Doesn't this prove the total bias of the NY Times rag? Why would they call a general in the army a Betrayer? Are they just mad because Petraeus isn't a surrender monkey like them?
2007-09-13 05:28:21 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09132007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/democrats_should_condemn_moveo.htm?page=0
About the discount, which is well-known.
http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=359606
2007-09-13 05:40:36 · update #1
Henry, have a good helping of steamed crow!
2007-09-13 05:41:30 · update #2
wyldfyr, enjoy your crow, too.
2007-09-13 05:43:10 · update #3
The New York Slimes should be at the grocery store checkout with the rest of the lib propaganda and conspiracy theory tabloids
2007-09-13 05:34:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
Link?
2007-09-13 12:33:51 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Maybe because they agree with Admiral Fallon, who called General Petraeus an "A** kissing little chickens**t?"
I don't remember any of you Bush lovers crying when Gen. Casey was pushed out to make way for this neocon stooge.
2007-09-13 12:39:43 · answer #3 · answered by Jason 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
well i don't see how you could possibly know that there was any discount involved.
but if they did, it may be because it was stories in the times that helped pimp the lies that led to the quagmire in iraq.
the radical right love to slander the times, but without them, the iraq quagmire and all of those corporate contracts that seem to be what the war is increasingly about, would never have been possible.
2007-09-13 12:38:41 · answer #4 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
How can a newspaper be a 'surrender monkey'?
The NYTimes routinely offers discounts to people who place ads within their papers. Also, if the newspaper had denied moveon.org to advertise would they not be censoring them? Isn't disallowing freedom of speech against the Constitution?
2007-09-13 12:35:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Terrorist Times is a private entity and has say on the contracting of advertisements.
That they gave Soros a discount can only show their predilection.
2007-09-13 12:39:13 · answer #6 · answered by illiberal Illuminati 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Someone needed a link so here is one from a New York Post article...You have to be blind or so full of hate for your country NOT to see the media bias in not just the NY times, but also ALL the major news sources. They truly are traitors to our country and the only way to stop them is to STOP BUYING THEIR PAPERS!!!!.....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1895928/posts
2007-09-13 12:40:34 · answer #7 · answered by greatrightwingconspiritor 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Can you provide a source for this information? Or did you just pull it out of your *ss?
2007-09-13 12:41:04 · answer #8 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course they did. I can see that by the evidence you so generously provide here in your post (NOT). Anyone who believes that listen up! I have a pretty orange bridge for sale. I can give it to you cheap. It spans the mouth to San Francisco Bay.
(Stop listening to Rush and that crowd, good grief!)
2007-09-13 12:37:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
That is the New York Slime and most reasonable people know that they are total liberals. They actually believe that garbage that MoveOn.org put in that ad. However they could not say those things themselves so they gave the corrupt MoveOn.org the great deal to say it for them.
2007-09-13 12:35:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