Here is New York Times Opinion Page Editor David Shipley's full e-mail to the McCain campaign detailing why the paper rejected the Arizona senator's essay.
Read the e-mail after the jump
Dear Mr. Goldfarb,
Thank you for sending me Senator McCain's essay.
I'd be very eager to publish the Senator on the Op-Ed page.
However, I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently
I'd be pleased, though, to look at another draft.
Let me suggest an approach.
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. To that end, the article would have to articulate,
in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq. It would
also have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory - with troops
levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate. And
it would need to describe the Senator's Afghanistan strategy, spelling out
how it meshes with his Iraq plan.
I am going to be out of the office next week. If you decide to re-work the
draft, please be in touch with (Redacted)
Again, thank you for taking the time to send me the Senator's draft. I
really hope we can find a way to bring this to a happy resolution.
Can you imagine the words that came out of McCain's mouth when he got his rejection notice? A fly on the wall probably wouldn't have survived :-)
Everyone calling the NY Times out on their "bias" should get over it. You're whining just like McCain's piece evidentially did.
Bias? In the primaries the Times endorsed McCain for President and did not endorse Obama.
Bias? Try reading Bill Kristol or David Brooks' regular op-ed columns in the Times and let me know how those fit into a "vast left wing media conspiracy."
Bunch of wimps and whiners and cowards the Republicans are.
McCain cannot articulate his plan. All he can do is attack the other's plans. So how will anything get accomplished under McCain? He is not a solutions canidate, he is an attack and finger pointer canidate with no real solutions.
McCain wanted to go to war with Iraq since 1998 and pushed for the Bush war all along and he also helped push the faulty intelligence that got us into this mess. Now all he talks about is the surge. Look it up.
What I don't get is why McCain will not forward his own ideas and will talk about Obama this Obama that. Listen to Obama speak and you will hear his ideas and his goals and his positions. He leaves us to make the conclusions and will mention McCain sparingly! The McCane campaign should learn.
Capt. Smash, Salt Lake City, Utah
I agree with you 100%. All I see from McCain isn't policy but just criticism of Obama. For all of those people who would complain that Obama has no details and just gives words, please look very closely at McCain. He doesn't offer anything more than, "people know me", "I know how to win wars" and " I have been there eight times I know these people". I agree with the editor, don't just send an op-ed cricitizing send something that has your own ideas and thoughts of how to win. Anyone can criticize but do you have a plan and I don't see any plans or details in McCain in either his security policy or energy or economically as well. Mr. McCain we need some more meat all you are doing is telling us why Obama is wrong.
McCain made a lot of D's in school – he's used to critiques like this...
TEXAS...WHAT facts did McCain make note of??? Please do tell. If you mean that won the war one, thats still up for debate. He sounds more like an angry HRC supporter than the GOP PRESUMED pres. candidate.
I'm a Democrat (and undecided as far as November goes). Along with having McCain articulate, in concrete terms, his definition of victory in Iraq, I'd also like to have Obama articulate, in concrete terms, what exactly it would mean for our future national security to simply give up in Iraq.
Maybe McCain doesn't remember How to write an Essay. So what is his staff for?
The New York Times is truly the Democrats Party subdivision of 'PRAVDA'....and they don't hide it...
I'm a Barack Obama supporter through and through, but even I found that email to Sen. McCain a little condescending. You don't tell one candidate to follow the "example" of his competitor. That's like telling Sen. McCaign to drop out of the race already!
Having said that, the McCain campaign got what they deserved for presenting mere attacks instead of trying to contrast themselves from Sen. Obama's plans.
The McCaign campaign has already accused the NYT of being a biased liberal publication anyway so, why do they need to copycat Obama with their own lettter to NYT!
Because we starved Afghanistan of troops while focusing on Iraq, 9 servicemen died in a brazen attack by Taliban and al Qeda forces. Where was John McCain’s much vaunted “”foreign policy experience” on that? I know where Obama’s views came down. He’s been arguing for more US troops in Afghanistan for more than a year now …
Hey John, can you make the same claim?
If McCain wants to get his view out, tell him too bad. Go to the Post, or just go home.
All McCain was asked to do is...stop attacking and put pen to paper. Oh I forgot...he is a Republican.
This is no lie or bull. I am a psychic. I have already seen the future. The future President of the United States will be Barack Obama – not John McCain. I have seen the future for the next 5-60 years as well as having glimpsed into the future 735,000 into the future.
I repeat. The next President of the United States of America is Barack Obama – not John McCain. Plan accordingly.
Good for the Times, go peddle your schlock to the New Yorker.
The Surge has solved nothing in Iraq, even the Bush appointed Puppet, Al-Maliki, wants the US out. Now the liars Bush/McCain are trying to get us to believe the surge worked, spare me!!
Just another LIE to redirect the troops to Afghanistan where we should have been in the first place. Too bad it had taken 6 years and four thousand lives to come to the conclusion that we had no reason to invade and occupy Iraq.
Can A Mccain Supporter answers this: What were we fighting for in Iraq, what will we win?
Bryant Gumbel was one of the best interviewers ever. He'd have never let these candidates get away with fillibuster answers to questions.
McCain's next op-ed: Why those kids should get off his lawn.
To John McCain,
Are you smarter than a 5th grader?
I could personally title the NYT refusal of McCain's article as......
"Why I no longer read or believe anything political from the New York Times, simply because their Far Left bias is so glaringly obvious there is no objectivity whatsoever left in their reporting. They are simply a mas sive media outlet of free advertising for the Far Left. Ditto the Washington Post."
It's also why I no longer watch CNN or any of the network newscasters. Same thing.
Formerly for Hillary, now for McCain!
Former lifelong Democrat, now brand-new Republican.
Julien in France,
I can forgive your mistaken views because you're french, so your irrelevance is completely understandable.
Mark in PDX.
The New York Times endorsed Hillary, not Obama. Most of your facts are also absurd.
What really hurts him in this article is that he consistenly is mentions Obama's "Plan in Iraq" and the irony is that he is helping Obama by solidifying that at least Obama has a plan and has a clear path to get there where as McCain HAS NO PLAN! He also takes a shot at the Bush administration by saying "I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the "Mission Accomplished" banner prematurely."
McCain, dude get a plan, detail a plan, tell us what victory and success is, tell us details not just bashing the other guy.
Don't you just love it..."the osama piece just worked for me...." here's a clue Shipley--you work for Obama and the Democrat party, keep patting yourself on the back to feel important.
Brian from NYC July 21st, 2008 4:06 pm ET
Hey just another example of affirmative action in the long list of affirmative action victories for Barack Hussein Obama. First getting into college, then Harvard Law, then the law review, now affirmative action on the political field. NY Times feels the need to defend obama, not print opposing views, would that make Barack look wrong? There is no way we can question Obama's intelligence on the issue that would be disrespectful, maybe hurt his feelings
This may be one of the most racist, intellectually dishonest, sensationalist comments I have ever read in response to a political article.
I could respond in great length as to why that comment is completely insane; I could also just brush off your comment as irrelevant. But it's comments like this and people like you that perpetuate the stereotype that Obama's rise to political power has been a result of charity instead of hard work and sacrifice. Comments like yours belong in the same group of the uninformed that also believe that Obama is a muslim and a terrorist.
Do some research on the subject. You may be surprised that Obama's life has been full of dedication, perseverance, and honest work, just like everyone else irregardless of skin color or religion.
You should be ashamed.