Funny. I backed up the thread to where you came in, and came up with this:
C'mon, Win, how about something substantive about Okrent's editorial, instead of the same old tired and tiresome stuff? #reply-20350200
But Okrent's editorial had nothing to do with foreign affairs, or the NYT coverage of foreign affairs either. Now, who's twisting things around to fit their own personal Wilson / Berger obsession? Not me, not the NYT, not Okrent. Then there was this:
In general, I don't read the NYT editorial page or the op-eds.
Interesting.
On what basis do you defend it, then?
Would you care to point out where, exactly, I defended the NYT editorial page? You came up with a bunch of posts where I noted the eternal NYT vendetta here, but under conventional logic that's not exactly the same thing.
Meanwhile, if you want to continue the alleged Okrent discussion, there's always nytimes.com . I'm not holding my breath. |
