Posted on 04/22/2012 7:43:40 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
... Eight years ago, The Times offered comparably scant campaign coverage of the incumbent, George W. Bush, even as it blanketed readers with articles about Senator John Kerry and others competing for the Democratic nomination.
Now, though, the general election season is on, and The Times needs to offer an aggressive look at the president’s record, policy promises and campaign operation to answer the question: Who is the real Barack Obama?
Many critics view The Times as constitutionally unable to address the election in an unbiased fashion. Like a lot of America, it basked a bit in the warm glow of Mr. Obama’s election in 2008. The company published a book about the country’s first African-American president, “Obama: The Historic Journey.” The Times also published a lengthy portrait of him in its Times Topics section on NYTimes.com, yet there’s nothing of the kind about George W. Bush or his father.
Readers deserve to know: Who is the real Barack Obama? And The Times needs to show that it can address the question in a hard-nosed, unbiased way.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Sure. Yeah.....and monkeys may flight out of my butt.
After three years in office, it amazes me that we have to ask “Who is the real Barack Obama?” I think the American people know who and what he is. But....those that voted for him will not admit they made one hell of a mistake. Hopefully, they will come to their senses this time around and save this country from a dictator.
“I think they [the Times reporters and editors who cover the campaign and Washington] see themselves as aggressive journalists who don’t play favorites.”
If this clown thinks he’s innoculating the New York Times, he should know that his article only makes it look more ridiculous.
feh...
D
n't need n
bl
"Behind the Violence, Says Jane Alpert, Was Sex"--November 09, 1981--
"The leaders of the Weather Underground, she believes, followed a similar pattern of constantly shifting sexual alliances..."http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20080637,00.html
"He [Bill Ayers] also writes about the Weathermen's sexual experimentation as they tried to 'smash monogamy.' The Weathermen were 'an army of lovers,' he says, and describes having had different sexual partners, including his best male friend."
Source: New York Times, September 11, 2001: "No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1"...the Weathermen, when not engaged in group sex, committed such revolutionary acts as parading with a Viet Cong flag through a local park on Independence Day and spray-painting the walls of a high school with the slogans, "Off the Pigs," "Viet Cong Will Win," and "F#$k U.S. Imperialism."..."
Campus Wars: The Peace Movement At American State Universities in the Vietnam Era
"What happens next bears watching closely, as does the response of the president, ex-Speaker Pelosi, and others on the left. Encouraged by leftists in the Democratic Party and funded by left-leaning nonprofit organizations and celebrity contributors, Occupy Wall Street may in time morph into something resembling the radical factions of the late 1960s and 1970s."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/predicting_the_weatherman.html
Unless they start asking questions about the birth certificate, anything the New York Times writes pretending to vet the pResident is BS.
Funny how these "aggressive journalists" forgot to cover the Arpaio investigation which determined that Obama's Internet Birth Certificate and his Selective Service Registration are FRAUDS. They presented evidence too.I post it here as I suspect that otherwise no one would ever see it.Do Times readers know who Mara Zebest is? I sort of knew who she was even ten years ago because she co-authored a couple of the books about Photoshop that are on my shelf. She asserts without reservation that Obama's Birth Certificate is a FRAUD. (Just Google her name and Obama's together and I'm sure you will find her report that never seemed to interest the "aggressive journalists" from the Times.)
Shame!
ML/NJ
What a load of crap.
After three years in office, it amazes me that we have to ask “Who is the real Barack Obama?”
At least we don’t have to wonder about the New York Times, an unabashed hardcore ideological propaganda mouthpiece for the Democrat Party and purveyor of the far left liberal agenda.
Bookmark
“I applaud The Times’s stated commitment to doing these kinds of stories. Readers deserve to know: Who is the real Barack Obama? And The Times needs to show that it can address the question in a hard-nosed, unbiased way. “
Hahahahahah. I’m sure the Simes will provide an “unbiased” look into the life and times of St. hussein.
Bbbbwaahhashhhaa.
.
‘Who is the real Obama?’
You don’t know the half of it.
The best Obama exposure site on the net:
The Obama File
http://theobamafile.com/
The United States Library of Congress has selected
TheObamaFile.com for inclusion in its historic collection
of Internet materials
http://theobamafile.com/LibraryOfCongress.html
’
http://theobamafile.com/index_next_politics.html
.
This is the key here. NYT readers are self selected limo libs who are not interested in learning more about The W0n.
Most non-readers already know that Hussein is a Zer0.
I just left a post over there as well that should set the leftist off.
I thought the Times was already doing it - they are totally unbiased in their support of a Manchurian dictator's takeover of the Nation.
