NYT calls out BO

[Horn6721]

I am sure they ( NYT editorial board) will come back to their leftist reality and praise his every move again BUT this is pretty harsh
"Within hours of the disclosure that the federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights."
and
'A senior administration official quoted in The Times offered the lame observation that the information does not include the name of any caller, as though there would be the slightest difficulty in matching numbers to names. He said the information “has been a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats,” because it allows the government “to discover whether known or suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the United States.”

That is a vital goal, but how is it served by collecting everyone’s call data? The government can easily collect phone records (including the actual content of those calls) on “known or suspected terrorists” without logging every call made.


The Link

Will an indignant ' I knew nothing" press statement do it this time?
The editorial was too long to link but I hope everyone reads the entire thing before they post here. and I REALLY hope no one tries to use the Bush did it defense

 

[Crockett]

Yeah right. The New York Times isn't the mirror of FOX News trying to write and report every story as to prove Conservative = Smart and Good while Liberal = Evil and Lazy. No the New York Times has a vast interest in facts and information and will pursue them where they lead, even if the facts don't line up for the benefit of their favorite politicians.

Conservatives routinely decry anyone who trust honest brokers of information as "drinking the kool aid" while they themselves don't trust anything that hasn't been filtered by a medium that ignores facts and intelligent voices that don't support the conservative view.

 

[AustinBat]

How do you know who are "honest brokers" - I'm curious how you know and I apparently don't. Do you get a list of brokers to trust? And where do you get this list?

 

[Crockett]

I guess we all have to make a decision on who we trust for news. Here are some criteria I use; Are intelligent persons with opposing viewpoints interviewed politely and allowed to answer questions? Is there a clear double standard of softball questions to folks they like and confrontational questions and verbal ambush of folks they don't? It just takes 30 seconds to to spot the bias on Fox or MSNBC, whose viewers aren't so interested in learning but instead seek reinforcement for the prejudices they carried when they turned on the tube.

Does the medium cover real stories or do they fabricate controversy then cover the controversy?

Do you find out stuff you didn't know before you read the story or watched the interview? That's a good sign. Are the journalists exposing facts and bringing creative new insights into the process or do you just hear endless spin trying to entrench the viewpoint you already have?. Do you feel like you are learning and engaging your crebral cortex or is your reaction emotional? If the writer/presenter is trying to engage your emotions it's a manipulative, not an informative medium.
Honestly, I don't think it's that hard to find good journalism out there. The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, The Economist, NPR and even the Dallas Morning News are capable of seriously good journalism, though with all of them some writers are much better than others. The reason there is so much drivel out there is because people don't like to think and engage their mind with fresh information that doesn't support the world view they woke up with this morning. That's an almost unversal human characteristic. Heck, I used to live in a world with two groups of people: Idiots and peopole who see things the way I do. Now I live in a more complex world where I acknowledge intelligence in folks with highly divergent points of view.

 

[Mr. Fiesta]

NYT doesnt have any credibility They edit their own editorial about obama.

 

[Horn6721]

All croc forgot was the " Bush did it" excuse.
It must have disappointed supporters to see a beloved media appear to be harsh on BO

Nothing was mentioned in the OP other than the fact that a newsource who nearly ALL the time was a follower of BO wrote a harsh editorial.

AS I predicted and as Mr Fiesta's link points out the NYT came to their BO senses and tempered their criticism to deflect it away from BO>
As usual BO knew nothing and what he says is not what he meant to say.

 

[RomaVicta]

Reality check for Crockett:

Don't worry, you're not crazy. Good post.

 

[majorwhiteapples]

So BO and GWB agree on something?

I think we need to go back 6 or 7 years and bring us up to speed on what W was doing? How Pelosit and Reid were not going to stand for it.......