Posted on 12/29/2007 1:45:11 PM PST by Sub-Driver
NYT needs to embrace Walter E. Williams.
The NY Times has pandered to the liberals for decades ... the vast majority of their paid subscribers make up, or, are on the fringe of the loony left. Rosenthal insisting that the 'old gray hoar' needs a conservative voice in the editorial pages is sure to have these self described progressive and tolerant libs gnashing their teeth in frustration.
Intolerant liberals have become what they despise the most.
Who needs to subscribe to the NY Times when they can get all the opinion columns off the internet? I get Ann Coulter, Larry Elder, and Thomas Sowell in my local paper, so there’s even less reason to subsidize the Grey Lady of Lies.
Walter E Williams at the NYT ??????????
might as well have brought the bucket of water to the witch...........
That is one sexually confused place, no doubt about it.
Ole Gray Ho...looking for some strange.
Kristol is and always has been a McCain supporter and apologist. And as we know McCain is not that popular in conservative circles (except maybe his support of the Iraq war) so Kristol can't be considered a true conservative as Safire was. But the Slimes will do what it can to present him that way so as to appear "balanced."
That is the way the left has always been. I would be afraid too if my ideas were so weak they could not stand up to scrutiny.
I will be curious to see if Kristol’s columns tend to favor McCain, the candidate that the media would like to see run against Mrs. Clinton.
Why would the Times have to defend hiring Bill Kristol? Everywhere he goes, he makes people smarter.
-- William F. Buckley, Jr.
Thanks for this quote go to Curmudgeonly & Skeptical
Amen!! Here, here!! But I really doubt that she is in the same cocktail circuit as Billy boy.
“Translation: New York Times Desperate To Get Paid Circulation Numbers Up, Tries Making Deal With “Devil.””
They made a deal with the devil. They have been paying for it for 75 years.
LOL!
So by your logic, the NYT should not have any conservative writers on their opinion page?
Bottom line is 30% the country which are conservative, wouldn't use the NYT's to train their puppies on, actually might log on to the web site to read Kristol. The mighty dollar speaks even to a left wing socialist rag
Anyway, it's not like Kristol is a Reagan conservative antway. He's a shill for McCain
Perhaps I can take this opportunity to point out that the NYT carries more than politics and political opinions. In fact, its political coverage is probably the least likely reason it has subscribers.
Not exactly. I think Bill has shilled for Dubya (over SCOTUS appointments and Rumsfeld, etc.) also.
I have no problem with conservatives telling the MSM that they won't help them sell papers or telling the Today show they won't be coming on until there is a semblance of balance. Kristol is providing political coverage, deflecting criticism, so the NYT can point to him as their token conservative. It's adding lipstick to a pig.
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.