The problem with what the Times did was that it asked McCain to actually explain his own plan in detail, rather than just attack Obama's plan using random buzz-words like "victory!" and "surrender!"

Has the NYTimes no shame?

http://strategy08.wordpress.com

As I said in another thread, offering no new ideas and attacking Obama is all McCain has!

The NYT knows that it is completely unfair to try to make a GOP candidate define the terms he uses in debate. Truthiness is all they have.

McCain: For the last time, GET OFF MY LAWN!

McCain is upset bc it takes a long time to write an op-ed in a medium with which he is comfortable- hieroglyphics.

The original Op-Ed piece, printed on Drudge, was a diatribe against Obama that would have made McCain sound a teeny tiny bit hysterical...his campaign should be glad they get a chance to clean it up, and have the Times publish it, because it's going to get a lot more attention after this.

Or maybe not. More pictures of McCain riding around in the golf cart with GB Senior and the "Property of #41 Hands Off!!!" sign might just distract everyone...

I just re-read Obama's op-ed, which was titled, "My Plan for Iraq". And, wonder or wonders, he actually uses most of the space to explain - his plan for Iraq! Heck, he even squeezes in some stuff about Afghanistan!

Yes, it included a few jabs at McCain and Bush, but only to setup what he would do differently. McCain's plan consists of a word - victory. No description of how we're going to get there. In fact, he doesn't even define victory.

It's actually kind of sad when you compare and contrast the two - can McCain become anymore pathetic? Perhaps the Times should have published the piece as-is and titled is, "My Attack Piece on Obama".

One more thing. Does this stuff - ie, leaking it to Drudge and then saying they might just go ahead an publish it in the NY Post instead - really work on anybody but the base? I know folks on the far right hate the NYT. And we folks here on the far to not-so-far left also have our problems with the paper. But I think most people who aren't political junkies just see it as a big circulation newspaper with a long and respected history.

McCain seems desperate and reeling. Is it because no one is listening to him or is this an example of what his presidency will look like, "desperate and reeling" from every opposition in policy.

The democratic congress will not, might be worse, help ease his nerves. Also, it will be a stronger congress with disgruntle democrats with out an agreement to cause trouble.

It would be fun to see the oversight committees kick it into high gear regardless of the president. This Attorney/Siegleman fiasco has to come to fruition. Valerie Plame, military contracts, and the truth about Iraq need no agreements in place to impede the progress in the new congress and presidential term.

Also, private overseas banking will be a big one next year. We might see a few names out of the 19,000 Americans that we might recognize. This will be a fun one and probably needs to be stepped up for the fall elections. Might be some revelation in on republican campaign financing and its contributors, stay tuned.

... And in conclusion my plan will lead to victory. And that is a good thing because victory is good.

-- Johnny McCain's 7th grade essay titled "How I Would Win Victory"

The NYT should have asked both camps for their pieces at the same time and printed them on the same day.

This is all an attempt to make this election a referendum on Obama and then they cry because Obama gets more press coverage. If McCain put out ideas of their own other than attack after attack then there might be something to cover. Obama does get move coverage, but he also faces a lot more critical coverage whereas all McCain coverage is virtually fluff pieces.

I support the idea of McCain getting more MSM coverage if it means they'll also cover him more critically. The MSM is doing McCain a favor by not covering him because then he'd expose himself as the bumbling fool he is. Be careful what you wish for McCain Camp.

If Obama was complaining about the critical coverage discrepancy the GOP would be riled up calling him a "whiner", among other names. It is curious that these complaints surface during Obama's overseas visits because Camp McCain wants to try and get the media to limit coverage and downplay the Obama story right now more than ever.

Good for the NYT. If McCain wants to run his attack ad for free, let him go to the NY Post.

It was obvious in 2002 when they started throwing about pretext after pretext that the McBush War Party NEVER had a plan to leave Iraq.

Then as now, their's was a plan to stay

100 years even

At first, I thought the McCain campaign was just dumb, but it was actually a pretty clever plan if you think about it. The campaign writes this op-ed/attack ad and submit it to the Times. Of course, it's going to be rejected. But, instead of simply changing it, they make a big, public, stink of the fact that it was rejected, and they release the original text on the web. This serves two purposes: the campaign gets to rant about how unfair the obviously biased liberal media is toward Obama (and outrage the right in the process). They also get the text out there on the network where it gets more - and free - press then an acceptable op-ed piece would ever get.

Two birds, one stone. Sad, but very clever.

this crap is yet another example of the corporate media bending over backwards to protect Senator Wackadoo from himself.

The single biggest gift that can be given to McCain is to fail to put on display the true depth of human refuse that the once proud member of the Keating Five has been reduced into.

NYT STOP PROTECTING MCCAIN!