'NYT' Reporter Katharine Seelye Blames Hillary -- for McCain Incident

[DeepModem Mom]

Editor&Publisher: 'NYT' Reporter Blames Hillary -- for McCain Incident
The New York Times has picked up on the McCain "How do we beat the bitch?" incident, but get a load of the double-triple-reverse psychology that Katharine Q. Seelye's piece employs.
By David Kurtz

(November 16, 2007) -- The New York Times has picked up on Sen. John McCain's "How do we beat the bitch?" incident that TPM (Talking Points Memo) Election Central first noted earlier in the week, but get a load of the double-triple-reverse psychology that Katharine Q. Seelye's piece employs.

Her angle (albeit not a new one) is how the McCain people are trying to use CNN's report on the "bitch" comment directed at Sen. Hillary Clinton as a fundraising tool. It's a hackneyed GOP ploy: attack the messenger and your opponent at the same time. But Seelye sees it as just another example of the sort of thing all the campaigns do: "Several presidential candidates this year have tried to cash in instantly on negative publicity, seeing it as a way to tap into anger that their supporters feel on their behalf."...

But we also learn from Seelye that this whole incident could really hurt Clinton because, you know, it's a reminder of how much voters don't like her: "Mr. McCain’s attack on CNN also serves to keep the episode involving the hostile question alive and as a reminder that many voters view Mrs. Clinton as divisive."

Sort of a polite way of saying Hillary really IS a bitch.

The piece concludes with the sort of confounding logic that makes national political coverage oftentimes seem like palm reading in a circus tent: "At the same time, the episode may remind voters that many people have strong feelings about Mrs. Clinton and make them question whether they want to live with animosity and polarization."

So it's really all Hillary's fault that some crotchety old conservative grand dame in South Carolina called her a bitch. It’s like blaming John Edwards for Coulter’s "fag" remark because he is so pretty. If Hillary wasn't so divisive (such a bitch) then conservatives wouldn't get so riled up about her (that bitch) and that would in turn make fair-minded people (like those of us who read the Times) happier because then they wouldn't have to hear angry GOPers fouling the air with words like bitch.

See? This really isn't about John McCain at all.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/shoptalk_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003673978

[underpants]

1. just like its not about that dried up old bitch in South Carolina either

Geesh!

As usual the pundits don't know s*&t that their gin soaked olive doesn't tell them. Look if Hillary gets the nomination suddenly we have an election that pits the public's view of the Clinton years vs. the Bush years-even I can figure out who wins in that showdown.

[pennylane100]

2. What a dumbshit.

[Rageneau]

3. Seelye is a Bush-butt-bitch whose lies helped torpedo Gore.

[DeepModem Mom]

6. We Dems go WAAAAY back with Seelye. nt

[BrklynLiberal]

4. Well, if ya can't blame Bill, why not blame Hillary?? As long as it is a Clinton.

[aquart]

5. I hear the same kind of thing here at DU day in day out.

Exactly the same kind of thing.

[gratuitous]

7. Isn't this a sweet set-up?

If liberals use naughty words, the kewl kidz can ignore us because we're such potty-mouths. Imagine getting riled up because of budget-busting invasions and all those thousands of dead bodies! But when the reich wing (oops, I did it again) calls someone a bitch, it's the bitch's fault. For being such a bitch, you know.

And ain't that a bitch, unless you're on the side of the kewl kidz.

[Jim__]

8. " ... many voters view Mrs. Clinton as divisive."

And many voters view McCain as a senile old man.