The Wall Street Journal subtitled its Tuesday editorial “In defense of the New York Times.” But, not surprisingly, it really wasn’t. The editorial took pleasure in noting that the Times, whose editorial board championed campaign-finance reform, is under fire about those laws. Some are calling for an investigation of the Times not charging MoveOn.org full price for its David Petraeus ad. The Times’ public editor, Clark Hoyt (a former editor at The Eagle), agrees that the rate was a mistake. The Journal’s defense amounted to saying that the problem isn’t with the Times’ ad rates but with the campaign-finance law.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
47 Comments
“DailyKos’s misadventure was resolved with a Federal Election Commission ruling that allowed it (quite properly) to escape the rules it wants foisted on everybody else.”
Well, it seems Murdoch hasn’t yet succeeded in making the editorial page any more idiotic (but that’s not the issue–what will happen to the news division, which actually did good work?)
Does anyone really believe that the Bush FEC made a special exception for Daily Kos?
BUt at least they’re talking about a genuine issue–campaign finance reform–instead of carping endlessly about a newspaper ad.
Steven Colbert pointed out that the same Congress that voted to condemn the ad ALSO voted against Jim Webb’s proposal to give the troops breaks between their multiple rotations in Iraq.
Nice to know our elected officials know what’s REALLY important!
good point about the c.s. congress.
this country is, or appears unable to concentrate on one issue long enough to form an opinion about it.
we are shoved from one “outrage” to the next without really solving any problems.
the main stream media doesn’t seem to want to report news other than easy stories like britney or oj or vick.
i guess the msm thinks americans are too simple to grasp semi-complex issues.
kinda like the story about the latest scare from somebody in the white house.it was a intelligence report about an impending attack on congress. the cover page said… not a report based on facts.it was circulated without the cover sheet. so the scared elected politicans quickly passed another bill taking away more rights to privacy.
see how easy it is for bush/cheney/rove to control our country.
it’s all in the P.R.
next stop iran.
It was an ad in a newspaper!!
The term “Betray Us” was thought up by Rush Limbaugh anyway.
Get over it,
There are large numbers of American kids getting wounded and killed in shithole Iraq while you whine about swift boating real veterans…oh, I forgot, swift boating vets was ok with you. It’s the General bush propped up in front of the tv cameras that “bothers” you.
the wall street journal ??
lollolWTF, who cares about the wall street journal??
now it’s just another right wing neo-CON rag owned by fox “news.”
nice try phil who is so concered about the “truth.”
Steven Colbert pointed out…
LMAO – taking a comedy show host seriously – now that is sad.
Did Rudy get the same rate for his ad? Just wondering.
>>>>>Steven Colbert pointed out…LMAO – taking a comedy show host seriously – now that is sad.Posted by: Kansas <<<<<
Daily Show/Colbert Viewers Most Informed – Fox, Not So Muchby News Corpse
Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 03:28:56 AM EST
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press has published a new study that measures the public’s knowledge of national and international news. The results are not likely to surprise anyone but Fox viewers, who come in at the bottom of the list (they probably don’t know that there is a list – or what a list is). And, although I’m not surprised to see the Daily Show/Colbert Report place high on the list, it is a bit of a jolt to see them at the very top………..
http://scoop.epluribusmedia.org/story/2007/4/17/32856/7062
Kansas have you ever actually watched TDS or TCR?
What is so funny about it, and sad at the same time, is that they’re always dead on correct.
Last night they made fun of Hillary’s laugh. Now surely you’d appreciate that?
I love Colbert’s new phrase…Election 2008: Don’t F*** This Up America!
Excellent point political_mom
I imagine Colbert show passes right over the rw’s heads. If you don’t know what’s going on, you don’t get the jokes and satire.
I read the ad discount was a bona fide mistake (those things that bush never admits to), and has been rectified. Case closed.
MoveOn, nothing to see here.
Can’t wait until Hillary takes control. I wonder what you all will bitch about then?
ah, the daily show, and the colbert report, really the only two shows I watch on a daily basis, besides the real news. Whats funny, is some of Colbert’s political guests can’t even tell that he’s just acting in character, some right wingers take his dry high brow satire as literal.
There’s at least one thing Hillary and the NY Times have in common.
What? Campaign Finance Laws were broken? Go figure. How could that have happend?
Oh, we’ll fix that right away.
