NYT Profiles Pauls

The New York Times cannot get enough of Rand Paul. Today it profiles Paul from the perspective of what it was like to grow up in the libertarian home of Ron Paul:

In keeping with their position as the First Family of Libertarianism, the Pauls of Lake Jackson, Tex., did not have many rules around their home.

“Behave yourself and be polite” is how Representative Ron Paul describes his regulatory philosophy about rearing five children. Mr. Paul, a Republican, and his wife of 53 years, Carol, never believed in assigned chores or mandates.

They did not give out allowances, which they viewed as a parental version of a government handout. They did not believe in strict curfews; Mr. Paul says that unintended consequences — like speeding home to beat the clock — can result from excessive meddling from a central authority.

Reporter on NYT McCain Hit Piece Also Targeted McConnell

A co-author of the New York Times' hit piece on John McCain's supposed scandals previously authorized a screed against Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell that has since been criticized on ethical grounds by the American Journalism Review.

While working as an editor at the Lexington Herald-Leader, Marilyn Thompson solicited and accepted a grant to fund an "investigative" series about McConnell. The grant came from the Center for Investigative Reporting, which was funded by the liberal Deer Creek Foundation -- an organization that had financed litigation against McConnell regarding campaign finance.

The AJR notes that:

In 2006, as editor of the Lexington Herald-Leader in Kentucky, Marilyn W. Thompson wanted her paper to undertake a major project examining Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell's political fundraising practices and suggestions of influence peddling. When she realized her lean newsroom budget alone wouldn't cover it, Thompson got her Knight Ridder bosses' enthusiastic approval to seek a grant from the nonprofit Center for Investigative Reporting. The California-based center provided $37,500 to underwrite the salary of reporter John Cheves, who took an unpaid six-month leave of absence to do the project, as well as to cover expenses.

Following publication of the series on McConnell, Thompson left the Lexington Herald-Leader for the Los Angeles Times. And the Herald-Leader was purchased by McClatchy. After reviewing the funding for the series, McClatchy's vice president for news, Howard Weaver, decided to return the grant. Weaver said at the time, "I just think that the relationship [with the outside groups] was sufficiently unorthodox that we don't need to do it."

The pay-for-play funding of the McConnell series, and the controversy it generated, caused the Center for Investigative Reporting to change its procedures, according to the AJR:

The incident made a lasting impression at the center. While there always has been "a complete firewall" between editorial and fundraising, since then "we have made the case more strenuously to funders that we would prefer general operating support as opposed to project-specific support," says Christa Scharfenberg, the center's associate director. (Funding for the McConnell project had come from money Deer Creek had designated for campaign finance coverage.)

When a foundation provides a grant to a journalist, there is a risk, AJR cautions, that "raises concerns about editorial objectivity and whether it has been compromised by a funder." That risk increases where, as in the McConnell series, the grant maker specifies the topic.

After Thompson, the former Herald-Leader editor, left for the LA Times, she then went to the New York Times; thus her byline on the McCain piece. Note, however, that Thompson is the only reporter on the McCain piece whose byline does not include a hyperlink.

Here's why. Thompson left the New York Times to go to the Washington Post, apparently after working on the McCain piece, but before it was published. Consequently,the Post was able to respond to the New York Times McCain piece today -- the same day the New York Times published the McCain piece. Thompson had spent only six months at the Times and authored just four bylines, according to the New Republic.

The Post announced last week that Thompson will serve as "new Washington accountability editor on the National Desk." In that capacity, Thompson will "lead the newspaper’s accountability reporting efforts, including oversight of such Washington subjects and institutions as the White House, Congress, and 'the intersection of money and politics,' according to an internal memo. "

On the issue of the intersection of money and journalism, Thompson brings substantial first-hand experience to her new job.

Update: Although WaPo announced Thompson's hiring last week, it seems her official first day is today. I give her six months.

We Knew That Was Coming

For many conservatives already suspicious of Senator John McCain, the New York Times endorsement of him did not help. It was just a matter of time, however, before the liberal mouth piece would turn on McCain. And now that he has the nomination locked up, the Times has run a hit piece that catalogs McCain's "scandals" going back to the beginning of his political career.

The Times, not surprisingly, dusts off McCain's connections to the "Keating Five" and the S & L crisis. And it discusses McCain's contacts with a lobbyist, who happens to be beautiful, blonde and female.

As the New York Daily News noted, the Times fails to make a direct allegation; it just gives lots of steamy innuendo about something that may or may not have happened nearly a decade ago.

The bar of proof gets raised when we're in the late innings of a presidential primary and your subject is closing in on his party's nomination. You either have the goods, or you don't. And if you don't, fairness and the professional requirements say you don't publish. The consequences deserve no less.

The Times' treatment of McCain is way slimier than any of its insuations against McCain. And coming after its endorsement, it's hypocritical. After all, McCain's ties to the lobbyest -- which appear to be purely professional --were disclosed years ago.

This attempt to manipulate first the Republican primary and now the general election is why circulation of the "Paper of Record" is plummeting. At some point, the Times lost sight of its slogan: "All the news that's fit to print." Without the guts to make a direct allegation against McCain --let alone the proof -- the Times has fallen to the standard of the National Enquirer.

In the meantime, McCain needs to address the unstated allegations of the hit piece forthrightly and quickly.

Update: The New Republic's coverage of the Times coverage makes clear that the Times sat on the story for three months. That is, the Times knew of the story before it endorsed McCain and did not consider it an impediment to backing him. In addition the Times waited to release the story until after McCain was assured of getting the nomination.

Update: At McCain's press conference, held earlier today, he flatly denied the Times' charges. According to the Associated Press:

John McCain says a report by The New York Times suggesting an inappropriate relationship with a female lobbyist is "not true" and he denied a romantic relationship with her. "It's not true," McCain said as his wife, Cindy, stood alongside him during a news conference.

The Arizona senator described the woman in question, lobbyist Vicki Iseman, as a friend.

McCain says he "will not allow a smear campaign" to distract from his presidential campaign.

. . . .

In a statement issued by his presidential campaign, McCain spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said:

"It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.

"Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career."