General Discussion

mindwalker_i

(4,407 posts)

18. Not rare enough

Reply to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #15)

Fri Aug 23, 2013, 02:18 PM

Aug 2013

I swear there are people who nit pick every little thing, like saying they don't know the flight a seat number of the 9/11 dudes so they couldn't do anything.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

106 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The New York Times has rather decisively broken with the Obama administration: [View all] friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 OP

good.... mike_c Aug 2013 #1

The editorial content of your thread title is unfounded. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #2

Sort of like most of your posts? Katashi_itto Aug 2013 #3

Meh. Let the 'cogintive infiltrators' post if they feel like it- we're on to them. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #8

+100 Katashi_itto Aug 2013 #14

Lol where is this "cognitive infiltrator" stuff coming from. dkf Aug 2013 #54

Here... winter is coming Aug 2013 #72

Thanks! Found it a bit earlier and I am appalled. dkf Aug 2013 #74

It's so Republican... "no, the problem isn't what we're doing, it's how winter is coming Aug 2013 #75

Rumsfeld diagnosed the "problem" at AbuGhraib was NOT the Torture, bvar22 Aug 2013 #101

First rule of Cognitive Infiltratrator Club: DirkGently Aug 2013 #106

How so? How do you think this will play in the White House? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #5

How do you think the NYTimes was previously joined to the Obama Administration? KittyWampus Aug 2013 #13

:) Isoldeblue Aug 2013 #16

The NYTimes "enthusiastically" endorsed O for President in 2012, THAT's HOW! Divernan Aug 2013 #27

Sorry, still no case made they would no longer endorse him. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #30

Issue was "how they were joined", NOT whether they'd endorse him again! Divernan Aug 2013 #38

I get the NYTimes daily. There have been MULTIPLE issues/editorials where they found fault w/Obama KittyWampus Aug 2013 #50

.. Little Star Aug 2013 #94

The only way to prove it is if he ran again, which he will not. CakeGrrl Aug 2013 #102

Ooh that's gotta Jackpine Radical Aug 2013 #31

It's hard to infiltrate when everyone can see you coming... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #45

I've put most of the cheerleaders on ignore; just left 1 or 2. Divernan Aug 2013 #46

So other DU'ers can see how wrong you are- one of the latest NYTimes Editorials criticizing Obama KittyWampus Aug 2013 #55

You're so upset, you're replying to the wrong post. Divernan Aug 2013 #64

My original post was that the TITLE Of the thread was misleading regarding the NYTimes "breaking" KittyWampus Aug 2013 #66

I replied to your post 13; we're allowed to reply to down thread posts, you know. Divernan Aug 2013 #80

Shame on you..... pocoloco Aug 2013 #99

Too bad I've totally debunked your OP's thread title. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #57

The NYTimes has found fault w/Obama & his Admin on numerous issues. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #52

This is about freedom of the press and prior restraint, not about the Obama administration or the JDPriestly Aug 2013 #65

Your post is a total non sequitor to my very short, simple post about the thread title. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #69

It's spelled "non sequitur". Divernan Aug 2013 #81

This message was self-deleted by its author Tunkamerica Aug 2013 #93

Not surprising. ForgoTheConsequence Aug 2013 #4

care to document "this admistrations (sic) all out attack on journalists"? KittyWampus Aug 2013 #12

It's rare to see such devotion these days... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #15

Not rare enough mindwalker_i Aug 2013 #18

catawompus burnodo Aug 2013 #76

.... ForgoTheConsequence Aug 2013 #20

You are right. Thanks for the correction! I apologize. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #63

. Fearless Aug 2013 #22

BTW. ForgoTheConsequence Aug 2013 #26

Maybe, but you spelled " administration's " incorrectly George II Aug 2013 #51

Thanks professor! ForgoTheConsequence Aug 2013 #67

Zing! Javaman Aug 2013 #70

It was the subject of a post, no period necessary George II Aug 2013 #84

Maybe, but you don't need spaces inside quotes. nt Union Scribe Aug 2013 #88

"Obama�s War on Journalists" (Slate) deurbano Aug 2013 #48

Thanks, I was wrong! KittyWampus Aug 2013 #62

Good. More exposure is definitely better. LuvNewcastle Aug 2013 #6

lol....reported by the stoker the gaurdian...ok uponit7771 Aug 2013 #7

It won't be the first time. The NYT, the Guardian, La Monde, Der Spiegel joined with Wikleaks sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #56