>>Readers deserve to know: Who is the real Barack Obama? And The Times needs to show that it can address the question in a hard-nosed, unbiased way.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *wipes eyes* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
The Times would rather go broke than abandon its agenda. The author came close to a mea culpa, then completely chickened out. Bernie Goldberg nailed it when he said these people are so isolated in their elitist bubble they’re incapable objectivity to any degree.
I wanted to read the article at the link. I can’t. I know what it is going to say and it will just make me angry this morning.
I don’t understand why people read the Times and think they are getting anything beyond left win dem raw propaganda.
Even better! I’d forgotten about that one.
The post says “Take A Hard Look At The President” but I just can’t do it. It’s “hard” for me to “look” at him at all. :)
No one is going to see it if you don't copy us all here.
ML/NJ
That’ll be the day
Perhaps the cracker jack investigative journalists at the Slimes will uncover the Kenyan’s golf handicap. Page 1, above the fold.
These newspapers can continue to lose money and still be worth the investment to their owners. Newspapers organize the herd into holding the bag for “pump and dump” stock schemes of monstrous scale. It has been so since the days when Mayer Amschel Rothschild made a killing on news from the Napoleonic Wars.
How do you copy everyone in s thread?
Pablum
I don't know of any way short of pasting each person's screen name into the "To" box. Some times I just put "All" in there, but that doesn't really do much except make me feel good.
ML/NJ
This is the most comprehensive I’ve ever read. Share it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2875042/posts
Mr. Brisbane:
The first step for anyone with an addiction is to admit you have one. It would appear the Times is continuing to deny their liberal bent and bias: “I asked Richard Stevenson, the political editor overseeing campaign coverage, about these matters, and he offered a detailed email response, noting that “we take very seriously our responsibility to report without favoritism” (Brisbane, 2012, pg 1).
Mr. Stevenson expects the majority of Americans to believe that the Times ignoring one of the most important and possibly the biggest scandal in American’s entire history is being fair and journalistic in nature as they (the Times) sees it:
Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery But Disregards “Image” As Indication Of Obama’s Ineligibility
4-11-12
DAMAGE CONTROL: A recent ballot challenge hearing in New Jersey exposes a desperate strategy by Obama to distance himself from his forged certificate and induce the contrived value of his transient political popularity as the only “legitimate qualification” needed to hold the office of the presidency.
By Dan Crosby of THE DAILY PEN
NEW YORK, NY – After a Maricopa County law enforcement agency conducted a six-month forensic examination which determined that the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 Certificate of Live Birth posted to a government website in April, 2011 is a digital fabrication and that it did not originate from a genuine paper document, arguments from an Obama eligibility lawyer during a recent New Jersey ballot challenge hearing reveals the image was not only a fabrication, but that it was likely part of a contrived plot by counterfeiters to endow Obama with mere political support while simultaneously making the image intentionally appear absurd and, therefore, invalid as evidence toward proving Obama’s ineligibility in a court of law.
Taking an audacious and shocking angle against the constitutional eligibility mandate, Obama’s lawyer, Alexandra Hill, admitted that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot”.
Right wrong or indifferent, the birth certificate is now a public record in open court and cannot be ignored, but, the Times is completely ignoring the issue!
Mr. Brisbane, the NY Times is engaging in conduct that is most favorable to this President’s reelection than to any kind of unbiased reporting or the news that most Americans have come to enjoy and seek out. No one wants to read an article in any paper or source that simply cheer leads this President’s reelection!
Every time President Bush sent more troops anywhere in the world, the NY Times blasted him on the front page of their paper for weeks!
SEPTEMBER 24, 2006: New National Intelligence Estimate determines Iraq war has increased terror threat.
“A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.” [New York Times, 9/24/2006]
Not to even mention the fact the NY Times every day reporting on the number of U.S. casualties from the war.
President Obama would appear to have escape the level of scrutiny from the NY Times:
JUNE 22, 2011: Obama Will Speed Pullout From War in Afghanistan.
WASHINGTON — “President Obama declared Wednesday that the United States had largely achieved its goals in Afghanistan, setting in motion a substantial withdrawal of American troops in an acknowledgment of the shifting threat in the region and the fast-changing political and economic landscape in a war-weary America” (Landler, Cooper, 2011).
I won’t even bother going into the slanted coverage of the Tea Party protests vs. the Occupy protesters and the NY Times coverage or the lack thereof! The Treyvon Martin shooting is another example of NY Times liberal bias! Really a “white Hispanic” in order to continue reporting the narrative of “white on black racism” when the facts had not even been fully investigated or reported. This did not prevent the NY Times from whipping up racial anger in the country, placing a shooting suspect’s life in danger because he was pronounced by the NY Times and others as being a white Hispanic, really?
No sir, I don’t see any liberal bias in the NY Times reporting and the NY Times does not see it either, so what is really the problem? Must be those stupid pine stump savages in fly over country who are just too stupid and uneducated to understand the sophistication of the Uber-liberal progressive’s.
