Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How does this get published? (calling out bogus NYT op-ed claiming Obama lacks specifics)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-11-08 04:41 PM
Original message
How does this get published? (calling out bogus NYT op-ed claiming Obama lacks specifics)
Edited on Thu Sep-11-08 04:43 PM by ProSense

How does this get published?

Posted by Max Bergmann

The New York Times ran an oped today by two Republicans Philip Bobbitt and John Danforth that supposedly makes a bipartisan call for the presidential candidates to answer 12 foreign policy questions. They write:

Yet with respect to national security, neither campaign has articulated the fundamental points of view that will allow people to make an informed choice in November.

Excuse me? NEITHER campaign? Umm... Go to his website http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/ and READ! He has pages and pages of policy positions that almost fully answer each of the conservatively framed questions the authors put forth. It is not surprising that two conservatives would not take the time to actually do some research and preparation before writing. It is however surprising that the preeminent paper in the United States would allow itself to be used to perpetuate the lie that Obama has no policy specifics. Just to push the point home a bit further this at the bottom of his foreign policy page:

For More Information about Barack's Plan

Read the Speech and Learn More About Barack Obama’s Plan on Iraq and Iran
Read the Speech on Nuclear Weapons and Diplomacy
Read the Speech on Counter-Terrorism Strategy | Read the Plan
Read the Speech on Restoring American Leadership
Read the Speech on Latin America and the Caribbean | Read the Plan
Read Obama’s Plan for a 21st Century Military
Barack Obama’s Agenda for a Stronger Partnership with Europe
Read Barack Obama’s Plan to Actively Engage China
Barack Obama’s Strategy to Promote Global Development and Diplomacy


But if you go to the equivalent McCain's website you will find few answers to any of the authors questions. Why? Because John McCain has laid out very few foreign policy specifics throughout this campaign. We still don't know what he means by "victory" in Iraq. He has laid out no specific plan or strategy for achieving this undefined "victory." He has almost no specific proposals on Afghanistan or terrorism (he did follow Obama's lead and call for more troops in Afghanistan yet he never said where they would come from). Yet what we do know about the few positions John McCain has taken on foreign policy - refusing diplomatic engagement with Iran and North Korea and staying indefinitely in Iraq - make him even more extreme than George Bush.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-11-08 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. No comment? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ogneopasno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-11-08 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'll tell ya.
The understaffed opinion section is running as fast as it can to keep itself together. You figure that every day you're going to have to have Side A and Side B, and whatever fills those slots, you're going to take -- if the slots are there, and the page hasn't been pulled, because lack of advertising has dictated a smaller section. There's no time for fact checking, and few copy editors to do so (layoffs again!), so you scan it for libel, run it through the spell-check, and call it good, figuring that if you've got something wrong you'll get letters to the editor to correct it, which you'll run and no one will read, because whose mind is changed by a LTTE anymore? Then go hustle off to the staff meeting to hear about more falling revenues and then you go home and see how the "MSM" is considered lower than pond scum, and you drink yourself to sleep.

Oh. Oh, sorry. At least, that's how it was at the paper where I worked. Wasn't the NYT, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC