Reuters: NY Times Endorses No Republicans for U.S. Congress

[rodeodance]

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-elections-nytimes.html?pagewanted=print

November 5, 2006
NY Times Endorses No Republicans for U.S. Congress
By REUTERS

Filed at 3:10 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The New York Times, one of the oldest and most respected U.S. newspapers, said on Sunday that for the first time in memory it was endorsing no Republican U.S. congressional candidates this year.

In an editorial, the Times criticized the Republican-led Congress on matters from tax cuts to energy policy, and charged it has failed to hold President Bush accountable for the unpopular Iraq War.

``This election is indeed about George W. Bush -- and the congressional majority's insistence on protecting him from the consequences of his mistakes and misdeeds,'' the Times editorialized.

The Bush administration has had a number of clashes in recent years with the Times, particularly for the newspaper's disclosure of its warrantless domestic spying program.

The newspaper, founded in 1851, wrote in its editorial: ``On Tuesday, when this page runs the list of people it has endorsed for election, we will include no Republican congressional candidates for the first time in our memory.''

.........

[rodeodance]

1. thanks nytimes.

[otohara]

2. Thank You NYT's

and don't let them get away with the liberal bashing BS, remind the White House that the NYT's was one of the war cheerleaders from the beginning.

[ECH1969]

3. The NY Times is the only news paper totally on our side

[kath]

26. "totally on our side" ?!?!

Huh??- where have you been the last 6 years or so? Do you still believe in the "liberal media" meme as well?

Please give me some of what you've been smokin'.

(on edit - please see Post #9, by GoldenRaisin, below.)

[UpInArms]

4. here's a link to the editorial

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/05/opinion/05sun1.html

and an excerpt:

To begin with, the Republican majority that has run the House — and for the most part, the Senate — during President Bush’s tenure has done a terrible job on the basics. Its tax-cutting-above-all-else has wrecked the budget, hobbled the middle class and endangered the long-term economy. It has refused to face up to global warming and done pathetically little about the country’s dependence on foreign oil.

Republican leaders, particularly in the House, have developed toxic symptoms of an overconfident majority that has been too long in power. They methodically shut the opposition — and even the more moderate members of their own party — out of any role in the legislative process. Their only mission seems to be self-perpetuation.

The current Republican majority managed to achieve that burned-out, brain-dead status in record time, and with a shocking disregard for the most minimal ethical standards. It was bad enough that a party that used to believe in fiscal austerity blew billions on pork-barrel projects. It is worse that many of the most expensive boondoggles were not even directed at their constituents, but at lobbyists who financed their campaigns and high-end lifestyles.

That was already the situation in 2004, and even then this page endorsed Republicans who had shown a high commitment to ethics reform and a willingness to buck their party on important issues like the environment, civil liberties and women’s rights.

For us, the breaking point came over the Republicans’ attempt to undermine the fundamental checks and balances that have safeguarded American democracy since its inception. The fact that the White House, House and Senate are all controlled by one party is not a threat to the balance of powers, as long as everyone understands the roles assigned to each by the Constitution. But over the past two years, the White House has made it clear that it claims sweeping powers that go well beyond any acceptable limits. Rather than doing their duty to curb these excesses, the Congressional Republicans have dedicated themselves to removing restraints on the president’s ability to do whatever he wants. To paraphrase Tom DeLay, the Republicans feel you don’t need to have oversight hearings if your party is in control of everything.

[Raster]

5. I'll gladly give this TEN!

:kick:10!

[FatDave]

6. Gee...

I wonder how they'll respond.

[Skittles]

7. DO NOT REWARD FAILURE

YES

[Chomp]

8. The NYT

has been absolutely eviscerating (sp?) about the Repubs and * in the last couple of months. Gloves well and truly off.

[Golden Raisin]

9. Better late than never I suppose.

The NY Times has some chutzpah! They were the ones who colluded with and witheld stories from the voting public at the behest/request of this foul, evil Administration, and now they are railing against Republican congresspeople, as if they (the Times) were as pure as the new-fallen snow. And let’s not forget the Times let Judith Miller run amok. While I'm certainly glad they are now coming out against the Republicans and putting it in print, it does not mediate or excuse their tardiness and gross hypocrisy.

[Amonester]

14. Maybe they watched that **'s botched Joke:

"Fool me once... shame on... shame on you..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKs44H7_l4w&mode=related&search=

[iamjoy]

10. That Liberal Media Again

The Times is considered the epitome of Liberal Media establishment.

Conservatives will be quick to point to this as proof of the Liberal media.

Please do not tell me that this is the first time the NYT has not endorsed any Republicans. There is no point in letting facts ruin a good theory.

[muntrv]

11. I don't endorse Republicans for office either.

[Arugula Latte]

12. I guess Judy Miller didn't get to weigh in, huh?

:eyes:

Sorry, Times, your credibility is still in the toilet from that one.

[cyclezealot]

13. I agree. The Times is at fault

for giving Bush the needed slack to get into Iraq. But, they now seem genuinely concerned about our loss of liberties and and executive power abuses. They know the only way to get Bush's abuses investigated is with a Democratic Congress that will restore the third branch of government to an equal branch of government and met its' obligations.

[Tatiana]

15. Glad they've seen the light.

Of course after all of Judas Miller's features have contributed towards making this nation just about FUBAR, it's a bittersweet piece of news.

[wake.up.america]

16. The Administration will lead the country over a 1000 foot chasm if not stopped.

And I am so tired of reading, "Well, you hate Bush and you are a liberal, that's the reason you don't support the President."

It's more like, "I can't support idiotic policies and behaviour."

[Hekate]

17. KnR for Righteous Thunder!

Way to wake up and kick ass, NYT!

Hekate

[colorado_ufo]

18. Applause!

Actually, just doing their job. It just looks exceptional because they are so alone in doing it.

[libodem]

19. Vindicated and validated

We have been right all along! We can smell the criminal stench of absolute power corrupting absolutely.

[cobaindrain]

20. This story will probably be cherry picked by Foxnews

and be put on the dem bashing political grapevine, just watch.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

21. K&R with pleasure!

[FernBell]

22. says it all

[blondeatlast]

23. Six years of utter failure from Washington, DC--did the Gray Lady have any other choice?

:kick:

[Catherine Vincent]

24. I can hear those repuke CSPAN callers now!

"The commie NY Times didn't endorse any republicans! They are for the terrorists! Why does cpspan lead off with the NY Times! It's not fair!"

[Sequoia]

25. Do a little dance, make a little love, get down tonight!