Ethics and Integrity in the White House, is that important?
Ethics and Integrity in the White House, is that important?Posted by: Max
Only for republicans in office Max.
OMG
“Ethics and Integrity in the White House, is that important?”
Apparantly not for the crowd who voted to return “integrity” to the white house by installing the boy king…
IOKIYAAR
Oh, I knew I would see the Bush attacks, in defense of Democrats lack of Ethics and Integrity.
Great defense for your Liberal pals.
So it’s OK if Hillary isn’t the best. It’s ok if she has no Integrity, ethics, or values.
Of course Kansas doesn’t watch The Daily Show.
It’s for hip young people.
Kansas was never hip.
In fact, he was never young.
He’s been an old single curmugeon all his life . . .
Lying us into an unwinnable quagmire in Iraq.
That’s “ethics and integrity” to Max . . .
“So it’s OK if Hillary isn’t the best. It’s ok if she has no Integrity, ethics, or values.”
heheheheh. Please post where I said that. YOU say she has no integrity, ethics or values.
Hint: That doesnt make it true, unless of course you are kansas where mearly speaking it makes it true….
::BIG effin’ eye roll::
What a MAROON!
Looks like the sock puppets all took stupid pills last night and now they are stuck on stupid.
What a surprise!
More faux outrage over an ad from the reich wing. After comparison a veteran who lost limbs in Vietnam to Osama Bin Laden, after comparing Purple Hearts to band aids, after claiming McCain fathered a Black child out of wedlock, etc. the Republicans are finally upset because Moveon places an ad that the majority of America agrees with.
And the conservative media just plays along because it diverts attention away from the fact that pro-war, pro-Bush Gen. Betrayus manipulated the data to make the occupation look better.
The puppets can be no more clever than the puppetier.
“Ethics and Integrity in the White House, is that important?”
I did not have sex with that girl.
There is Substantial and Credible Information thatPresident Clinton Committed Acts thatMay Constitute Grounds for an Impeachment
Introduction:
Pursuant to Section 595(c) of Title 28, the Office of Independent Counsel (OIC) hereby submits substantial and credible information that President Clinton obstructed justice during the Jones v. Clinton sexual harassment lawsuit by lying under oath and concealing evidence of his relationship with a young White House intern and federal employee, Monica Lewinsky. After a federal criminal investigation of the President’s actions began in January 1998, the President lied under oath to the grand jury and obstructed justice during the grand jury investigation. There also is substantial and credible information that the President’s actions with respect to Monica Lewinsky constitute an abuse of authority inconsistent with the President’s constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws.
There is substantial and credible information supporting the following eleven possible grounds for impeachment:
1. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil case when he denied a sexual affair, a sexual relationship, or sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.
2. President Clinton lied under oath to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.
3. In his civil deposition, to support his false statement about the sexual relationship, President Clinton also lied under oath about being alone with Ms. Lewinsky and about the many gifts exchanged between Ms. Lewinsky and him.
4. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Ms. Lewinsky concerning her involvement in the Jones case.
5. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth about their relationship by concealing gifts subpoenaed by Ms. Jones’s attorneys.
6. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth of their relationship from the judicial process by a scheme that included the following means: (i) Both the President and Ms. Lewinsky understood that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their sexual relationship; (ii) the President suggested to Ms. Lewinsky that she prepare an affidavit that, for the President’s purposes, would memorialize her testimony under oath and could be used to prevent questioning of both of them about their relationship; (iii) Ms. Lewinsky signed and filed the false affidavit; (iv) the President used Ms. Lewinsky’s false affidavit at his deposition in an attempt to head off questions about Ms. Lewinsky; and (v) when that failed, the President lied under oath at his civil deposition about the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.
7. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice by helping Ms. Lewinsky obtain a job in New York at a time when she would have been a witness harmful to him were she to tell the truth in the Jones case.
8. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Vernon Jordan concerning Ms. Lewinsky’s involvement in the Jones case.
9. The President improperly tampered with a potential witness by attempting to corruptly influence the testimony of his personal secretary, Betty Currie, in the days after his civil deposition.
10. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice during the grand jury investigation by refusing to testify for seven months and lying to senior White House aides with knowledge that they would relay the President’s false statements to the grand jury — and did thereby deceive, obstruct, and impede the grand jury.
