CINCINNATI (TDB) -- The Big Apple blog Gawker says the Times sat on the story about John McCain and the lady lobbyist for two months. The wait cheated primary voters who may have wanted to hear more and dig deeper before McCain won the GOP championship. And the story was weak when it appeared -- hardly worth a long delay. Says Gawker:
"There is nothing noble or redeeming about this morning's New York Times story on John McCain's alleged improprieties with a young female lobbyist, nothing remotely cunning, nothing but tragedy. The story is too late for Republican primary voters, too weak to be remembered in the general election, and worst of all, a sad illustration of how the Times regularly squanders its money and reputation dilly-dallying on its biggest stories."
What is really disappointing is that the NY Times was sitting on this while they endorsed him on 1/25/08.
ReplyDeleteIf they thought it was unworthy to run with then, why is it worthy to run with now.
squandered it's reputation?
ReplyDeleteThat's a hoot.
Paula Jones II?
ReplyDeleteMaybe the NY Times people thought he did not have a chance or maybe they wanted the Republicans to have a candidate who cannot win.
ReplyDeleteoh, I don't know, if it proves McCain can still get a boner into his 70s, he might be worth a vote. I understand The Smoking Gun has copies of his Viagra prescriptions.
ReplyDeleteIt was such a flimsy story on substance that even a blog would have been questioned if they run the story, let alone the NYT
ReplyDelete