... winner since Rush and OReilly put so much pressure on the editors to at least mention this brave soldier somewhere in their paper?
Is it traumatic for the editors to have to print the article?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/us/22medal.html?em&ex=1193198400&en=539cfc9168609d6a&ei=5087%0A
2007-10-22 04:21:30 · 13 answers · asked by junglejoe 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think they would be laughing if they thought actions by Rush and/or O'Reilly are believed to have pressured them into doing anything - that is funny.
Good Luck!!!
2007-10-22 04:27:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
Huh?
Rush & O'Reilly have got nothing to do with the newsworthiness of the Congressional Medal of Honor.
The New York Times has an article in today's paper, on the day the Medal is being awarded.
What I wonder about is this: "Mr. Bush approved Lieutenant Murphy’s nomination for the medal on Oct. 11, more than two years after his commanders recommended him for an award to recognize his actions in battle."
2007-10-22 11:47:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Funny, YOU cant even mention this guy by name. Do you agree with the New York Times?
And where is Fox Noise's story about this fellow? And you believe Limbaugh and O'Reilly somehow MADE the NYT write this story when the story is happening TODAY? Do Rush and Bill have crystal balls?
I saw nothing in this article to make me think the NYT had any biased against this soldier or any other. They refer to him as "A Protector", "a Hero", describe him as "bold", frankly I see not ONE descriptor in your link story which would lead an unbiased person to think the NYT had any "pains" at all about publishing this wonderful article about a TRUE Patriot and Hero in Afghanistan.
What I find so reprehensible is also found in your link. After 5 years in Afghanistan and 4 in Iraq, this is the FIRST and only Congressional Medal of Honor winner from either conflict and it is a posthumous medal at that.
And this is the CONGRESSIONAL Medal of Honor. It was ratified for award by the DEMOCRAT Congress, something the previous Republican held Congress was apparently too busy to do.
i'm not saying we should be handing them out left and right: The CMH is the nation's highest tribute to its warriors. But it takes a warrior to recognize a warrior and the Republican party just doesn't breed them.
Case in point, how many rich Republicans support the troops so strongly they have quit their jobs, gone to the gym to get in shape and enlisted in the service? I mean enlisted AFTER the US invaded Iraq, not soldiers who joined for the college money and got "Stop-Lossed" into Iraq for years?
I can think of one, but he was killed pretty quickly by friendly fire. Rush and Bill don't talk about THIS guy either, but I will, since he came from Arizona: Pat Tillman.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4815441
2007-10-22 11:39:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
How many times are you going to ask this boring question? Until you get the responses you want? Isn't that sort of the way you're interpreting the news, too? You don't want it to be the truth, so you won't accept it as truth? That's STILL called "dodging reality."
2007-10-22 11:28:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Why would they be. The NY times reports the news. This is news and they reported it.
It appears that all is how it should be. What is your problem with the story?
2007-10-22 11:34:46 · answer #5 · answered by buffytou 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You're not getting anywhere with this question no matter how you reword it.
The NYT is reporting news. That's what newpaper do. Not everything is an opinion piece.
2007-10-22 11:27:36 · answer #6 · answered by Global warming ain't cool 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
OHhhhhh, what I would have given to be a fly on the wall in the editor's office for that discussion.
2007-10-22 11:29:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I think they take scalding hot showers and use Boraxo soap three times a day until they can get the imagined stench off their bodies, lol.
2007-10-22 11:28:47 · answer #8 · answered by Yahoo Answer Angel 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋
As if their decision to cover an important story has anything to do with a bunch of overgrown babies p*ssing and moaning.
2007-10-22 11:25:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
I think they showed their true color when certain other news agency's have been reporting on this great man for quite awhile.
2007-10-22 11:31:10 · answer #10 · answered by time_wounds_all_heelz 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