Actually, it's arbitrage of press freedom laws, as it were. Benton D Struckcheon Aug 2013 #60

Yes, but what I am saying is, people were concerned, and articles have been written about how OUR sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #71

Interesting. If we are moving toward some kind of corporate world order... Eleanors38 Aug 2013 #68

Yes, I am actually pleasantly surprised the NYT has come forward to support the Guardian. They sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #73

Oh, because The Guardian is not a credible source. cui bono Aug 2013 #86

:facepalm: NealK Aug 2013 #91

Good, more sunlight on the roaches is valuable. Tierra_y_Libertad Aug 2013 #9

It's about time. The press has been asleep on the watch. Faryn Balyncd Aug 2013 #10

Maybe we will have nice things. Safetykitten Aug 2013 #11

UPDATE: Buzzfeed is confirming this, with more details: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #17

so what! heaven05 Aug 2013 #19

If they've seen the light, and are once again the NY Times that published... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #21

The Times always defends the interests of the establishment starroute Aug 2013 #23

+1. They cooperated with Bush for the same reason. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #25

No, actually it doesn't. It has a history of publishing editiorials across a pretty broad cali Aug 2013 #39

Editorials are a cheap way of scoring points starroute Aug 2013 #78

Astute observations here, IMO. +100. closeupready Aug 2013 #41

When Wikileaks released the diplomatic cables, I checked all the papers involved starroute Aug 2013 #79

The Guardian and Der Spiegel are my daily go-to news sources. Divernan Aug 2013 #82

K&R DeSwiss Aug 2013 #24

That is not news to me, OldEurope Aug 2013 #28

It's totally ironic how Palast, Greenwald, et. al went to the UK & The Guardian originally 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #29

Good! truebluegreen Aug 2013 #32

Like I often say 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #35

Right there with you. truebluegreen Aug 2013 #37

The Guardian is in collusion with the UK government. joshcryer Aug 2013 #92

Good? Google: CIA Operation Mockingbird New York Times AnotherMcIntosh Aug 2013 #33

Indeed. nt msanthrope Aug 2013 #61

I have maintained for some time that this isn't about the Obama Administration. totodeinhere Aug 2013 #34

The sad fact remains, that Obama IS POTUS NOW. 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #42

I hope they don't share the entire Snowden cache with the Times Oilwellian Aug 2013 #36

No they won't. Greenwald clarified "only to a limited class of Snowden documents, not all" Catherina Aug 2013 #95

This is wonderful, but kinda surprises me, I would have expected the Washington Post quinnox Aug 2013 #40

Historically one of the best media outlets, they compromised closeupready Aug 2013 #43

HUGE K & R !!! WillyT Aug 2013 #44

I wonder if the New York Times knows about this? George II Aug 2013 #47

Buzzfeed has more details friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #77

Almost 24 hours later, still no word from the NY Times? Or have I missed it? George II Aug 2013 #98

Amazing the transition LordGlenconner Aug 2013 #49

Does this mean Maureen Dowd is going to stop lionizing Obama? BeyondGeography Aug 2013 #53

Wouldn't that rather depend Kelvin Mace Aug 2013 #58

The news media, the watchdog of our liberty, has a duty to bark loudly ... spin Aug 2013 #59

I do wish they'd bark as loudly when there's a Republican in charge. snot Aug 2013 #100

If they had we might not have got mired in Iraq. (n/t) spin Aug 2013 #105

You make it sound like they'd been dating for years Yo_Mama Aug 2013 #83

It will be interesting to see which NYT reporters are going to be completely villified now. cui bono Aug 2013 #85

An interesting development blackspade Aug 2013 #87

K&R! Phlem Aug 2013 #89

The NYT, not the sharpest tool in the box, that's for sure. blkmusclmachine Aug 2013 #90

LOL treestar Aug 2013 #96

Lockstep colbertforpresident Aug 2013 #97

I don't feel any great loyalty to either one, so if they don't play well together, whatevs. Pterodactyl Aug 2013 #103

I guess NYT will be up for sale soon. gulliver Aug 2013 #104