(CNN) - The New York Times has rejected an op-ed piece written by John McCain defending his Iraq war policy in response to a piece by Barack Obama published in the paper last week.
Read the rejected op-ed
In an e-mail to the McCain campaign, Opinion Page Editor David Shipley said he could not accept the piece as written, but would be “pleased, though, to look at another draft.”
“Let me suggest an approach,” he wrote. “The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans. It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece.”
McCain’s rejected op-ed had been a lengthy critique of Obama’s positions on Iraq policy, particularly his view of the surge. “Senator Obama seems to have learned nothing from recent history,” wrote McCain, criticizing Obama’s call for an early withdrawal timeline. “I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner prematurely.”
Obama’s July 14 essay had taken shots at McCain for not further encouraging the Iraqi government to take control of the country.
That's pretty disgusting. And shame on some of the Obama supporters here who don't mind blantant violations of the First Amendment if it helps out their guy.
Funny how McCain has become exactly what the Democrats were accused of during the early years of the Bush presidency – a tired, bitter relic with no other use or purpose than to attack their opponents while contributing no new ideas or solutions to the problems and issues of our country.
The NYTimes stance does not surprise me due to their extreme left-wing positions. But, it appears that they are now trying to manipulate what the subscribers read and that is very bad for journalism. They should be taken to court!
"that position will not change based on politics or the demands of the New York Times."
What position? He has no position. He has no plan for 'victory' in Iraq. And he does not have a clue about Afganistan ('the Iraq/pakistan border" John McCain") Why cant who ever writes these news pieces add in those facts.
Can somebody in the media please call McCain on just one of his incoherrent statements. It would have been great for the United States if someone had done this about bush in 2000. Instead the majority of Americans had to wait until after he was elected that Bush cannot speak in complete sentences or make any sense even when he does finish (the childrens do learn- Bush)!
Shipley had advised the McCain campaign that “the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you,
Because he will "Veto Every Beer that come to his table.... lol according to his words. I can't believe that, and thats someone who wants to e our president. NO WAY !!!
It's not an "editorial." An editorial is collective opinion of members of an editorial board. It's a column.
Mike form Syracuse,
The point is that there are certain criteria worth publishing and some that is not. McCain offers nothing of relevance except for a free opportunity to lay into Obama. That is not editorial stuff.
They did the right thing and give McCain a second try. Hopefully he has some depth in his character to come back and enlighten us how he will be different that Bush and save this country with not knowing much about the economy.
How can McCain continue insisting on fighting where the people say "no?" It's incredible! There are just so many ways to say, "No thank you. We don't want your help anymore."
McSame won't define what success would be because he and the neo-cons want to stay in Iraq forever with mutiple bases to protect our interests, ie. OIL. He said it himself "... go to war for oil" My freinds, our troops are diying and being physically and psychologically maimed -not because of 911-for oil. For oil companinies and corporations. We,ve heard enough from this blow-hard.
Who's the king of attack and fear-mongering? None other than Lee Atwater's protoge, Karl Rove. So it's no wonder McCain's piece is not full of substance, but rather full of attacks on Obama.
John McCain has Karl Rove as an advisor; if McCain gets elected, there is no doubt we will have four more years of Bush, because it's been Rove (and Cheney and Norquist and Rumsfeld) who've been running the country from the get-go.
Maybe the NYT is afraid McCain will write something idiotic like.. oh i don't know.. the BORDER IRAQ PAKISTAN BORDER?!!!?
This is why newspapers are floundering ... they think they know more than their readers ... why not let the readers decide if McCain's article is worthwhile? And the truth is, Iraq is not ready for us to leave yet ... what happens in their next elections will be very important to stability in the Middle East.
Editor David Shipley is biased. He should have not accepted Obamas editorial page too. We have seeen the major tv networks swinging in that direction. What's wrong with this election. People should know that this election is between kenyan Anchor Baby and All American Baby; Between liberal and moderate. go figure!
This is what the media SHOULD BE DOING ...
require both candidates to present and defend their own plans as a precondition for getting published.
Sounds like Obama did this ALREADY with his 1st submission ...
I've tired of politicians like McCain consuming the public airwaves and the constitutionally empowered FREE PRESS with their negative views of their opponent without saying why they deserve our votes.
CNN, MSNBC, FOX, ABC, CBS you need to follow suit.
Again and again McCain has nothing to say for himself except to attempt to bring down Obama.
We will listen to McCain's plans but are sick of his negative ramblings. The "kitchen sick: mentality did not work for Clinton and it is not working for McCain either.
You need to try something else John. Can't you see by now that what you are doing is not working?
The Times is in Obama's back pocket....as are the rest of the MSM. Simply a shame that the American people are being so lead by media. Obama will have the economy in a depression....and oh ya – let's not forget that the nomination campaign was to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home. NOW – oops, they will be going to Afghanistan. Do not count on seeing any of the troops in Iraq anytime soon!!! So the General Election campaign promise will be – "oh forget what I said during the nomination process – things are different now"...no they aren't – he has just gotten a bit more knowledge. Naiive and inexperience at it's best! Wonder how much the Times plans on making if Obama is elected?
Wasn't John McCain part of the Keaton Five ( the '80s loan and saving failure). Where countless american lost they life savings. So believe him when he say he knows nothing about the ecomony. By the way, CNN, still waiting on the story about how McCain didn't know that Iraq and Pakistan DO NOT SHARE A BORDER.
another blatant example of the media glorifying obama. i and many others agree that the media bias in obama's favor is absolutely nauseating. never has the media been so determined to influence an election. this behavior is completely disgusting.
Wow–this was interesting. I may subscribe or check out the New York Times. McCain blusters about the other guy, but never says anything himself other than bomb bomb bomb. Great to see some backbone.
I think McCain needs to learn that Obama gets more cover time because he is more interesting
McCAin = old man yells at clouds.
McWeasel is nothing more than a tired old man, whining about not being treated fairly by the media and the NY Times. Learn to write an op-ed piece that is NOT FoxNews' concept of fair & balance, and maybe the world will take McWeasel seriously when he parts his mealy-mouth to discredit the next president of the United State.
President Barack Obama
Maybe the NYT is afraid McCain will write something idiotic like.. oh i don't know.. the IRAQ PAKISTAN BORDER?!!!?
I'm impressed with the NY Times and their steadfastness in being balanced. I've seen some comments claiming that this is biased reporting, but you really have to look at the facts.
Obama submitted a piece that gave his stance on Iraq and how to deal with the problem. Did it take a few potshots at McCain? Sure. Of course it did. It was a critique as well as a suggestion.
McCain's article was nothing other than slander. Biased reporting would be allowing that trash to be published. Asking McCain to stop being a baby and write what his plans are isn't bias; it's only fair.