this editorial in today's NY Times shows what a sad group of candidates the GOP has assembled. Watch the conservative responses to this. None will be able to refute the facts of the editorial. They'll just cite the source as the Times and call it another example of the bias of the liberal media.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/op...1.html?_r=1&hp

It's getting harder to find facts on the NY Time Editorial/Opinion Pages and it's not too hard to find opinions on the NY Times news pages.

Reminds me of Mark Twain who wrote...
"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please."

Please, actor. The NY Times is a well known promoter of the liberal/progressive cause and liberal/progressive political candidates in it's opinion pages particularly. Your link is specifically from their opinion page and is just that, their opinion. You don't need me to tell you what I think they can do with their opinion.

I reject their stupid and hateful opinion of the Republican electorate, and laugh at their caricature depictions of the people who are vying for the Republican nomination.

This editorial opinion piece can only entertain their disciples.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Please, actor. The NY Times is a well known promoter of the liberal/progressive cause and liberal/progressive political candidates in it's opinion pages particularly. Your link is specifically from their opinion page and is just that, their opinion. You don't need me to tell you what I think they can do with their opinion.

I reject their stupid and hateful opinion of the Republican electorate, and laugh at their caricature depictions of the people who are vying for the Republican nomination.

This editorial opinion piece can only entertain their disciples.

my point.

Actor, as you predicted, the conservatives have just labled this as junk reporting by the liberal press. Right wingnuts do not even bother to check for the truth in it.

Personally, I liked it a lot. Gingrich wants to have a "loyalty oath"? Bachman couldn't find anyway to create jobs except to get rid of the EPA (doesn't that lose jobs for those employees?), and Santorum actually said that wealth will trickle down? Total losers - all of them.

The current field of Republican contenders is a very good base for jokes for the late night comedians. See, they do have a purpose!

This column is purely for people who did not actually watch the debate, and who refuse to do so because their minds are completely closed to other ideas and thinking.

The arrogance of this "erudite" NYT editorial staff is doing nothing more than promoting ignorance and laziness--ignorance in the form encouraging readers to rely on this biased pile of mockery, instead of doing a little bit of easy homework by simply watching all or parts of this debate in video segments posted online.

In this day and age of internet, radio, and satellite tv/radio, it is pure laziness to consider yourself "informed" after reading only a column like this from a notoriously biased publisher of "news".

This is irresponsible, to encourage the public to consider itself "informed" about these candidates, providing drivel like this, when readers can and should easily inform themselves by actually WATCHING the debate REGARDLESS of your Democrat or Republican leanings!

Here is one clip of 7 minutes from the debate, on immigration. Warning: you might learn something about these candidates that the arrogant NYT purposely withheld from its column

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH7ERymYRVo&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

Since the youtube link I posted above is not working, here is a link to the "channel" where it is posted.

http://www.youtube.com/user/immreport

Well, I just wasted 7 minutes of my time listening to the video clip of those sorry individuals who are the hopes and dreams of the Republicans.

They were asked direct questions regarding immigration. Not one of them answered the direct question but went off on their own prepared responses to something remotely similar to the question.

Ron Paul is totally out his element (as well as out of his mind) when trying to give a coherent answer. Ricky Santorum did not even try to answer the question. Newt only grazed the question and finally said there is no answer.

Bachman was not in on this question but I am sure she would have had some stock answer her advisors wrote for her that brushed on immigration.

None of these people were impressive. To my conservative friends, Richie, Hancie, and iloveTV, I can only say Vote Democrat.

Originally Posted by Tbugs

Well, I just wasted 7 minutes of my time listening to the video clip of those sorry individuals who are the hopes and dreams of the Republicans.

They were asked direct questions regarding immigration. Not one of them answered the direct question but went off on their own prepared responses to something remotely similar to the question.

Ron Paul is totally out his element (as well as out of his mind) when trying to give a coherent answer. Ricky Santorum did not even try to answer the question. Newt only grazed the question and finally said there is no answer.

Bachman was not in on this question but I am sure she would have had some stock answer her advisors wrote for her that brushed on immigration.

None of these people were impressive. To my conservative friends, Richie, Hancie, and iloveTV, I can only say Vote Democrat.

Sorry, some of us are willing to keep doing some homework and then coming to a tentative conclusion. Lots of things can happen in 17 months, and some of us are willing to change course based on what we have the ambition to study and learn.

To ilovetv - You asked people to watch the video on the candidates' responses to questions on immigration and we might learn something about the candidates. I did that and then I posted my findngs. You did not express any of your viewpoints on what you thought of their non-answers.

Please do so - and tell us who you thought gave the answers to the direct questions and why you think their answer to the direct question posed to them was the right answer. Thank you.

Maybe they should all have had teleprompters ready.

The Times, along with most daily newspapers, continues to lose circulation and importance - not to mention money. The sole exception among major papers is The Wall Street Journal. I noted in another post that I continue to read the journal because of its objective coverage. Apparently I am not the only one who feels this way:

http://www.theawl.com/2009/10/a-grap...st-two-decades

For those of you who are interested, the times continues to lose circulation, having lost an additional 6% in the last year. Unless people can believe what a paper writes, there is no reason for subscribing.

BBQMan,

You definitely got a good head on your shoulders. The Wall Street Journal is an excellent newspaper.

Hancie -
... or had crib notes scribbled on their hands.

Originally Posted by actor

my point.

You don't get to set up the biased and hateful editorial opinion of the NY Times towards Republicans as some kind of national barometer of truth. It was merely their biased opinion and I get to disagree with their opinion, and in fact, damn well should.

Your promotion of this lousy opinion piece and your impertinence in expecting me to be in awe of their journalistic wisdom and respond in defense of their false premises is ludicrous.

Vote for Obama again and we all will we in a socialist society and the Government will run all our lives. Good thinking......................