I would guess you know a hit piece when you see it, but in this case, in the absence of any evidence of discriminating review on your part, how would we know? Or do you just like posting anything negative about Hillary?
Dowd had better look in the mirror and see what it is she dislikes in Hillary, because this piece is personal and it's bullshit. I'm not saying it's false, you understand. I'm saying that this column could not be more destructive to political discourse than if it had been written by Kristol himself.
The gratuitous remarks from "reporters" is a sly way to get other people's personal opinions into the mix, the most cynical and jaded, vindictive crap from people who are pissed that Hilalry won't give them access to even more ammunition with which to trash her. Are we supposed to now take the "reporting" of the NYT as unbiased and fair? (as if it ever was)
This is a race. And it looks like a long one. And it's about alot of things; strategy, substance, appearances, spin, records, potential, etc., not to mention the future of the country. So let it play out.... |
