In an amazing turn of events, New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt has admitted that the advertising rate given to Moveon.org, to publicly try to destroy General David Petraeus' reputation, should not have been offered to the organization and Hoyt went even further and said the New York Times should not have accepted the ad in the first place because the wording of the advertisement was a personal attack on the truthfulness of General Petraeus' a decorated four (4) star general. I guess if we wait around long enough, we see some very strange things in life and this public admission of wrong doing is something I never thought I would see from the New York Times (NYT).
While I am surprised that the most liberal newspaper in America would admit a mistake like accepting the Moveon.org anti-Petraeus full page ad, I am glad that this major newspaper did admit their mistake and hopefully it will not be repeated again as the 2008 presidential election goes into full steam over the next few months. Clark Hoyt said that this Moveon.org ad represents how low the political discourse has become over the past few years and he is 100% right in that statement. Both conservatives and liberals have lost the ability to play fair on the political battlefield, so the average American is left to try and figure out what is truth and what is propaganda by reading different stories from different news outlets.
While I believe there has always been a liberal slant to the news on the major three (3) U.S. broadcast networks, that liberal bias has become more pronounced over the term of the Bush administration and with the fast rising success of the Fox News network. Add to this debate a War in Iraq that most liberals hate with a passion while conservatives embrace that same war with pride and the table is set up for liberal newspapers like the New York Times and conservative media like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh to clash on a daily basis. In the middle of this ideological battle, good men like General David Petraeus are sacrificed for what one side or the other considers that greater good of the country. That is completely wrong.
At some point in time the vast majority of the American people, that consider themselves moderate, will find a candidate that takes the best ideas of conservatism and liberalism and then blends them together for the greater good of the country. Extremism is almost always bad and lead to a world that most people are not interested in living in. Right now the only moderate candidate I see running for President of the United States is Rudy Giuliani and in the end he will have a difficult time winning the GOP nomination because he is considered not conservative enough for the party faithful. I am old enough to remember a time in the U.S. when extremist were considered nuts and not listened to by mainstream Americans. I so wish for that day to return to the U.S. political system.
Read more about 2008 Elections:
Chet Edwards - Texas Congressman - Still Fighting
Florida Fights DNC For Early Election
Reagan Would Not Win In 2008
Second GOP Debate
Media Abandons McCain