Free Republic

NYT: MCCAIN'S BIRTHPLACE IN CANAL ZONE RAISES ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONS...

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...

August 19, 2007 -- IT pays to write a rave review in The New York Times. The paper's perfume critic, Chandler Burr, admits accepting free samples of a French fragrance to which he'd given a 5-star writeup last year - and then giving the perfume to patrons of a $200-a-head dinner he hosted this month.

NYT plans Monday splash on how Fred Thompson's two eldest sons, who are both lobbyists, have benefited from their father's influence... Developing...

Just a few months ago, I thought it was insulting to be called a “theocrat.” I was wrong. “Theocrat” is almost a compliment compared to what the Left is calling Christians now. According to a New York Times review, we Christians are fascists—that’s what the Nazis were. And if we’re not stopped, we’ll try to take over America. It’s an illustration of how vicious the invective has become against faithful Christians. “Of course there are Christian fascists in America,” writes Rick Perlstein in the New York Times Sunday Book Review. How else, for example, to explain the cadres who took...

view edit Posted by Mark Finkelstein on October 12, 2006 - 06:58. There's a saying along the lines that liberals will always oppose the use of US force - except where US security interests are not at stake. The New York Times editorial of this morning, The Age of Impunity, provides a perfect case in point. The central thesis is this: "Bush has squandered so much of America’s moral authority — not to mention our military resources — that efforts to shame or bully the right behavior from adversaries (and allies) sound hollow." Along the way, the Times recommends that...

The New York Times has blocked British readers from accessing an article published in the US about the alleged London bomb plot for fear of breaching the UK's contempt of court laws. Published in the US yesterday under the headline "Details emerge in British terror case", the article claims to reveal new information about the alleged terror bomb plot that brought British airports to a standstill earlier this month. Online access to the article from the UK has been blocked and the shipment of yesterday's paper to London was stopped. The story was also omitted from the International Herald Tribune,...

In response to The New York Times' decision to publish top secret information regarding how the government tracks financial transactions of terrorists, Sergeant Timothy Boggs wrote the following letter to The Times: Mr. Keller, What ceases to amaze me about your paper is the lengths you are willing to go to make headlines and sell papers. Who cares if those headlines help the enemies of America, you guys are making money and that is what it is all about in the end right? Your recent decision to publish information about a classified program intended to track the banking transactions of...

When asked yesterday why the United States isn’t talking with Syria about the Lebanon crisis, President Bush replied, “Syria knows what we think.” ... But Syria is also unlikely to even consider doing what Mr. Bush wants — rein in Hezbollah and help halt the killing in Lebanon and Israel — unless its leaders know what potential rewards as well as punishments await them. And for that, the United States needs to offer a serious high-level discussion with Syria, and it needs to do it now. Mr. Bush has always seen talking, by itself, as a reward. As a result,...

The New York Times on Sunday backed Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont in his Democratic primary challenge of Sen. Joe Lieberman, criticizing the three-term incumbent for his support of President Bush's national security policies. The Hartford Courant and the Connecticut Post on Sunday backed Lieberman. The Times said Lieberman's efforts "to appear above the partisan fray" have turned him into one of the administration's most useful allies. "If Mr. Lieberman had once stood up and taken the lead in saying that there were some places a president had no right to take his country even during a time of war, neither...

Isn't it generally assumed that when two countries are at war, that it is the right and duty of those countries actually in the conflict to decide when that war might be over and how it is prosecuted? Certainly other nations might attempt to diplomatically intervene to help resolve the crisis but, when all is said and done, isn't it still the duty of the warring parties to arrive at their own conclusions? Not according to The New York Times. The Times has pronounced it the duty of the vaunted "World Powers" to end Israel's security measures in Lebanon as...

It’s one of those things you “can’t not know.” The New York Times, Don of the Media Hit Squad, despises the Bush Administration and on a more stealth (but more longstanding) level, loathes the U.S. Armed Forces. The latest ugly example came July 7 in what is more accurately described as a press release for a far Left organization than a news story. The sole source for John Kifner’s piece, “Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Says,” is a sloppy document released by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The obnoxious report, the title of which is a gratuitous slap...

by Mark Finkelstein July 25, 2006 - 07:01 Back to the drawing board for Bill O'Reilly. As noted here, on his radio and TV shows yesterday, BOR propounded the theory that the big-city newspapers have tread lightly in the current Middle East conflict for fear of alienating their liberal Jewish readers. As Bill put it, liberal Jews "are all the papers have left" when it comes to significant market niches. BOR particularly singled out the New York Times as a paper that hesitant to take any positions that could be construed as contrary to Israel's interests. As of this morning's...

The New York Times plans to cut 250 jobs and shrink the size of its pages in 2008, making them 3.8 centimetres narrower, the newspaper reported in yesterday's edition. The newspaper's plans include closing a printing plant in Edison, N.J.The moves were estimated to save the company $42 million per year. The reduction in the size of its pages would mean a loss of 11 per cent of the space devoted to news, but the newspaper plans to add pages to make up for about half of that loss.

The Times report says “Children in public schools generally performed as well or better in reading and mathematics than comparable children in private schools.” The actual study says, “In..both reading and mathematics, students in private schools achieved at higher levels than students in public schools.” The only point at which parity is reached is in comparing poor children in public schools with poor children in private schools. Which is hilarious because thanks to the Times’s hatred of school choice, there are no poor kids in private schools.

The New York Court of Appeals ruled this morning that the state Constitution does not guarantee a right to marriage for same-sex couples, and that state lawmakers, not the courts, are better suited to consider the issue. In a 4-2 decision that has been eagerly awaited by both sides in the gay marriage debate, the court, the highest in the state's judiciary system, concluded that the legislature could have "a rational basis" for limiting marriage to heterosexual couples, in large part because of their ability to bear children. The court did not rule that the state should not or could...