Posted on 02/26/2008 4:40:40 PM PST by jdm
Well, it's not what one might think. They have a correction on an irrelevant point in a completely discredited article -- but at least it's right at the top:
A front-page article on Feb. 21 about Senator John McCain’s record on lobbying and ethics, including his role in the Keating Five case, described incorrectly the reprimand delivered to three other members of the Senate in 1991 for intervening with government regulators on behalf of Charles H. Keating Jr. The Senate Ethics Committee rebuked the three senators for improper behavior, but under a parliamentary agreement the full Senate did not censure them or take any other vote on the matter.
Wow. That really builds the ol' credibility, doesn't it? Here we have a story that got held for months while the editors tried to build a case for their accusations. We've been told by no less an authority than Dan Rather that we should trust their smear because all involved are, and I quote, "very responsible journalists."
And these responsible journalists -- the ones who accused McCain of possibly thinking of having an affair with a lobbyist on the word of two disgruntled staffers who couldn't even offer testimony that such an affair had taken place -- couldn't be bothered to fact-check the end result of the Keating Five investigation in the Senate? How hard would it have been to check their own archives for the right information?
Very responsible journalists. Hmmm. Sure.
Dan Rather thinks Dan Rather is a responsible journalist.
Just following the formula ... step 2, find a way with an innocuous correction to hammer home one of the article’s damning points. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Ha! This one gets the “That was in another country and besides the wench is dead” award.
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! The former disgruntled McCain staffers testified that if they were Senator McCain they would have considered an affair with a lobbyist who looked that attractive!
NEW YORK TIMES, ROT IN HELL - http://youtube.com/watch?v=eOWeczTvJr4
I’m sure they mentioned the fact that McCain was the only republican involved in the Keating Five incident — all the rest were democrats.
Grey Hag.
That really builds the ol' credibility, doesn't it? Here we have a story that got held for months while the editors tried to build a case for their accusations. We've been told by no less an authority than Dan Rather that we should trust their smear because all involved are, and I quote, "very responsible journalists."
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.