Whom did you admire most in 2113?
Posted on 12/31/2013 9:26:16 AM PST by Nachum
On Monday, the editor of the New York Times Editorial page was compelled to write that the publication has not decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 yet.
His pronouncement came two days after the paper attempted to whitewash the Benghazi tragedy by printing a story that alleged that there was no al-Qaeda involvement in the attacks that killed four Americans (contradicting the paper's own reporting), murdered U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens had "little understanding" of the region, and that the terrorists were motivated by an anti-Muhammed YouTube video.
On a blog post on the paper's website, Andrew Rosenthal alleged that it is important to Republicans "that Al Qaeda orchestrated the attack" because they want to "tarnish Democratic candidates by making it seem as though" President Barack Obama "doesn’t take Al Qaeda seriously." They also want to "throw mud at former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who they fear will run for president in 2016."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Damn that picture hurts.
What is truly terrible is that he really cared about the people there.
And that was his repayment.
I was reading an article a few months ago about the Bay of pigs invasion when JFK was POTUS, and they had one part where they talked about how the NYT warned Castro of it, blaring it from the headlines which is one of the reasons it was such a disaster besides Kennedy refusing to give air support, but I was thinking why the hell isn’t this rag brought up on treason charges? They pulled the same BS when we invaded Iraq.
Yeah right. And Obama said he wouldn’t run for president ... that he’s not qualified.
Stop the BS, liberals ... we know what you’re doing.
The NYTimes really screwed this up and missed a major opportunity. They should have realized that Republicans orchestrated the Benghazi attack. They made the video, getting a hapless Islamist to make the crude videotape. Because they are racists looking to denigrate President 0bama and to make Hillary Clinton look bad too. Part of their war on women, you know. .
I live in New York unfortunately, and when she was our carpetbagger Senator all she did was travel out of state trying to boost her profile for POTUS. She did absolutely nothing and attended just one funeral for a 911 firefighter (Guliani by comparison attended ALL of them). And this was after her incredibly arrogant “Listening tour” and getting her husband to pardon FALN terrorists and of course the morons in this state voted for her or maybe not being the grifting POS she is.
No one honestly believes what they are saying.
I do not want on any ping lists
Because of their constant RATaganda, the New York Times is largely responsible for the destruction of the USA and the treason and murder in Benghazi and elsewhere.
According to them, the RATs can do no wrong, and any given Republican is a murderous demon from Hell....especially George W. Bush.
Cue up the canned laughter.
This is why the Republicans need to impeach Obama. The real target is Clinton. Otherwise the media is going to cover her butt to get her elected.
“tarnish Democratic candidates by making it seem as though” President Barack Obama “doesn’t take Al Qaeda seriously.”
...........................................................
Benghazi. He slept through it, or played cards with Reggie.
He sends weapons to Al Qaeda in Syria.
He stopped sending money to Egypt when the Muslim Brotherhood was tossed out
Certainly Obama takes Al Qaeda seriously, he helps them in every way he can.
Meanwhile he is playing golf in Hawaii.
“Conspiracy,” the word suggests something done in relative secrecy. The NYT is blatantly pushing and covering for Clinton.
Amen!
Absolute nonsense.
Don't tell us ... tell Candy Crowley.
If the New Yawk Times says it, it must be true. LOL!
The New York Times has, uncompromisingly and without any withholdings or reservations, endorsed Herself, Madame Benghazi, the Cold & Joyless, for the nomination and coronation to office of the successor regime holding sway over the territory once known as “the United States of America”, a storied land renown in song and the pages of history.
Of course, we can change this, with a little creative reconstruction of the politics of this territory, dividing the territory between the “red” district and all the scattered little “blue” enclaves.
Herself is welcome to serve as the Supreme Imperator of the “blue” enclaves, but the “red” district would be free to elect a leader that would represent the interests of the nation once known as “the United States of America”.
It will be generations before the nation finds its ways to prosperity. There are the resources but the establishment of corruption is too ingrained & will not give it back.
Yet? Any wonder why the NYT is collapsing faster than THE FOREIGNER can take a selfie of himself.
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.