(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.
Interesting...........if we don't like what you have to say, we won't print it.
No bias here!
No worries though as paid readership falls I suspect Wacko Barako will bail them out to keep the media reporting fair.
New York Times basically just called McCain an idiot.
It would be easier for all of us if the NY Times just came out and said they were a paper that supported the Democrat party and left wing political ideology.
This way any aditional loss of readership could be blamed on the Replicans, like everything else.
McCain does not want to clearly out line his position at this time as he does not want his plans, if he has any, to be critique by any one else. He just wants to talk about his own war experiences, smile, and give the impression that he has wisdom. Now McCain states: “victory in Iraq must be based on conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables."
Obama has stated in clear terms that we should have a time line, but always qualified the time line based on the situation as it progresses. Obama inspires my confidence to do what is right in Iraq. He has not changed his position on Iraq, but I am Ok if he does, as long as he makes informed decisions at each critical junction and is always honest with the American people.
I have no idea of what McCain's platform is, unless it's to attack Obama until he concedes. He must have learned that strategy in 'Nam
McBush said Iraq is a success but yet he said there are upcoming Al-Qaeda attacks in Iraq, so how do you measure success?? This guy is confusing himself on the whole thing, and now the GOP and Bush mafia are calling a timetable, time "horizon". These guys are really insane. What American is stupid enough to believe this?
Now McSame is scrambling since Obama set foot in the middle east. After McSame said if was safe to walk around in Baghdad market with a bullet proof vest and helicopters flying over.
Does he really think we are that stupid???
My goodness - the politics, the rhetoric of the war on terror in Iraq. I hope when Obama returns from the Middle East he will tell the American people that despite the FAILED policies of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice, we are winning the war in Iraq, but not because of the Washington politicians; we are winning because of our troops. God bless our troops. It is their resolve, fortitude, stamina, brillance and excellent training that we are winning in Iraq. Our troops were sent to the Middle East without a game plan. They worked out a game plan as the war progressed. This is why America is such a great nation right now. And, we can have an even greater nation with Obama as our President. The ordinary people, not the Washington insiders, are bringing home victory for America. I am very displeased with our nation and its policies, but I so love the American people. Obama has led the way for the people to take back control of this nation. No to the Clintons. No to the Bushs. Yes to the People! Hurry on November. Obama '08
No surprise here. The NY Times is the most biased tabloid in America.
The Times made a good call. McSame's letter was probably almost completely factually false, anyway. Can McSame remember how to write? He's pretty old and haggardly. If McSame wants to respond to Obama's letter by attacking him, let him pay for airtime. Spend all that money, McSame!!!
YES WE WILL TAKE BACK THIS COUNTRY!!!
It wasn't because they couldn't read his longhand letter....really.
They just couldn't get past all the manure left by the Pony Express horse.
He really should take some lessons for the computer and email.
Jesus, I love that liberal rag. Not just the NY Times, but every media outlet – print, TV, internet – and their daily felating of Obama. Obama has carte blanche to do and say whatever. John McCain is held to a different standard. Incredible.
The US and the media better hope that their Golden Boy can lead the country....
LOL, I am glad that they rejected his op-ed. Maybe is he wrote about what he would do instead of attacking attacking attacking. We know that you do not agree, but why?
Here! Here! for the Editor of the NY Times. I am so tired of hearing the candidates complain about what another candidate is or isn't doing. I want to hear what each candidate stands for on their own and then make my own decision. It is so sad to see politicians doing this at the local and national level. Do they really have no respect for our intelligence or is it that they just don't know the answers and are avoiding the subject !
McCain sounds bitter and desperate. I love how the republicans refer to a "time horizon" which is B.S. because they're too prideful to just accept the fate of a "time table". The Bush administration and McCain need to see that more respect is given to those who admit their mistakes and change their paths to a better course.
If I were McCain I would feel slighted, and tell the NY T to go scratch and I would resubmit to another source. The editor liked the obama format more so he requests tha McCain follow obama's lead, not very smart MR editor.
Don't worry John, Sean Hannity will publish it, the whole thing. He wants every American to vote for you, and makes it very clear on his show. So he'll read it on the air, tonight. Just don't expect non Republicans to hear it, we won't because Fox Noise is bias.
Are liberals becoming defenders of freedom of speech only if it mirrors their speech?
If I understand well, the NY suggests to McCain to stop whining and to propose his own proposals, rather than unsubstantiated criticisms???
What is wrong with that??
He should follow this advice ASAP, maybe this could give him some credibility.
Just send it to that hateful Bill Oreily and that nasty Hannity, those two have a hugh hatred for Obama till they can't see straight. LOL I don't watch these idiots but I have seen enough to know they are so bitter I have no idea how they stay on the air. OMG hannity is still talking about rev wright, get a life idiot.
Believe it or not to those crying media bias, the New York Times doesn't have to publish anything that a prominent person rights. If you read their opinion page there are smart, nuanced editorials from the right and the left all the time. So, no, they aren't wrong to demand that if McCain wants to be in this forum he has to discuss things on that level.
There are plenty of outlets for simplistic, right v. left negativity, congrats to the New York Times for trying to demand a deeper discussion of the issues...
McCain doesn't get it–and never will!
Yes, Senator McCain, I would like to hear what your plans are for Iraq. Instead of just criticizing Senator Obama, I would like to hear what you consider a win in Iraq to be, and how long your propose to keep us there. I would seriously like to know what your plans are. Good for the NY Times for not wanting to just run an attack piece on Obama.
Did McCain actually write the piece himself or did his staff... that's what I want to know. I read the piece, it was garbage and provided nothing new. It wasn't even a good rebuttal. McCain keeps talking about supposedly winning in IRAQ and I keep wondering 'Winning' What? When we know McCain's mission, maybe then we could know how it was winnable.
The Times also were within their rights to request details about McCain's plans. Problem is, he doesn't have one.
Obama wrote an article spelling out his positions on Iraq, and Afghanistan. McCain was supposed to do the same, but he instead wrote and article of critical of Obama's positions ,without spelling out his own positions.
Is like if this was a job interview, and you are asked to describe your self. And you say nothing about your self, but talk only of how much better you are than the last person interviewed.