Thursday, January 01, 2009

Lobbyist Sues NY Times Over McCain 'Affair' Article

This could be said to be a case of "poetic justice". In 2008, the mainstream media ignored all rules of journalism. The media including the New York Times orchestrated a two prong strategy. The first part of the strategy was to mass market Barack Hussein Obama as the greatest thing ever to come along since Abraham Lincoln, John Fitzgerald Kennedy and even Jesus Christ. Their second part of their strategy was to attack viciously, repeatedly and recklessly anything related to John Sydney McCain and Sarah Palin whether it was true or in most cases untrue. It doesn't take the brightest people "sorry Obamatrons "in the room to know that the media ran zero investigative stories on Barack Obama during 2008, eventhough there were plenty of issues that were out there and needed to be explored such as Obama's past, his affiliations and his beliefs. Earlier in the year the New York Times wrote a hit piece on a former lobbyist for John McCain. Her name is Vicki L. Iseman. The piece from the slimes reported that McCain aides once worried the relationship between Iseman and McCain had turned romantic. Now it looks like the ones that should be "worried" is the New York Times itself. On Tuesday Ms. Iseman filed a $27 million dollar defamation suit in U.S. District Court in Richmond. I hope and pray that she wins her case. Since the New York Times is already treading on financial skid row, a quick payout or even drawing this case out won't be good for the Times financially. Maybe Ms. Iseman's lawsuit will accelerate the New York Time inevitable Chapter 11 Bankruptcy filing. I so hope so. If we are lucky maybe the New York Times will be so financially drained from this lawsuit and it's crushing debt load that it will have to go chapter 7 liquidation instead of chapter 11 reorganization. In any case maybe Governor Palin can help sell the New York Times assets on Ebay in a liquidation sale. Keep your fingers crossed and wish Ms. Iseman good luck with her case going forward.


9 Comments:

Blogger JMK said...

"I hope and pray that she wins her case. Since the New York Times is already on financial skid row, a quick payout or even drawing this case out can't be good for the Times financially. Maybe Ms. Iseman's lawsuit will accelerate the New York Time inevatable Chapter 11 Bankrtupcy filing. I so hope so. If we are lucky maybe the New York Times will be so financially insolvement from this lawsuit and it's crushing debt load that it will have to go chapter 7 liquidation instead of chapter 11 reorganization." (Tyrone)
<
<
I hope she wins too, but I'd rather see Vicki Iseman running the NY Times....maybe it could be saved!

It would be ironic if the NY Times was turned back into a Conservative organ of the status quo.

There are those who say "The liberals would howl!"

What?! All eight of them?!

Seriously, I don't think a Conservative takeover of the NY Times would be a big deal and I doubt there'd be much negative reaction at all.

Without question, Vicki Iseman would be a HUGE step up from "Pinky" Sulzberger.

6:52 PM  
Blogger God Of Bacon said...

The tribe sent their bravest and fiercest lawyers who immediately began to chant:

Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.
Sue them.

2:32 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

jmk "I hope she wins too, but I'd rather see Vicki Iseman running the NY Times....maybe it could be saved!"

Don't think so jmk, the times is too far gone to be saved. Since the Times has been so liberal for so long, even if it were to became a manin stream or even conservative paper jmk, it's reputation is too trashed for anyone to ever give them a chance, I think the Times only ave about a million or so readers a day. The problem is that the liberal sheep in the media get their marching orders from the Times then regurgitate what the editor board of the Times write.

6:03 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

God of Bacon "The tribe sent their bravest and fiercest lawyers who immediately began to chant:Sue them!!

As long as the tribe is victorious in the end thats all that matters God of Bacon lol

6:05 PM  
Blogger JMK said...

"Don't think so jmk, the times is too far gone to be saved. Since the Times has been so liberal for so long, even if it were to became a manin stream or even conservative paper jmk, it's reputation is too trashed for anyone to ever give them a chance, I think the Times only ave about a million or so readers a day." (Tyrone)
<
<
I think that's the wrong way for us to think about this Tyrone. The demise of the Leftist MSM should present an opportunity for more traditionalist Americans.

One of the basic problems with that, however, and it's one that most Conservatives seem unaware of, is that wealthy Americans are generally NOT Conservative and certainly not all that pro-market.

I know a lot of Conservatives (and many Liberals as well) ASSUME that wealthier people are naturally more Conservative, as they think, “These guys have the most to lose in a socialist environment,” but that’s not how the wealthy see it and the fact is THEY’RE right (at least on the bottom-line) and we’re wrong on that issue.

While it’s long been proven that the government-run economy doesn’t work, the government-managed (heavily regulated and controlled) certainly CAN work AND it has the added benefit (to the wealthy) of cementing the gains of the very rich in place, as it freezes the free-for-all of the market in place, with them at the top!

So, the wealthy are NOT “natural allies” of Conservatives and that’s why the “Rockefeller-wing of the GOP (the Bush’s, McCain’s, Whitman’s, etc.) ALL disdain Supply Side (pro-market) policies and Conservative principles.

10:49 PM  
Blogger conservative brother said...

jnk "I know a lot of Conservatives (and many Liberals as well) ASSUME that wealthier people are naturally more Conservative, as they think, “These guys have the most to lose in a socialist environment,” but that’s not how the wealthy see it and the fact is THEY’RE right (at least on the bottom-line) and we’re wrong on that issue"

I've debated liberals on that very topic jmk. The richest people in this country tend to be liberals. That's why the whole class warfare position they take against conservatives is so laughable. I could never understand why Warren Buffet is a Democrat liberal. His wealth is directly tied to valuation of Berkshire Hathaway stock. His own elk can literally cause him to lose his fortune fi they screw with with economy.It never gets old listening to Hollywood liberals attacking capitalism yet requesting $20 million a film.I truly believe they are too naive to understand that their own ideology can lead to their undoing. Many of the movie studios raise their money to finance films through private investors. I won't be surprised to hear soon that Hollywood studios are starting to experience a problem financing their projects. They don't know they are the orchestrators of their own destruction. That is what makes them so dangerous jmk.

9:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First off, newspapers get sued. That’s the nature of the business. Second, it’d take a hell of a lot more than a gripe from Vicki Iseman to financially destroy The New York Times.

The nut of the Times’ piece centers around the statements by McCain aids about their perceptions of his relationship with Iseman. If those statements by those sources are true, there’s no lawsuit here. To win a court case against the press, you have to prove more than that the story had bad sources. In this case, you’d have to prove that people made the stuff up. And good luck with that, Ms. Iseman.

From BusinessWeek: “David S. Korzenik, an attorney who defends media companies in defamation cases -- but is not involved in Iseman's suit -- says her complaint ‘undercuts its own case.’ That's because it chronicles reaction to the story by other media, much of which excoriates the Times for sloppy journalism and innuendo. ‘If you look at the actual fallout from this article, it's very, very clear that nobody thought it was delivering proof of an illicit affair,’ says Korzenik. ‘Ultimately nobody thought the Times had much.’

The sad part about this was that the article probably caused more howling about the Times than about McCain’s judgement. These kinds of allegations were nothing new and no longer provide shock value. McCain’s personal character had already been well-documented, with the multiple affairs he admitted having during the last several years of his marriage to Carol Shepp, including the courtship of Cindy Hensley that began four months before his divorce.

12:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Conservative Brother: "... It's [sic] reputation is too trashed for anyone to ever give them a chance, I think the Times only ave [sic] about a million or so readers a day."

Ah yes, the New York Times "only" has a million or so readers a day." Which would make it "only" the third most-read newspaper in the United States. Plus it "only" is one of the 50 most-read sites on the entire World Wide Web.

Not bad for a metro daily, no matter what your standards are.

The New York Times is the newspaper of record in this country, not USA Today (No. 1) or The Wall Street Journal (No. 2). And certainly not your beloved Washington Sun Myung Moon Times, the Fox News of print media, which has a circulation below 100,000 and is not even listed in the Top 100.

1:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Conservative Brother: "In any case maybe Governor Palin can help sell the New York Times assets on Ebay in a liquidation sale."

I have to give you credit, Tyrone: You never let facts get in your way. Yes, Gov. Lapdance tried to sell the state's jet on e-bay. Alas, it never sold there and the transaction was executed off-line with a businessman from Valdez.

I guess saying "Gov. Palin TRIED to sell that jet on e-bay, but didn't get a buyer" wouldn't be as cute and folksy, would it?

1:56 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home