New York Times Hit Peace on Boehner to come out in October

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Navin Johnson, Sep 25, 2010.

  1. Liberal media goes on attack against GOP's Boehner

    Last Updated: 11:50 AM, September 24, 2010

    The heat is on Republican leader John Boehner.

    Liberal media outlets are trying to smear the highest-ranking Republican in the House just weeks before the midterm elections with a deal-breaking scandal before he has a chance to take the speaker's chair from Nancy Pelosi.

    A blogger from liberal Web site The Daily Kos pierced through Boehner's security detail at yesterday's unveiling of his leadership policy "Pledge to America" to ask if he was sleeping with a lobbyist from the Printing Industries of America.

    The congressman ignored the pesky blogger with a flip camera and kept moving to his fleet of black Suburbans.

    The lobbyist who was named in the confrontation and then was contacted by he Daily Kos blogger Lisbeth Lyons denied the accusations. "As you can imagine, I was stunned by such a question," Lyons said. "I found it to be highly insulting, particularly as a female political professional, as well as unfounded. Beyond that, I have no further comment on the matter."

    Insiders on Capitol Hill are buzzing about an upcoming New York Times exposé that will detail an alleged Boehner affair. Sources say the Times is looking for the right time to drop the story in October to sway the election, similar to how the Times reported during the 2008 presidential campaign on an alleged John McCain affair that supposedly had taken place many years before and that was flatly denied by the woman in question.

    "Catching Boehner with a mistress is the only way to destroy him politically before the election," a source said.

    A rep for Boehner's office said, "This is bull[bleep]. The American people oppose Washington Democrats' job killing, so their desperate liberal allies are resorting to outright lies. It's low, and it's dirty."
  2. It's wrong to expose adulterous affairs now, such as John Edwards' affair? Just off the top of my head, the New York Times ran articles about Edwards' affair with titles like "Edwards' admits paternity" and even interviewed his mistress "She Speaks."

    Apparently the rules oscillate wildly.
  3. You know perfectly well that the National Inquirer broke the Edwards mistress story, and the NYT and other mainstream media outlets tried their best to cover it up and ignored it as long as possible. They also covered up the bizare, borderline psycho behavior of Edwards' wife until a book came out detailing it.

    You also know very well that the NYT ran that story about the supposed McCain mistress with nothing in the way of legitimate evidence, and in the face of flat-out denials from the principals.

    Of course, all during the Clinton years of Oval Office blow jobs, DNA-stained dresses, and women being groped and harrassed by the president, we were loudly lectured by the likes of the NYT that a public official's sex life was a private matter and none of the public's business. Yes, the rules do oscillate wildly, just not in the way you would have people believe.
  4. Um, okay, so you want the NYTimes to cover it up and ignore the story as long as possible?
  5. <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value=";hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=";hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
  6. You are missing the point.

    No, it is not wrong to expose an affair, if it is true. The NYT did a FRONT PAGE hit piece on John McCain during the 2008 election that was false.

    The NYT apparently has a story on Boehner (whether true or not, TBD) that they are planning on releasing in October. The timing appears to be designed to cause him and Republicans the most damage possible. If they have the story, why not release it now and give him a chance to respond? Why not allow the press to verify the authenticity of the story? The NYT has a history of printing false stories in order to promote their political agenda.

    Also, the NYT did not expose the John Edwards affair. They reluctantly printed a story after weeks of reporting by other news sources. The NYT tried to keep the story out of the paper as long as possible.
  7. +1
  8. Or here's another thought: after the McCain issue they wanted to wait for a confirming source.

    But since we're discussing anecdotes and how Republicans feel the NYTimes should cover the Boehner scandal up and not report it as long as possible (which I don't really agree with) -- remember during the impeachment proceedings against Clinton when Newt was boning his staff member and the "liberal media" didn't report it until long afterwards?

    Personally, to me, an affair isn't newsworthy. However, "family values" hypocrisy is news-worthy.
  9. Nice strategy, when you lose, divert the discussion.
  10. What's been diverted? The story is about the New York Times (supposedly) writing an article about Boehner's alleged affair. Republicans posting here are outraged, OUTRAGED, that the New York Times is covering this when they did cover McCain, but they say covered Edwards "too slowly."

    What's your opinion -- should the New York Times cover this, or should they cover it up?
    #10     Sep 25, 2010