Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Did The Times Wait?
Sweetness & Light ^ | January 3, 2006 | N/A

Posted on 01/03/2006 12:52:29 PM PST by Sam Hill

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
Of course another poem applies as well:

"What a tangled web we weave..."

1 posted on 01/03/2006 12:52:29 PM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

With at least 70% and more like 90% of public approval of the wiretapping, what makes you sure that the NY Times would have swung the election? If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism.


2 posted on 01/03/2006 12:54:28 PM PST by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

The nickname "Pinch" refers to the sphincter action accompanying story production and editing at The Old Socialist Broad.


3 posted on 01/03/2006 12:59:46 PM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

"With at least 70% and more like 90% of public approval of the wiretapping, what makes you sure that the NY Times would have swung the election? If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism."

I'm not necessarily saying what I think. I am saying what I believe Calame and the NYT think. Calame is obviously disappointed that they didn't use this to help their side win the elections.

And I'm not so sure that this would have been presented clearly enough to the public by the DNC/MSM that they would have seen it as a nescessary move by the Bush administration in a time of war. It would have been portrayed as an outrage on the Constitution. And probably brought out so close to the election that nobody would have a chance to argue for its need.

But maybe this is another explanation. Maybe the DNC did some internal polling and found that this would hurt them. But I sort of doubt they would believe it without some kind of polls. They think they have the popular positions, you know.


4 posted on 01/03/2006 1:02:05 PM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

Why did they wait? I wonder the same thing, why did they wait until Bush numbers were going up and the day after Iraqi elections were a success?


5 posted on 01/03/2006 1:02:47 PM PST by icwhatudo (The rino borg...is resistance futile?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

"If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism."

My bet is the Kerry campaign and the DNC specifically asked that this be held off until after the election. They knew that the Swifties nailed Kerry on being anti-American and this would have sealed the deal. They were also banking on Plame blowing up in Bush's face.

The RATS and Slimes are so petty it is beyond belief.


6 posted on 01/03/2006 1:04:42 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz ("We don't need POLITICIANS...we need STATESMEN.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; Deb; kcvl; Mo1; Enchante; nopardons; veronica; KJC1; stocksthatgoup; mewzilla; backhoe; ...

Pinging in the New Year.


7 posted on 01/03/2006 1:04:50 PM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

just opened the mail, found there a letter from nyt. i can get their paper on a 'special' for ONLY $2.90/week.

They would have to pay me about 10 times that to take it.

Folded everything, including envelope together, inserted in enclosed postage-paid return envelope and will put in mail tomorrow.


8 posted on 01/03/2006 1:05:24 PM PST by InsureAmerica (Evil? I have many words for it. We are as dust, to them. - v v putin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
Why Did The Times Wait?,

Rockefeller finally gave them the go-ahead...don't anyone remember the democratic strategic email that was sent by Rocky,but delivered to the wrong address..???

Doogle

9 posted on 01/03/2006 1:06:20 PM PST by Doogle (USAF...8thAF...4077th TFW...408th MMS...Ubon Thailand..."69"..Night Line Delivery,AMMO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

I do, and I'm sure many here do:

Rockefeller memo=The Hill.com=
http://www.hillnews.com/news/110603/memo.aspx

This and the CIA "Retentions" surely fit that announced campaign.

And Rockefeller himself is almost uniquely positioned to have leaked both stories.


10 posted on 01/03/2006 1:09:53 PM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: Sam Hill
Why Did The Times Wait?
"What a tangled web we weave..."

Here's another one - "Timing is everything."

12 posted on 01/03/2006 1:16:54 PM PST by b4its2late (Do illiterate people get the full effect of Alphabet Soup?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
Why did The New York Times postpone its treason

Because they didn't want Kerry either but couldn't admit it.

13 posted on 01/03/2006 1:18:01 PM PST by quantim (If the Constitution were perfect it wouldn't have included the Senate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

"...when these leaks could have won the elections for their bosses, the Democrat Party?"

I would disagree, but if the screaming of the MSM drowned out everything else and this ran as often as the Bush National Guard story, then...it might have improved the Rat's chances.

As it was, with the complete one-sided bias of the media, Bush still won...I think it speaks to how woefully inadequate their platform and candidate was, and is.

The good news is that the Rats somehow still think America thinks the way they do.


14 posted on 01/03/2006 1:18:41 PM PST by rlmorel ("Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does." Whittaker Chambers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

If not released just before election day the next best thing for the NYT/DNC is to realease this story on the day of the Iraqi elections to quell any "victory" talk by the current administration. Either way it's a victory for terrorists and democrats. The real problem as I see it is that this is a non-story. If after Sept.11th the President WASN'T doing everything in his power to fight terrorists (including wiretaps/intercepts) he would have been impeached by Republicans AND Democrats. JMHO.

Do any of these people even remember 9/11?


15 posted on 01/03/2006 1:19:08 PM PST by Liberty Valance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

I'm in total agreement. I would've loved to see how the dims would present their "no spying on terrorists" strategy for winning the war. I might not have had to sit biting my fingernails for Bush ("Fingernail Biters for Bush!") on election night.


16 posted on 01/03/2006 1:19:26 PM PST by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
They held the story because it would have enhanced the President's election numbers.

That it was released at the time of the vote to renew the Patriot Act has turned into a plus for the President as well.

Just my lame opinion.

17 posted on 01/03/2006 1:19:50 PM PST by OldFriend (The Dems enABLEd DANGER and 3,000 Americans died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
And Rockefeller himself is almost uniquely positioned to have leaked both stories

...eee..correctamundo...LMAO

Doogle

18 posted on 01/03/2006 1:19:59 PM PST by Doogle (USAF...8thAF...4077th TFW...408th MMS...Ubon Thailand..."69"..Night Line Delivery,AMMO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

"If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism."

My bet is the Kerry campaign and the DNC specifically asked that this be held off until after the election. They knew that the Swifties nailed Kerry on being anti-American and this would have sealed the deal. They were also banking on Plame blowing up in Bush's face.

The RATS and Slimes are so petty it is beyond belief. They are going to turn this around like they turned around the memogate files. It wasn't the fact that the RATS were trying to take down Bush, it was the fact that the Republicans found out.


19 posted on 01/03/2006 1:20:00 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz ("We don't need POLITICIANS...we need STATESMEN.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

I'd like to know exactly what the 28 questions are.


20 posted on 01/03/2006 1:20:39 PM PST by airborne (If being a Christian was a crime, would there be enough evidence to convict you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson