July 21st, 2008
03:20 PM ET
14 years ago

New York Times rejects McCain essay

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/07/21/art.nytimes.ap.jpg caption="The New York Times rejected an editorial written by John McCain."]

(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.

Full story

soundoff (266 Responses)
  1. Peachy Keen

    Why are some people so surprised that the NYT or any other paper just might endorse Obama. Historically, all papers, at one time or another, will endorse a candidate. It has nothing to do with journalism. It's just the way it is and I'm sure, very soon, the NYT will come out with their endorsment of Obama. And as far as I'm concerned, that is wonderful.

    July 21, 2008 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  2. lawdog

    Let's see....the New York Times.....has Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson offered anything new to the New York times in the last 20 years......why should the NYT start enforcing a "editorial" guideline now?

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  3. WOW - Cedar Hill, TX

    Thanks NYTimes for seeing McCain for who he really is. A copy-cat...

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  4. trudi

    The "Times" is so notoriously biased it is disgraceful.......
    It is hard to believe any political rhetoric that comes out of it.
    Never do we get both sides from it. Really disappointing.

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  5. Vinny Fairfield, Ct

    It's amazing how many people who posted here are happy that the NYT refused McCain's op-ed. They feel that only Obama's comments are worthy. Wow! Isn't that what's done in communist countries like Cuba and China, and dictatorships like Venezuela, Zimbawe? Those posters are all for "free speech" as long as it's theirs! What a bunch of hypocritical morons! As for the NYT, it's par for the course; that "newspaper" lost all its credibility a long time ago! (Even see their stock worth and readership numbers? Pathetic!)

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  6. Jeffrey

    After reading McCain's rejected piece, I can see all too well why he's achieved the nickname McSame. Only the NeoCons and warmongers like McCain continue to believe that the Iraq war can be "won" in the same sense that previous wars have been won. The Iraq war was lost the moment it started because it was a preemptive invasion. There is no way to reverse world opinion of America's suddenly naked imperialism by destroying Iraq through violence. Just for once, I'd like to see McCain or anyone prove that the terrorism has been weakened by the Iraq war. Of course, this proof will never come. You can defeat a nation or an army with war. You cannot defeat a method-terrorism-through war. It's impossible, by definition. Anyone who mocks the idea of exploring the root causes of terrorism like McCain lives with their head in the sand. Obama appears, at least, willing to consider that there may have been triggers caused by America's international policies that have read to the rise of terrorism.

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  7. Change NOW

    could mccain just cut and past bush's plans, because they are identical???

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  8. Julie

    Good for the NYT's.

    What exactly is Mccains strategy other than just shooting down everything Obama says? Since he's behind, you'd think he'd focus on his stance on the issues. I lose respect for mccain on a daily basis. I didn't think the US could do worse than bush, but I see the potential of doing so with Mccain.

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  9. Ed, Santa Fe NM

    so McBush flunked his written test??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  10. Worst...Resume...Ever....

    The NY Times is the front for the vast left wing conspiracy.

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  11. Love My USA

    I am a Dem. But I will not even consider working or voting for BO. Stop blaming the Repub. for what the Dem haven't done in the past two years they have been in control. BO is not cabable of leading this country.. God Bless America and all of our troops if BO becomes President. He is a sheep in wolves clothing.....

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  12. Ryan, New York, NY

    Why are people outraged that the NY Times isn't publishing every Op-Ed that it receives? The Times has repeatedly published tons of op-eds thoughout this election season from right leaning sources that often disagree with its left-leaning point of view. If it didn't meet their criteria, so be it. It's the op-ed section, not the news portion, anyhow.

    Additionally, this story will probably cause the op-ed to get more readers than if it'd been accepted and printed by the Times as is. I'm sure that the McCain campaign has already spread it all around and that other right-leaning publications will be publishing it to show "how fair they can be" compared with the Times.

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  13. JR Shells

    Oh wow... I just read the Op-ed. At first, I was going to blast the Times but now I understand. Why would they print an op-ed that merely attacks but does not elucidate? McCain needs better campaign handlers.

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  14. wthwah

    So basically the New York Times is saying you can have your own opinion, as long as it is theirs.

    I have lost all respect for the NYT, I think they are biased, have an agenda, and should be called the Obama Press Corps.

    I happen to be an Obama supporter, but have been rethinking this as I find he is being made into a messiah-like figure by the media, and that scares me. Did anyone see the cover of Time? He looks like he was superimposed over the image of Jesus.

    I will never buy or read a NYT owned product. I hope all their advertisers bail out too.

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  15. Tim

    Furthermore it is completely inappropriate for McCain to be given a soapbox for Iraq considering that:

    1. Today on Good Morning America he said that Iraq and Pakistan share a border.

    2. At a fundraiser McCain leaked details of Obama's Iraq trip. Here are the militaries guidelines:

    "Please strongly discourage Congressional offices from issuing press releases prior to their trips which mention their intent to travel to the AOR and/or the dates of that travel or their scheduled meetings. Such releases are a serious compromise to OPSEC."

    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  16. al






    July 21, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11