The NYT's credibility is already shot regardless of the reasons Miller's in the slam. They failed to keep her in check, and she abused just about every code of conduct ever applied to journalism. My bet is they're all covering their ass, and hoping the axe falls from Fitzgerald before Judy has to fess up.
As to Miller having any credibility now, she has none. But as always with the left, Huffington's post on Miller goes beyond making the case to bitching and gossiping, which discredits her as well. You don't have to be an asshole to spot an asshole, but you wouldn't know it from Huffington's column.
Posted by Overkill at July 31, 2005 05:05 PMSteve,
While I will respond with facts from sources about err post about Texas, it will never make up for the fact that s/he posted it. You let Judith nag and Bendito flame, but you do nothing, nothing at all, to filter the crap posted. I am so pissed.
Posted by Michelle at July 31, 2005 06:38 PMSorry my bad, it was pess.
You let Judith nag. Michelle, what are you talking about?
Posted by Judith at July 31, 2005 07:16 PMDespite you all, I will fight to bring Texas back from the idiots.
If you all are true dems, anachro-syndicalists -- support Bell. He may be our best chance.
M
Posted by Michelle at July 31, 2005 07:24 PMSo let's see if I understand what you are saying. You have decided my post are "crap" and Steve should use more discretion in "filtering" out said crap. Correct? Well, how do you like this "crap" post? Fuck You!
Posted by Judith at July 31, 2005 07:46 PMLet's see, I have not used language that needed bleeping. You on the other hand, have used language that is so colored that i can't. ..
Judith, you would let babies die, cats and dogs, you you would let them die. Just to get your point across.
All hail JUDITH
Michelle, try anger management. It might do you some good.
Posted by Judith at July 31, 2005 08:52 PMWas somebody making a hero out of Judy Miller?
I think most people who care to think about it at all recognize that she is on some mission to save her own ass. If anybody is buying the 'martyr for the first amendment' bullshit, I am not aware of it.
Posted by James E. Powell at July 31, 2005 09:37 PMWhoa! What's going on over here? Can't we all just get along? Seems like the vitriol is getting out of hand. Michelle, what is your problem? Why are you taking it so personally? The post was about the politics and history of Texas. Not you. I live in Cali, and believe me I'm very willing to critisize it, Schwartzeneger, LA smog and attitude, as well as several Democrats like rep.Tom Lantos-D (voted for Iraq war). I also am a citizen of the US, and am certainly able to listen to Noam Chomsky rail on about the crimes against the people committed by the US gov. without taking it as a personal insult.
And about electing another actor...Stupidity.
Posted by Oaklander at July 31, 2005 10:20 PM"Michelle, try anger management. It might do you some good."
It pains me that I need to point out the obvious here, but Judith, you're the one who went off the deep end. I don't get Michelle's issues, and frankly if it involves Texas I really don't care, but yelling Fuck You! at someone and then telling them they have an anger management problem really doesn't do a lot for the minimal amount of credibility you'd earned around here.
Posted by Anonymous Not at July 31, 2005 11:01 PMIt pains me that I need to point out the obvious here, but Judith, you're the one who went off the deep end. I don't get Michelle's issues, and frankly if it involves Texas I really don't care, but yelling Fuck You! at someone and then telling them they have an anger management problem really doesn't do a lot for the minimal amount of credibility you'd earned around here.
I don't see the problem, as I was not yelling. For some reason, Michelle, in two separate posts decided to make sarcastic comments directed towards me. In both posts, I had not left comments.
Sorry if my contribution has minimal amount of credibility to you.
Judy Miller a "hero."
>snort!
That's a good one.
Posted by citizen Able at August 1, 2005 08:33 AMJudith, so far you seem like one of the more thoughtful commenters I've seen.
My only nitpick is that I wish you'd use
<i> ... </i>
(or similar) around the text you quote, so readers could tell the difference more easily.
Judith, so far you seem like one of the more thoughtful commenters I've seen.
My only nitpick is that I wish you'd use
<i> ... </i>
(or similar) around the text you quote, so readers could tell the difference more easily. :)
Damn. Apparently, hitting "cancel" doesn't stop a post from going through, even if it's been taking a long time. Sorry for the duplicates.
Posted by Doug at August 1, 2005 06:40 PMDoug, help me out here. I am not sure what you mean. I was dreaming of being a great artist in my english classes, so I will admit my sentence structure is lacking.
Posted by Judith at August 1, 2005 07:55 PMFunny that you should ask about the NYT editiorial staff. Apparently they had some supporting info to allow Wilson to write his editorial in July 2003. Wilson also provided material for the Kristof May 6 article. 'Save our Spooks'-another Kristoff special-implies some consulting with CIA as well.
IS it not likely that the editorial staff was told of Wilson/Plame as Kristof used 'unamed sources', and Judy found out from somebody's loose lips? Maybe Joe should have told Kristof that his wife was a covert operative, rather than a 'head of Weapon's Proliferation'.
Judy answers the subpoenae, and the whole editorial board will follow. There is a reason they are not allowing her to talk...and paying her well.
My over/under on reporters Wilson, himself, told about his wife's work: 10.
Put Olbermann at the top of that list, as Wilson managed to appear over 20 time in one year, on his show.
Posted by paul at August 2, 2005 06:33 AM