<![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @Furious George: Technically, since "ziti" is plural, the singular form is actually "zito."
That doesn't detract from how long that image will stay in my head, however...

catbagger

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> I'm sorry, but I have a different take on this. Didn't the NYTimes endorse McCain? Perhaps they were worried that their endorsement coupled with his obvious connections with big business lobbyists and special interests would burnish his image among big business Conservative Republicans and provide him with an unfair advantage over Romney? Johnny McCain is clearly "one of the boys" in DC.

Superstarsteve

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> The Times dislikes playing catch-up on stories. Yeah, they ran like scalded dogs from the Watergate scandal. They aren't exactly a corporate profile in courage.

Ron_Obvious

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> Drudge loves the theory that the NYT held the story to screw McCain only after he won the nomination. But for that to be true, they'd have to have believed in early December McCain would win. Not many people thought that then.
Also, it's not just anonymous sources (not that there's anything wrong with that). John Weaver is in the second graf of the WP story.

jollydog

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @vulturesquadron: particularly if you didn't really do anythign to start with.

dcd829

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @TheHonJudgeSmails: Well, it really works better in a barely repressed homosexuality context, but there must be something in there to work with.

Fuzzy_duffel_bag

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @Fuzzy_duffel_bag: Wow, didn't even cross my mind.

TheHonJudgeSmails

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> What, no Top Gun jokes? Maverick? Iseman? Too easy?

Fuzzy_duffel_bag

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @Furious George: You should ask that Cosmogirl blogger.

ArtfulSlinger

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> They all fuck, they all have little dicks, except Hillary, and Ron Paul should be sterilized, and now can we please moveon.org?

KarenUhOh

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> ROFL-LOLz at that picture of Saint McCain- we need to have that on a 3$ bill someday!

C'mon this story is a win-win for the Rethugs. How long before the Pandering Bastard tearfully cops to it and begs that lord/savior guy to forgive his imperfect soul, thus wooing Dobson his many and sheeple?

True confessions didn't hurt Willy-Jeff his first time out. Oh, and there's the corrollary benefit of reinforcing his Anti-Gay-Super-Hetero-powers (and if it doesn't pan out in November he can tout the EDF meds like Dole and Ditka).

VeeKaChu

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @veraikon: The Onion is much funnier/quicker than I am.

TheHonJudgeSmails

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> The splitting of this post is going to make me look like a carpet commenter, but I think my original comment, three post versions ago, is more apt here, so here it is again:

What if this was the scenario?

The Times wishes to rehash the Keating/McCain connection, and they research and write a piece. Some asswipe - maybe Keller, maybe not - reads it in an editorial meeting and says, "It's not sexy enough." Reporting team then digs, and digs, and digs some more, until they come up with the lamest sexy in the history of sexy. They put it in, but cooler heads prevail (possibly Keller in this role, instead) and the story is pulled. Asswipe is unhappy and leaks it to Drudge, because Asswipe wants the sexy! Finally, several thousand painful editorial meetings later, Asswipe gets his whiny way and it's printed. And today, somewhere in the Times building, cooler heads are saying, I TOLD YOU SO.

Just a thought.

Rome Girl

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @vulturesquadron: I guess this is the Times trying to make up for lack of turndown service at the Hanoi Hilton.

In Other News...

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @Stark_pigeon:

I believe someone grabbed them by the tail

ADismalScience

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> @TheHonJudgeSmails: Didn't the Onion do a piece a while back on Obama's "scandalous black children"? :3

And I was just thinking (although this is totally off-topic) of when we found out about Strom Thurman's illegitimate black daughter. No one ever explicitly said Thurman had a relationship with the family's maid. I always suspected he "forgot" the woman wasn't actually his family's property and just plain raped her. /tangent

veraikon

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> Hate me if you must, but this is the kind of thing from which six years in a Vietnamese prison (and turning down an offer of early release) buys you immunity.

vulturesquadron

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> I thought this gawker post was much better this morning when it had the word "fuck" in the headline. What happened? Too racy for Gawker?

Stark_pigeon

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> After you've had no-doubt terrible, geriatric sex with John McCain, are you obliged to use the cheesy "war hero" qualification that Obama and Hillary use before criticizing him?

"John, you're an American hero and have honored our country with valiant service in at least four wars -- two of them World, one of them Civil, and one Revolutionary. But let's be honest. The sex was pretty damned awful. It felt like being pinned down by a constipated dog and then repeatedly tickled with an overcooked zitti."

Furious George

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> There's an upcoming Times piece that quotes several "campaign insiders" stating that Barack Obama is sleeping with a colored womman.

TheHonJudgeSmails

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> dude, not even one mention or link to WALNUTS?
This "actual writing, good commentary" thing is making you soft.

mitchel_stevens

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> Well done. Now find out why the lobbyist, a 1990 college graduate, aged faster than Joyce Wildenstein.

lefty

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> The Times hates Republicans so much it nearly ran a story about Mac and large farm animals. (Did Mac try to do the cow or did the cow try to do him?) Expect hand-wringing from ombud this weekend.

plasticene

]]> <![CDATA[This Is the Closest the 'Times' Can Get To Sucker Punching John McCain]]> Is it just me or does Walnuts look like he's really whacking one out in this photo?

mavricky

]]>