Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: The NYT makes its endorsment

  1. #1

    Default The NYT makes its endorsment

    And in a major upset, we don't get it. I know, I'm shocked as well.

    Still, Mr. Romney was the best choice of the field, an experienced politician and businessman who is capable of doing more than simply representing moneyed interests and social conservatives. He is the best bet to challenge President Obama.

    The only other remaining candidates are terrible choices. Newt Gingrich, who was drummed out of the House speaker’s job, is a right-wing zealot who wants to give minority children jobs as school janitors to show there is an alternative to being a pimp or a drug dealer. Ron Paul, a presidential never-was since the 1980s, offers the usual libertarian litany of agencies he would close, and some disturbing racial views.
    But be sure to tell all the conservatives you know that the Times views ole Mitt as the best choice. They'll love that.

  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2


    $#@! the New York Times. They haven't been relevant in decades.

  4. #3

  5. #4


    "and some disturbing racial views."

    "The New York Times continues to act upon its mission statement to regress the intellect of the American public and to eat babies."

    See, I can make up unsubstantiated lies, too! How fun! (well, the first part of my statement is true)
    "I'm not just trying to win or get elected. I am trying to change the course of history" - Ron Paul

  6. #5


    Mr. Romney’s challenge is to find a way out of his current position, where he has endorsed Representative Paul Ryan’s budget, a pinched and cruel blueprint that pretends to deal with the budget deficit by slashing programs for poor and working-class Americans while expanding tax giveaways for rich Americans who don’t need the government’s aid.

    Yeah, because knocking out the deficit by 2040 is a "pinched and cruel blueprint."

    I think this is the most representative piece of the top of the NY Times thinking. There are a few writers who write articles that are thought-provoking, interesting and even fair occasionally.

    Where you find the truth, is when "The Editors" put a piece out. No one name is attached, and you finally get to see how the editors *really* feel.

    I hope it goes Bankrupt.
    "Your mother's dead, before long I'll be dead, and you...and your brother and your sister and all of her children, all of us dead, all of us..rotting in the ground. It's the family name that lives on. It's all that lives on. Not your personal glory, not your honor, but family." - Tywin Lannister

  7. #6


    NYT is composed of a bunch of Marxists. No wonder their pick is Mitt.
    If Rand does not win the Republican nomination, he should buck the controlled two party system and run as an Independent for President in 2016 and give Americans a real option to vote for.

    We are all born libertarians then something goes really wrong. Despite this truth, most people are still libertarians yet not know it.

  8. #7


    Although I don't bash you for posting this, I don't get why you or anyone else here should care.

    This is typical from a major news paper, and someone above wrote that the NYT hasn't been relevant in years, they are right.

    This is the same media who has been ignoring Ron Paul, saying that Romney already won the nomination, yet now coming out and saying Dr. Paul won Iowa and Minn. You see the joke here?

    All the major media outlets are on the way out. Look at the younger generation (which I am in), we don't watch nor do we care about thew major news.

    To be honest, I don't read that much about the news anymore. Wanna know why? Because we you read so much, whether it's history books, distopias, or economic books, you can easily predict the route the globalists are going. Reading the news is such a waste. Although I have lost respect for Drudge, he still provides the best info out there.

    To sum up, I really don't care what the NYT says, they are terrible. I don't care what Maddor, O'Reilly, Hannity, AC, etc say...they are all full of $#@! and sensationalists.

    I turned off the TV (news) for two months now, and it has been great.
    "I am, therefore I'll think" - Ayn Rand

  9. #8


    Quote Originally Posted by LisaNY View Post
    $#@! the New York Times. They haven't been relevant in decades.
    I second the motion. $#@! the slimey ny times

  10. #9

  11. #10


    DRUDGE IT!!!!

    LOL, c'mon Matt Drudge, where's the siren and big link to this endorsement?

  12. #11


    Oh, believe me, it fills me with glee to know that only something like 3% of 18-29 year olds read newspapers nowadays. A dying media form, and since it's too often controlled by liberals or faux conservatives, one I don't mourn.

    I took a class a few years back where the professor made us read the Times every day. the day it ended, I went right home and canceled my subscription to it. Felt good.

    Also, my main reason for posting this was that they just had to bring up Paul's "disturbing racial views." You'd think a newspaper as respected as the NYT would provide us with some evidence of this claim, but I guess they now deal in rumors and hearsay.

    Also, funny that the "establishment" that the Times represents always whines about how far right the GOP is, but somehow the candidate they most want always seems to get the nomination. First McCain, then Romney. It's almost like the GOP is not as conservative as they think. Who'd have thought?

  13. #12


    Quote Originally Posted by satchelmcqueen View Post
    racial views??
    Everyone is equal and no group should get special preferences is apparently racist.

  14. #13


    These $#@!ing traitors are the equivalent of the people who did propaganda for the Nazis during their reign of terror. The people associated with this newspaper deserve the same fate as the regime they brainwash the masses for.

  15. #14


    Quote Originally Posted by satchelmcqueen View Post
    racial views??
    Guessing they mean the newsletters.

  16. #15


    Only useful in that, as someone mentioned, conservatives are very wary (at best) of the NYT. Good little factoid when talking to Republican voters, then, is that the NYT endorsed Romney! That's about as good as an Nancy Pelosi endorsement!

Similar Threads

  1. Syetem of A Down Endorsment
    By RonPaul507 in forum Marketing Strategy, Influence & Persuasion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-04-2011, 04:59 PM
  2. We Need Ted Nugent's Endorsment
    By BobSmith in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-22-2011, 11:11 PM
  3. Red State's Endorsment
    By low preference guy in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-15-2009, 08:30 PM
  4. kennedys' endorsment
    By Cinderella in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-28-2008, 12:11 PM
  5. lil' Wayne endorsment?!
    By trey4sports in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 12-13-2007, 01:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts