As NYT Hails McCain, Williams Demands Giuliani Answer Its Belittling

Photo of Brent Baker.

Instead of pressing John McCain to defend himself to Republican primary voters in the wake of a New York Times editorial endorsing him which praised McCain for his more liberal views on global warming, campaign finance and illegal immigration, during Thursday night's GOP presidential debate on MSNBC, Brian Williams demanded Rudy Giuliani respond to the denigration of him by the left-wing newspaper -- which Williams called “your home town paper” -- as a “vindictive man” with a “breathtaking” level of “arrogance and bad judgment.” To audience applause, Giuliani pointed out that if he ever “did anything the New York Times suggested...I wouldn't be considered a conservative Republican.”

Concluding the 97-minute debate from Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, Williams promised questions about “how you counter the attacks against you from your opponents,” presumably those on stage, and Williams did hit Mitt Romney on his flip-flops and McCain on his age. But leading off with Giuliani shortly before 10:30pm EST, Williams pursued:

In tomorrow morning's editions of the New York Times they are out with their endorsements in the New York primary. Senator Clinton on the Democratic side, Senator McCain on the Republican side. In tonight's lead editorial, they say, quote: "The real Mr. Giuliani, who many New Yorkers came to know and mistrust, is a narrow, obsessively secretive vindictive man. His arrogance and bad judgment are breathtaking." How can you defend against that in your home town paper? How have you changed as a man since this portrait?

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

January 25 New York Times editorial endorsing Hillary Clinton.

An excerpt from the praise for McCain in the shorter January 25 editorial endorsing the Arizona Senator:

....Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe. With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field.

We have shuddered at Mr. McCain's occasional, tactical pander to the right because he has demonstrated that he has the character to stand on principle. He was an early advocate for battling global warming and risked his presidential bid to uphold fundamental American values in the immigration debate. A genuine war hero among Republicans who proclaim their zeal to be commander in chief, Mr. McCain argues passionately that a country's treatment of prisoners in the worst of times says a great deal about its character....

Mr. McCain stood up for the humane treatment of prisoners and for a ban on torture. We said then that he was being conned by Mr. Bush, who had no intention of following the rules. But Mr. McCain took a stand, just as he did in recognizing the threat of global warming early. He has been a staunch advocate of campaign finance reform, working with Senator Russ Feingold, among the most liberal of Democrats, on groundbreaking legislation, just as he worked with Senator Edward Kennedy on immigration reform.

That doesn’t make him a moderate, but it makes him the best choice for the party’s presidential nomination.

The Williams/Giuliani exchange near the end of the January 24 debate, moderated by Williams with questions also from Tim Russert:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: These questions are designed to speak to who you all are in terms of how you counter the attacks against you from your opponents, the weaknesses your opponents among others perceive. Mayor Giuliani, we're going to begin with you. In tomorrow morning's editions of the New York Times they are out with their endorsements in the New York primary. Senator Clinton on the Democratic side, Senator McCain on the Republican side. In tonight's lead editorial, they say, quote: “The real Mr. Giuliani, who many New Yorkers came to know and mistrust, is a narrow, obsessively secretive vindictive man. His arrogance and bad judgment are breathtaking.” How can you defend against that in your home town paper? How have you changed as a man since this portrait?

RUDY GIULIANI: Because I probably never did anything the New York Times suggested I do in eight years as Mayor of New York City. And if I did, I wouldn't be considered a conservative Republican. I changed welfare [audience applause] I changed quality of life. I took on homelessness. I did all the things that they thought make you mean, and I believe show true compassion and true love for people. I moved people from welfare to work. When I did that, when I set up workfare, the New York Times wrote nasty editorials about how mean I was, how cruel I was. I think there's a serious idea logical difference, and I worked for Ronald Reagan. And I remember once. when I was in the Justice Department, the New York Times wrote a very laudatory editorial about my boss, Bill Smith, the Attorney General. And Bill was very nervous that Ronald Reagan would get upset that we were off agenda because of the good New York Times editorial. So the reality is that I think there is a serious ideological difference. That probably was some of the nicest language they've written about me in the last six months.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The MSM are a ruthless bunch

The MSM are a ruthless bunch aren't they?  Inhuman if you ask me.

