While I have also found the sports fan like affiliation with political sides consternating, it is time to pick a side and stand on it.

This is who our family and people like us have always voted for is no longer good enough. One from A and two from B doesn’t cut it. Who one is prepared to help win because one feels losing is not an option is all that matters. I don’t care for the “right” a great deal but I will not accept victory by the “left” (as preposterous as those labels are).

I wish, if their core advertisers were Walmart, GM, Kraft, Walgreens, etc, companies with ties to middle America it could happen, but the NYT’s lives off of Fendi, Tiffany’s, Gucci, etc ads, the consumer goods of the well to do lefty elitists.

And, David, the NYT’s losing it’s way isn’t a new thing. It was on the wrong side of history with Duranty’s slavish praises of Stalin a long time ago.

The owners are a sick, mentally decadent and arrogant family. They are just as privy to the stock’s 50% haircut since 9/11, but would rather go for broke.

MarkD – my prayers for your son-in-law. I thank him for his sense of duty and sacrifice.

You regard The Times “as outright stodgy, rarely able to see outside the box of the ‘Zabar’s Zeitgeist.’”

Have a look at this feature profile of Ann Coulter.
Contrary to your pressumptions, she is similarly icon smashing, a think outside-the-box breath of fresh air – a point I made on your post asking about her a week or two ago.

The left priviledges “feelings” and “other regard” above straightforward common sense. This enrages the left but also befuddles standard bearers on the right. In other words, exactly what The Times utterly lacks.

I have a son-in-law in Iraq now, and this is personal. I’m going to help Pinch out by contacting his advertisers directly to let them know how much I appreciate the NYT helping our enemies and how I am not exactly inclined to spend money with people who are trying to help those who would kill my family.

Maybe some pressure on the advertisers will drive the NYT stock down a little faster. It beats simply waiting for the government to put the squeeze on them.

And the reason that the natural reaction of the public, not some manufactured response from a good P.R. campaign, was so strong was because of the pathetic defense that these jerks made in justfiying why they had no choice to publish. They ask for press shields and for legal protection of there sources and methods and at the same time try to say that our spy services don’t need legal protection for the programs that save lives, here and abroad. Maximum openess for spy agencies, maximum secrecy for the press. Unamed press sources leaking security secrets-sacred, classified government security programs- trust us, we know better as to what should be secret and what should be exposed. Oh, breaking news, the Belgiums are now considering backing out of the program now that Keller spilled the Beans. Now the terrorists can go back to the fast, efficient ways to transfer money. Praise Allah for Mr. Keller and Bancquet.

If You Are Not Part Of The Solution You Are Part Of The Problem.– Blast From Our Past.

Anything that contributes to the ‘health’ of the NYT is by your definition, anti-’progressive’. For this one time only, that old 60ties slogun is actually applicable. Unless you can read the output for nothing, it is ‘reactionary’ to read the Times.