Posted on 10/31/2008 11:07:22 AM PDT by AIM Freeper
In this campaign, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is easily The New York Times’ favorite target.
John McCain’s running mate represents everything the mainstream media despise - pro-life, pro-family, pro-traditional marriage and anti-big government.
Once upon a time (before he secured the GOP nomination), The Times actually liked McCain, and called him a “maverick,” its term of endearment for Republican lawmakers. Sarah Palin it could never like, even if she was running against Gen. Pinochet.
The Times’ latest Palin hit is a “news story” in today’s paper, the gist of which is that his running mate is a major liability for McCain.
The Times: “All told, 59% of voters surveyed said Mrs. Palin was not prepared for the job [of vice president], up nine percentage points since the beginning of the month. Nearly a third of voters polled said the vice-presidential selection would be a major factor influencing their vote for president…”
This is based on The New York Times’ own survey (Oct. 26-29) - surprise, surprise! - conducted with CBS News. Its accuracy may be judged by the fact that of all recent polls it shows the greatest gap between Obama and McCain (51% to 40%). A Zogby poll taken at the same time showed McCain and Obama only 2 points apart (47% to 49%). The latest Rasmussen poll has the candidates separated by 5 points, versus 9 points in The Times/CBS News poll.
That aside, nobody votes for a presidential candidate based on his running mate, regardless of what they tell pollsters.
The Times is setting up Sarah Palin. If McCain loses, the paper will blame Palin and McCain’s focus on the Obama/Ayers connection, which the paper claims is a foray “into the dark territory of race-baiting and xenophobia” (in an October 7 editorial).
(Excerpt) Read more at boycottnyt.com ...
Adios amigo...uh....buh bye......
How can I boycott something that I don’t buy or read?
The Times is in self-destruct mode and frankly we don’t have to anything to accelerate the action aside from cancelling, if anyone still has a subscription to this dinosaur.
Another “helpful” post by a noob.
I gave little credence to anything from the NY Times, about as much as I would give to the official Hamas or North Korean news organ. I rather expect I am not alone in this view.
“How can I boycott something that I don’t buy or read?”
Find out who its sponsors and advertisers are and boycott them, and let them know why you are boycotting them.
I’ve boycotted almost everything from the media. They are beyond playing with fire.
“How can I boycott something that I don’t buy or read?”
You send a letter to the advertiser.
Good lining for the bird cage and the outdoor privy.
“That aside, nobody votes for a presidential candidate based on his running mate, regardless of what they tell pollsters”
This time that is exactly what I am doing
I’m in L.A. so don’t see NYT, but based on who advertisers are out here at that rag, the LAT — you would be totally safe in complaining to Macy’s, AT&T, Bloomingdale’s, Citibank, etc.
////How can I boycott something that I don’t buy or read?
////
Don’t click on their links. The more eyeballs they get the more they can charge advertisers.
As usual, we were right.
They DESPISE her because she’s a CHRISTIAN.....period....a Christian that BELIEVES MUST be DESTROYED!
The NYTimes is not a newspaper. It is a “Baghdad Bob” type spokesman for the DNC.
You are not alone.
I am! So are many others. We have another job in mind for her after she's done being VP.
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.