Brian Williams-The Littlest Democret


Brian Williams
, starring in The Littlest Democret

Russert-Williams 2000 Gore-Bush flashback

McCain gets Satan's backing! (Only kidding!)

As if John McCain doesn't have enough problems begging conservatives to vote for him, he gets endorsed by the New York Times. Wow. That'll help.

What next, the KKK endorses Barack Obama?

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

→ Bauer

You're not far off with the Klan question.

The only question the NYT had to ask itself was: "What endorsement on the Republican side most benefits the Razorback HillBillies"

CONSPIRATORIAL or CLUELESS ?

The conspiratorial view would be that the NYT fears McCain could beat the Democrat and wants to damage him with their endorsement.

The clueless view is that the NYT editorial board believes Republicans trust and value its endorsement.

I think the most arrogant

I think the most arrogant thing about that question was the:

How have you changed as a man since this portrait?

Since this portrait? You mean the one they wrote today?????

Good grief! Not do you agree with this assessment? but are you trying to improve?

His answer was fantastic: they think I'm arrogant because I wouldn't let them dictate my actions.

For McCain, they're a little upset about his "occasional pandering to the right." No similar worries about Mrs. Clinton's pandering to the nutroots.

They do criticize her, including her husband's big mouth, but then endorse her anyway. They throw a few flowers at Obama, but in the end go with the one who was their girl all along. They claim she is ready to lead the country. The only thing missing was "on day one"

Well, that would have been a little obvious.

Rudy had the right idea, and a great answer.

Does anyone think these newspaper endorsements really have any effect on voters? Well at least the practice gets their biases out in the open.

Update at 0656: And don't forget, the Times praised Mrs. Clinton's new openness to explaining herself and not just her programs.

The choking-up worked!!!

 

 

best answer ever?

Was that not a perfect answer?  My goodness, how was Rudy able to stay so poised when asked such a ridiculous question?  So not only was he able to slam the NYT while defending his conservatism, he highlighted liberal media bias that existed 30 years ago!! 

I wanna vote for Rudy, but is he electable?  Is it Rudy or Romney?  The NYT coronation for McCain is his death knell. 

I'm still in awe of that answer. 

I agree his answer was

I agree his comments were probably the best (with Mitt's coming in second). I don't agree with Rudy on abortion or gay rights but he would be light years better at president than HillBill or Obamama.

 

Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns

or McCain

"he would be light years better at president than HillBill or Obamama"

...or McCain

It's not Right vs. Left; it is Right vs. Wrong

I wanna vote for Rudy,

I wanna vote for Rudy, but is he electable?

Not if you don't vote for him! That has to be the start for whover you support.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

After all, it was in the New York Times

Notice how they just assume that since it's the New York Times, it must have been accurate. Maybe that's the definition of a liberal: someone who places trust in that rag.

The New York Times has been portraying Rudy as a tyrant for years, but as Rudy explained after the debate, they always liked the result of his policies, but never the theory. I can't help but remember the Democrats carping for years about Reagan's "warmongering" and "insane" rhetoric, and yet when Reagan was proved right, the liberals welcomed the result as if it was their idea all along. Clinton embraced welfare reform, which was a long time conservative idea, and took credit for it.

  • I was proud of the GOP candidates last night. As Rudy said, we supported the war when the poll was 60% in favor, but we've stayed in support even if the poll goes against us 60%.
  • Contrast that with the Democrats, who are bragging about how fast they can jump ship.

Liberals are like Gilderoy Lockhart from Harry Potter. They show up when there's credit to be taken, but at the first sign of trouble, they're long gone.

Compare to his rumor clarification with Obama

What  a contrast to the rumors that he allowed Obama to clarify just last week.  He lead Obama through that, but somehow thought he would sting Rudy with of all things..The New York Times?

Um, lets look at what your former readers are saying and the former stockholders..I use the word former, because they are leaving in droves and they are not coming back..What used to be a paper that mattered is nothing but a bunch of op-eds thrown together and painted as news.. Honestly, who looks to the Times for their viewpoint on a candidate this side of Marx? 

 

That's a 126 word

That's a 126 word "question" from Williams. And it even begins with a fatuous rationale.

In any sort of real journalistic ethics, The New York Times is not an "opponent" of Rudy. Or maybe it is now. Maybe the Slimes is merely the Democrats' house paper, and therefore everything it prints is just a Press Release on behalf of the Democrats.