11. President Clinton abused his constitutional authority by (i) lying to the public and the Congress in January 1998 about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky; (ii) promising at that time to cooperate fully with the grand jury investigation; (iii) later refusing six invitations to testify voluntarily to the grand jury; (iv) invoking Executive Privilege; (v) lying to the grand jury in August 1998; and (vi) lying again to the public and Congress on August 17, 1998 — all as part of an effort to hinder, impede, and deflect possible inquiry by the Congress of the United States.
Clinton isn’t President anymore. Moving on….
So I noticed. But all this talk about ethics and integrity about the president brings it to the forefront.
So I noticed. But all this talk about ethics and integrity about the president brings it to the forefront.
Posted by: All the Presidents Wives
Not to mention the leading candidate is the wife of this villian. No doubt two peas from the same pod.
So the argument is that Clinton wasn’t the most ethical (because he didn’t get his BJ in a public restroom from a guy) so that excuses everything done in the Republican party.
I guess that’s a good excuse, if you are four years old.
I haven’t see any court documents on President Bush, have you?
Only on Clinton. Where were all these ethical and high moral libs then?
What’s ethical about taking nearly $1 Million from a known felon fugitive?
That’s Hillary.
So the argument is that Clinton wasn’t the most ethical
Posted by: Doug
Don’t rationalize. Has nothing to do with the BJ you mentioned. Clinton lied under oath. He obstructed justice in an investigation of his abusing a woman.
That is a crime.
BREAKING NEWS EVERYDAY ABOUT:
CLINTON’S CULTURE OF CORRUPTION CAMPAIGN CRISIS
Last fall, as the Nevada governor’s race was heating up, Clinton agreed to help raise money for Democrat Dina Titus, a prominent party leader in a state that holds a key early presidential caucus. Clinton arranged for Hsu, at the time a little-known New York apparel executive with no apparent reason to take interest in Nevada politics, to give Titus $5,000 on Nov. 3, according to a person with knowledge of Clinton’s fund-raising.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/09/26/hsu_raised_big_money_for_clinton_supporters/
Tell me she didn’t know Hsu well enough to question his sources!
Who’s Hsu? Oh, I’m sooooo suprpised he’s a fugitive!
Right.
If she didn’t know, she’s truly too stupid to be President.
(Que – Attack Bush now)
because he didn’t get his BJ in a public restroom from a guy)Posted by: Doug
And since you mention it, Senator Craig resigned from Senate and had pled guilty.
Unlike Clinton who held the nation at risk during months of testimony, lies, and denial. I’d say character doesn’t count in libs eyes – EXCEPT if it is a republican.
Remember, truth be Told, he did not have sex with that woman. She performed an act of pleasure upon him. According to one definiton of sex offered during the grand jury investigation, he actually did not have SEX with that woman.
Senator Craig said he’d resign from the senate if he couldn’t get his guilty plea overturned. So “truth be told” he hasn’t resigned yet. Vitter hasn’t resigned, in fact he was applauded by fellow Republicans for engaging in capitalism to get his extra-marital sex (maybe they hate Craig because he was trying to, literally, get a hand out).
Crap. This is great. Hillary’s campaign has apparently resurrected the tired old chorus of “CLINTON! CLINTON! CLINTON!”
More to the point, it’s the textbook “tu quo” fallacy. “So’s your mom!” doesn’t somehow excuse the current occupant of ANYTHING. It’s just a way of changing the subject.
Doug,
According to the link below, the intended resignation will be on hold until “legal determinations” are made, whatever that means. And, the usual unidentified source claims the Senator is looking for a way to continue in office.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/26/craig.arrest/index.html
So it’s a crime if Clinton lies to the American public about his personal life, but not if Bush lies to the American public about invading Iraq.
13% of Americans wanted Clinton impeached. How many Americans want Bush/Cheney impeached???
“How many Americans want Bush/Cheney impeached???”
Not enough to make the dems in congress get a spine implant.Or cut the war funding. You should impeach the democrat congress for lying to get elected.
In Defense of Hillary Clinton,
ATTACK BUSH!
“He obstructed justice in an investigation of his abusing a woman.”
Abusing a woman? You are going to back up that ridiculous claim with some evidence, correct?
If Hillary gets a bj in the oval office I’ll be the first to denounce her!
I don’t CARE if Clinton screwed some willing woman. BUSH HAS SCREWED THE COUNTRY!