>> Their argument for not publi****ng it its present form is valid
>
>So, we can hold all future op-ed pieces to be held to this standard?

No.  But the New York Times editors can.

>What about past ones?

Presumably the New York Times has done so.

>Can we reject or condemn all editorial pieces

If you are the editor of a publication to which such pieces are
contributed, yes.

>that do not give specific policy information in areas they
>challenged? 

That was not the standard.  The standard was that it had to have new
information.

>Can we expect Obama to tell us in the next few days how
>he will pay for his policy promises (not fully covered by his tax-the-
>rich plan, now)? 

No.

>To be fair, can we expect McCain to do the same?

No.

>What about vp picks?  Can we ban ALL editorial pieces that do not name
>names?

YOU can't ban anything.  YOU are not an editor of an internationally
respected newspaper.  (the concept of linking Kennie with anything
bearing the phrase "internationally respected" is worthy of a belly
laugh or two)>

How many editorial pieces has the NY Times published on VP picks?

>However...again ... I think Obama should be the winner, at this point
>(unless changes are made with the GOP VP pick that I do not expect),

Nobody cares what you "think".

>and I look forward to seeing a New York Times about face, in the even
>that the VP pick is Giuliani or another liberal.
 
An about face from what?

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Lojban language www.lojban.org