 Just another surrogate rabid attack machine which has spent the best part of 10 years producing hit piece after hit piece on the man.

But conservatives will get the message that they 'love' McCain and hate Giuliani. And as the Slimes is so invested in a Democrat election victory you have to ask yourself, why?

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

No need to ask, Jack; they

No need to ask, Jack; they love McCain because he's the closest thing to a Democrat on the Republican side. He's an "even Republican."

McCain must be seething at

McCain must be seething at the Slimes.

McCain thought bubble: "I told you to wait till Feb 6 you bleep-holes."

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Anyone catch McCain's excellent maneuver last night?

I dislike McCain as a candidate, but admire his timely maneuver last night.  

Following up the NYT's sliming of Rudy, McCain "defended" him by applauding Rudy's service to the country after 9/11.  

It was a Godfather-like kiss....an announcement to the world that Rudy's campaign was dead...and a pitch for Rudy's followers to join McCain, all neatly packaged.  

Nicely done, John.

 

RJ -- damn these cunning

RJ -- damn these cunning politicians!

Rudy has had the best putdown in the whole campaign but it doesn't appear to be helping him now.

Clinton: "I have a million ideas; America cannot afford them all."

Rudy: "No kidding, Hillary - America can’t afford you."

 

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Brian Williams has his 'Smart Glasses' on.. What a shallow....

piece of trash. These people are so transparent it's amazing how the public doesn't run them out of town. Or at LEAST get them to do their jobs.

NBC

NBC, MSNBC and CNBC have ever declining viewship.  Brian Williams works there and is aiding in that decline.  Why is he pretending to be "superior" to any of those candidates on stage last night?

There you have it..

Straight from the liberal paper of record. The NYT is officially endorsing McCain for the Republican nominee because they, the liberal standard bearer, like his ideas and positions more than the other GOP candidates.

If that doesn't tell you that McCain is closer to a Democrat than a Republican, I don't know what will.

By all means vote for him if you think that McCain is the best conservative candidate for GOP nominee, but please change your party affiliation to Democrat.

McCain represents the moderate wing of the Democratic party, As the NYT endorsement makes blindingly clear.

 

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

BRIAN WILLIAMS = SILKY PONY

The quaffed hair, the $3k suits, the "holier than thou" attitude, the left of center mantra.

I think it's safe to say Williams IS the silky pony of broadcasting!

so much for moderating

I suppose in these days, the definition of a debate is when the moderator quotes a lengthy rant from a hit piece, and instead of asking the candidate to rebutt it, insists the the attack was truthful and justified and asks the candidate to move on.

That was not a GOP debate last night. It was NBC's attempt to paint them all as villans and all Republicans learned from it was who the left hates more.

Dorian Grey

Williams is trash. If ever there were a re-incarnation of Dorian Grey, it's he. He wasn't the best looking guy last night, but he's younger and "clean" looking. Yet on the inside he is nothing but rot. His covered portrait is in his house.

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"

When I lived in NY...

When I lived in NY, the Times never had a good thing to say about Rudy and his staff. I'm sure this was not a big surprise or disappointment to him. I don't think any of the GOP candidates, except for McCain or Paul would welcome their endorsement. I would see the endorsement as the "kiss of death" for a candidate. Brian Williams is such a shill for the libs, it's laughable.

On another note, Rudy's advisors did not do him any favors by concentrating on Florida and ignoring the previous caucuses and primaries. They lost him the Presidency. And he's just as much to blame for listening to them.

Of course, there's always the Vice Presidency. That way, we don't have to look at his wife on a full time basis.....yuk....I like Rudy, but the wife is a nightmare.

NYT anti-endorsement

Rudy's answer is why I like him.  It's funny how Williams assumes that the NYT's insulting description of Giuliani is the least bit accurate.  But Rudy's point nails it...the NYT opposed me, thus proving I was right.

The fact that the NYT endorses McCain is enough to disqualify him as a Republican candidate.

In tonight's lead

In tonight's lead editorial, they say, quote: "The real Mr. Giuliani, who many New Yorkers came to know and mistrust, is a narrow, obsessively secretive vindictive man. His arrogance and bad judgment are breathtaking." How can you defend against that in your home town paper?

 

I'd say: "Easy. It's the frickin' New York Times!"