Publius has a smart post on the New York Times and the McCain Iseman article:
I’ve got to think there’s more to come. Josh Marshall’s analysis seems spot on the NYT must have more than they’re publishing at this point. This article wasn’t some rush job they’ve been mulling it for months. More to the point, they knew exactly the type of conservative firestorm that the article would produce.
It’s hard to imagine the NYT (after institutional deliberation) going forward with such an explosive article with such a thin foundation. In this respect, the sheer recklessness is, in a weird way, perhaps the most frightening thing for the McCain campaign. Maybe the paper has the goods and is trying to tie down one loose end or something. Who knows. They’ve either got the goods or it’s one of the stupidest things in the history of journalism.
I'm still trying to figure out how to respond to the McCain scandal. The New York Times is sticking by its guns, so, for now, I'm going to assume their reporting has some factual basis. We'll just have to wait and see how things shake out over the next few days.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to email@example.com.