Once again, the New York Times is going around thinking that it's the Washington Times.

Good thing they didn't plant Republican Operatives.

First off, the NyTimes didn't misstate anything, 2nd, the provision would clearly assist the party in power in the Senate, which at some point could, hypothetically, be back in Repub hands, so why is this an issue?

Who said the NYT "misstated" anything ?  The MMFA text is "... the Times failed to disclose ..." 

My guess is because it could taint the public's grandiose image of the Democratic controlled Congress, and MMFA can't have that.....I mean really, they are less popular with the American people than OJ Simpson.

And knowing the former occupation of Gold and Gupta would taint the public's grandiose image of the role they played in the equally popular Republican-controlled 109th Congress, and the NYT can't have that .

Are you saying the NY Times is worried about a negative image of Republicans among its readers?  Ahhhh, ok. (??)

Um...NO.

They're worried about a negative image of the people they choose to write Op-Eds.  I think I made that abundantly clear. 

I personally think MMfA should lay off the newspapers who host the editorials MMfA doesn't like and concentrate on the writers themselves. It's regular and part of the democratic system for major newspapers to provide contrasting editorial opinions, and if one paper let them go, they would just get picked up by another, so calling out the newspaper is a bit like shooting the messenger.

MMFA's complaint is the failure to disclose important information.

why does this taint the image of the democratic congress? as i read the explanation by feinstein, this will stop last minute additions to bills that have been negotiated between the house and senate.  as she describes it, the only way before to remove that last minute addition is to object to the entire bill.  and if it passed with only 14 against, that means most republicans supported it.  it sounds like a good idea.

Because the op-ed piece criticizes passed legislation in the Congress which is controlled by Democrats, without identifying the piece's authors and their previous Republican affiliation.

so you agree with mmfa's criticism?

I think MMFA has a point, although it's an op-ed piece, which is given far greater latitude as it is opinion.  Nevertheless, full disclosure is good.

okay, then we agree.  when you said "mmfa can't have that", i thought you were taking some kind of shot.  glad to hear you weren't.

I was a little, but hey it's a holiday week, so thankfulness and gratitude is the prevailing atmosphere, right?

The congress as a whole may be unpopular, but the Democrats sure are more popular than their republican counterparts. In fact, I believe it's 10 points higher. Wouldn't want the public to know that, they might stop listening to the current government...

SAVE DEMOCRACY!! VOTE FOR AN INDEPENDENT!!

END THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM!!

Another example of why both the Democratic and Republican Parties have destroyed America. We really need a 3rd party more than ever. 

Amen!  One of the reasons for all the cynicism and nastiness in politics is the underlying anger and disappointment many have for politicians and elected officials today.  No matter who they are, or what they say, it's met with "yeah right".

There is thirst for a viable third party, but the two powerful ones will move heaven and earth to see that doesn't happen. 

I agree with that.

And the Republicans IN Congress are even LESS popular

The issue is that Martin B. Gold and Dimple Gupta were opponents of Senate minority-party rights in 2005, and with a change in which party controls the Senate, are now supporters of Senate minority-party rights.

Eric, well put, thanks for the explanation.

Why does it matter who they worked for earlier with regards to their op-ed?  Not that I'm a fan of the NYT, but they identified these two in broad terms as lawyers and Congressional aides. After all, this was an op-ed, not an article.

My guess is, if one were so inclined, that you could find instances where op-eds written by people, who at one time worked for Democrats is also omitted. 

The more important omission is that Martin B. Gold and Dimple Gupta are behind the "nuclear option" against filibusters of judicial nominees.

Yes, the NY Times doesn't have to tell us much about the writers of Op-Eds.  But I'm thankful that MMFA is filling us in. 

Eric,

Does knowing a bit more about the op-ed writers change your opinion of the op-ed?

It should. One of the things you need to know when judging the credibility of an op ed piece goes like this Is their ox being gored? That is how would THEIR best interest be served if you take it at face value. That is why they SHOULD have been identified as Republican operatives.

anyone with political connections should be identified as such.  either party.

Hopefully in the next election repug's will become extinct like the dinosaurs they deny having been around.

Huckabee is the new face, methinks. I bet he loses this nomination, the Repubs understand that the nation has gone economically and environmentally progressive, and runs to at least the nomination success in 2012.