Setting aside the NY Times non-liberal bias or prejudice, I am wondering just how long George W. Bush would have remained in office if his administration was involved in “fast and furious,” resulting in the murder of a federal agent, Solyndra where 500,000,000.00 million of the tax payers’ dollars was simply given to a company who then filed for bankruptcy, effectively giving the American tax payers the middle finger, GSA scandal, and finally, but, not limited to the secret service prostitution scandal? You and I both know the answer to that question. Instead what we get from the NY Times is the fantasy “Republican war on women” and the Obama Administration creation of “Republicans who want to prevent women from getting their contraception!”
The NY Times is the [old media] for a reason, the American people are not simply “fly over country” as so many liberal reporters believe, they are not stupid, they too understand the liberal bias of the NY Times just to mention one (1) of so many in the old media. The readership of the NY Times is proof positive of the liberal bias!
Nice try Mr. Brisbane, but, you cannot fix or correct a problem unless you first admit you have a problem. The NY Times will be long gone to the pages of history before that ever happens!
COMMENT POSTED REPLYING TO JOSH HILL(I wonder if it will be removed)
dougfromupland
upland, ca
Just amazing. Some people are still worshipping at the altar of The One. He is the greatest danger this republic has ever faced. He threatens the Supreme Court, keeps piling on massive debt for our kids and grandkids, is consolidating unimagined power in the executive branch, has disdain for our Constitution, hates entrepreneurs who make the country work, apologizes to other countries, bows down to the Saudis, will not let us get our own energy to become independent of the Middle East, is the worst enemy Israel has ever had in the White House, and is totally clueless in dealing with our enemies. The man is a community organizer, a socialist who has always hated this country, is in way over his head, surrounds himself with socialists and communists, refuses to prosecute the Black Panthers for voter intimidation, will not follow the law and enforce the borders, and through anger or pure incompetence is determined to destroy this great nation.
But not so unbiased as to publish my comment. (Just let everyone know they should Google Obama's name together with either "Arpaio" or "Zebest" and look around at what Google finds.)ML//NJFor 50 years I trustingly read the Times from cover to cover. Now I never look at it except to ridicule it. Meanwhile the stockholders weep and the WH laughs.
I was so sad the day he got elected. What should have been a day of celebration-the election of America’s first black President-I knew that for the next 4 years he and his handlers would use the race card over and over. He would do what he could to ruin America-or what he considers white-ruled America.
it was sad to think about what Obama was going to do to “race relations” (not to mention the whole darn country!) As the first black American President, he had such a once in a lifetime opportunity in his hands; he could have shown that if you worked hard and lived right, as a black man, you could do anything, you could have it all.
But, unfortunately, the first black man elected was-Obama, not Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas.
A man with such a hideous past, it must be covered up at any cost.
A man with such a hateful, anti-American agenda,that even his ideas must be constructed in the dark,and are so bad that they can only be made law by an edict or by breaking other laws-once again-put in place at any cost.
Re: A Hard Look at the President!!
UGH you look, I can’t I value my sanity too much.
For the first time since I was 12, I did not watch election coverage. To this day, this political junkie has no idea of the electoral count or state results. I was as the indoor range trying out a weapon I ultimately bought. I knew what was going to happen to America and just could not watch that night.
So, does that mean that the Times also basked in the warm glow following George Bush's elections?
I think we all know the answer.
I posted it under the name FEDUP. Can’t copy text from an iPad
It was heart-breaking.
I didn’t feel bad for all the crazies who thought he was a god and were just looking for an idol to worship, but I really did feel badly for black Americans because they were being used and some (not all) really looked hopeful and happy that they had finally broken the race barrier with a black President...and sadly, I knew he was evil,immoral and would only bring ruin to our country.
I cannot think of one good thing he has done-and that’s a sad legacy for our first black President.
We knew he would keep us white conservatives under his foot, but black Americans didn’t know they would be under his thumb and used to advance his hideous and anti-American agenda whenever he needed to play the race baiting game.
His legacy will be one of pure corruption.
“The evil that men do lives after them”.....Shakespeare
Mrs C
We know who Obama is - he is the run of the mill corrupt politician looking out for his own selfish interests and not those who voted for him in 2008.Obama is NOT a "run of the mill corrupt politician." Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are "run of the mill corrupt politicians." Joe Biden is a "run of the mill corrupt politician."
Obama is an ENEMY of the United States, its People, and the government he pretends to lead. He is a complete FRAUD. If I were his successor (were he to have one) he wouldn't survive my first term.
ML/NJ
I wanted something that would get posted. They heavily censor posts over there.
Personally I believe is as close to the Antichrist as they get.
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.
