How about some rambling from a rank amateur?
:-o
This is an endorsement by the NYT. Those responsible for
endorsing Kerry certainly know as much or more about Kerry
as any of us on this thread. At best, Kerry is the best of
a bad lot & his credentials to be President are surely
lacking. Kerry has serious credibility problems, from his
littany of flip flops on numerous serious issues, his
inability to keep his word & his dishonesty.
The NYT choose to seriously nuance all of his weaknesses &
had the audacity to frame some as strengths that come from
mainstream America. IOW, the NYT once again exposed their
liberal bias & their inability to accept that they, like
Kerry, clearly are liberals & not part of the mainstream.
The fact that the NYT, like Kerry, choose to use his
service in Vietnam as evidence of his leadership
abilities, while completely ignoring his horrific assault
on the military with blatant lies about massive war
crimes, ET AL, all while many tens of thousands were still
fighting & dying in Vietnam speaks volumes about the
credibility gap at the NYT as well as Kerry.
I'm going to look deeply into my crystal ball & make a
prediction. The NYT is going to continue to back Kerry
come hell or high water & at the same time they will
continue to smear Bush at every opportunity.....
regardless of the facts (and in spite of them quite
often)........ and they will still believe they are
objective, balanced, moderate & representing mainstream
America.
IMO, I've only stated the obvious. |
