HA! HA! HA! NYT Rejects McCain Editorial Rebutting Obama's Previous Article

[berni_mccoy]

:rofl:

McCain is about to blow his TOP!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/21/new-york-times-rejects-mccain-editorial/

(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 (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/21/mccain.op.ed/index.html)

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.”

LOLOL! Essentially: "McCain, talk about your plan or shut up" :rofl:

McCain is looking more desperate by the minute.

[JimGinPA]

1. It Was Also Written On A Computer...

So they also probably had doubts about it's originality.

[Colobo]

2. Hahahahahahaha! Take that, McShit!

[thereismore]

3. Actually he seems to be saying "Sen. MC what is your own plan?" nt

:applause:

[MikeE]

4. Plan?! You mean I need a plan?

You mean I can't just copy his paper and then talk shit about him? :dunce:

[Cha]

18. Zactly..that's all they ever do.

Pleasantly Surprised the NYT has a standard for mccain.

[ErinBerin84]

5. heh, from Wonkette.

"Stylish wordsmith Barack Obama had an op-ed in the New York Times last week, which is kind of a big deal. He could be the next David Brooks or Bill Kristol or even Maureen Dowd! So then Grampa Walnuts McCain was all, “Argghhh, I should get a column in the New York Times, I was tortured,” so the Times is all, “Okay, submit one, we guess?”

According to Drudge or where-ever he got this from, Op-Ed editor David Shipley cold rejected McCain’s submission because, instead of being an op-ed for the NYT, was just some rehashed campaign talking points against Obama."



http://wonkette.com/401287/nyt-to-mccain-your-writing-sucks-too#more-401287

[dsomuah]

6. LMAO!! @ I would be pleased to look at another draft. That's hillarious.

[applegrove]

7. LOL. Who has substance? Obama.

[BuyingThyme]

8. Sorry, but if you want us to print that crap, you'll have to pay the regular rate.

[berni_mccoy]

9. Nah, they just expect a level of Intelligence that McCain doesn't have.

[Quixote1818]

10. This is funny! It's like he got scolded by his English teacher for not following

the lesson plan. FAIL!!!

[polichick]

11. Maybe his head will finally EXPLODE! k&r

[berni_mccoy]

12. I know his Temper Did today! LOL He held a presser WHINING About it.

He was getting P.Oed in a MAJOR WAY.

[polichick]

13. Poor widdle Johnny! :)

[Imagevision]

14. haha! screw you Rove...!

[berni_mccoy]

20. Something tells me McCain is getting no help from Rove...

[NewJeffCT]

15. I saw a headline on CNN as I walked by that asked

Is it evidence of media bias against McCain that his NY Times op-ed was rejected?

[brindis_desala]

16. The NYTimes is doing Obama no favors with this.

They publish "I've always been wrong" Kristol for goodness' sakes. Just one more phony "Liberal bias" talking point for the noise machine.

[berni_mccoy]

17. Normally, I would agree... but this just makes McCain look 1) Stupid and 2) Whiny

I see no positive upside for them.

They've been crying LIBRUL MEEDIA for some time now and they've already been saying it this campaign. There is nothing new to this Whining Point.

[samsingh]

19. he's being asked to copy Obama because mccains own stuff

is useless.

:rofl:

[nc4bo]

21. Lovely pigpicking by Jason Linkins, HuffPo.

Bring a napkin or 2.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/21/inew-york-timesi-spares-m_n_114117.html

[stevedeshazer]

22. Thanks for that link, it was delicious. DUer's should really enjoy it.

Snips from McGramps failed op-ed are there too, in all their glory.

My favorite is this:

From Grampa McRejected's proposed op-ed piece:

Senator Obama is also misleading on the Iraqi military's readiness. The Iraqi Army will be equipped and trained by the middle of next year, but this does not, as Senator Obama suggests, mean that they will then be ready to secure their country without a good deal of help. The Iraqi Air Force, for one, still lags behind, and no modern army can operate without air cover. The Iraqis are also still learning how to conduct planning, logistics, command and control, communications, and other complicated functions needed to support frontline troops.

Jason Linkin responds:

Funny thing. You go to war because you have to stop a terrorist mastermind's powerful military from unleashing their awesome arsenal of diabolical weapons of mass destruction, and you end up staying at war because the military you defeated is no longer good for anything but a few laughs. Nothing fails like success, I guess.

Again, from the McCain piece:

No one favors a permanent U.S. presence, as Senator Obama charges. A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five "surge" brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves. As we draw down in Iraq, we can beef up our presence on other battlefields, such as Afghanistan, without fear of leaving a failed state behind. I have said that I expect to welcome home most of our troops from Iraq by the end of my first term in office, in 2013.

Linkins responds:

You see, when I read McCain saying things like, "A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five 'surge' brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves. As we draw down in Iraq, we can beef up our presence on other battlefields, such as Afghanistan, without fear of leaving a failed state behind." I think: Yes, that is Barack Obama's plan.

But McCain's endorsement of the Obama Doctrine is bookended by two inane statements. In the first place, the United States favors a permanent U.S. presence. We are, at this moment, spending many a taxpayer dollar building "enduring" bases. One such base, located on the banks of the Tigris, will be as large as Vatican City. If McCain doesn't know this, then one can hardly take him for the spending hawk he claims to be.

more at nc4bo link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/21/inew-york-timesi-spares-m_n_114117.html