Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The New York Times is just pretending to be outraged. They've obviously known this was going on all along.
Right you are. Same as their false outrage over AP and Rosen abuses. Truth is, they aren't a news source, they are the bullhorn of the party they represent.
Even with an 'outrage' piece, they had to massage it, for fear the low information folks might believe them:
NYTimes modifies editorial to make it less damning of Obama | The Daily Caller
New York Times quietly changes published editorial to make it less damning of Obama
8:52 PM 06/06/2013
The New York Times edited its damning editorial condemning the Obama administration for collecting phone call data from Americans to make it less stinging shortly after the editorial was published online Thursday afternoon.
The editorial originally declared that the Obama administration has lost all credibility as a result of the recently revealed news that the National Security Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have been secretly collecting call data from American users of Verizon under the authority of the Patriot Act.
But hours later the stinging sentence had been modified to read the Obama administration has now lost all credibility on this issue. [Emphasis added]
According to NewsDiffs.com, a website which tracks changes to online articles, at 3:34 p.m. ET the editorial damned the Obama administration generally and by 7:09 p.m. ET it had been edited to damn the Obama administration more narrowly over its collection of call data.
NewsDiffs also showed that several other modifications had been made to the editorial, but none as significant as its change to the originally broad condemnation of the Obama administration.
The new version of the article contains no indication that it has been changed.
Here's the problem with low information voters or people, as it were. They really 'aren't that into news.' However they have great instincts regarding what may effect them. Thus the IRS scandal and this one, delving into their privacy, are likely to resonate.
The Daily Caller?
Really?
The outfit that paid a Prostitute to accuse Senator Menendez of Pedophilia?
That Daily Caller?
Right you are. Same as their false outrage over AP and Rosen abuses. Truth is, they aren't a news source, they are the bullhorn of the party they represent.
Even with an 'outrage' piece, they had to massage it, for fear the low information folks might believe them:
NYTimes modifies editorial to make it less damning of Obama | The Daily Caller
Here's the problem with low information voters or people, as it were. They really 'aren't that into news.' However they have great instincts regarding what may effect them. Thus the IRS scandal and this one, delving into their privacy, are likely to resonate.
The Daily Caller?
Really?
The outfit that paid a Prostitute to accuse Senator Menendez of Pedophilia?
That Daily Caller?
Really, with the links and captures you try and pull 'failure of source'? LOL! I thought you were lame, not stupid.
The administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the 9/11 attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers.
Yeah, it was an opinion piece in the NY times saying the Patriot Act, enacted after 9-11 needs to be sharply curtailed or repealed. They are correct on this BTW. Nowhere did they say the administration has lost all credibility. That was The Blaze saying that.
No. And liberals like you need to learn reading comprehension skills badly.
"Within hours of the disclosure that the federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.
Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability. The administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the 9/11 attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers."
Note: The phrase "on this issue" was added later in an obvious attempt to backtrack.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/op...pagewanted=all
