New York Times editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal spoke to journalism students last week and let's just say that he was consistent in his dishonesty.
Let's start with Rosenthal's description of the dust-up earlier this year where the Times refused to run an op-ed by John McCain after affording the same opportunity to Barack Obama.
Talking about the controversy around Obamas [sic] published op-ed piece, followed by denying McCain the same opportunity - at least when you ask his campaign management - Rosenthal had the following words to say about a process that started with telling Senator Obama of what to write and what not.
“We can’t accept this piece but if you take out all those quotes from last week’s speech and the ones from the commercial and you focus less on attacking John McCain and you focus more on your own policies. And they sent us two more drafts and we accepted the third one.
“And when we accepted it I said to David Shipley, our editor, ‘okay here’s how this is gonna go. We are going to run this thing and the McCain people will ask for equal time. And we are going to give it to them because it’s only fair. And they are going to send us a horrible, unprintable op-ed piece. And we’re going to ask them for the same exact changes we asked Barack Obama for and we are never going to hear from them and they’re going to leak it to Drudge and attack us for dissing McCain and that is exactly what happened.
“Our public editor has criticized us. They sent in the piece. They called on a Thursday and wanted it to go on Sunday. I said ‘fine.’ Our editor said to them ‘you understand the rules, it can’t be a press release, it can’t be a rehash speech and we really don’t want you to just criticize Obama, we need to hear about your opinions.’
“They said ‘yes, yes, yes.’ They sent us a rehash speech that criticized Obama and said nothing about what McCain wanted. We wrote them back - a slightly inartfully worded email but basically said them same thing: ‘We can’t accept this.’ And they just went straight to Fox News, Drudge.”
I analyzed Shipley's explanation at the time it occurred. I encourage you to read it because it reveals that Obama's op-ed was nothing more than a rehash of earlier statements he'd already made. Shipley also demanded not McCain's "opinions," but timelines, troop levels, etc. -- something that McCain continues to be opposed to.
Rosenthal also decided to slander conservatives in general as dishonest.
"[US Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice is a particularly bad op-ed writer," Rosenthal said. However, the problem doesn't end there. "The problem with conservative columnists," Rosenthal said, "is that many of them lie in print."
Lying in print? The New York Times editorial page knows all about that.
They didn't want McCain's opinions, they wanted timelines from him! Obama's piece was just a repeat of statements he already made. Rosenthal is not only a dishonest illuminati liberal, but also a liar!