Wow, I’m shocked to the core, the NYT endorses Kerry? Dog Bites Man.

Why wouldn’t the ideological core of the left feel used and abused by such new and novel concepts as the Electoral College and the idea that a State Supreme Court can’t make up the rules as it goes along? Why this is no fun!! We’re not playing.

Let them soil their nappies, I’ve heard quite enough of their lies and condescension. The MSM’s days are over. They don’t rule the world like they used to. The Jason Blairs and Dan Rathers of the world are now having their work checked by guys in their jammies and they are found wanting. They don’t like be 2nd guessed especially when they’re FOS and they know it.

If the real world retorts with “BS!”, it’s greatly deserved. Beating a drum for Kerry isn’t going to change things much in NYC, or the rest of the country, for that matter.

The Times stopped leading the parade decades ago and every day it looks less like a newspaper and more like Vanity Fair.

Posted by: torpedo_eight at October 17, 2004 10:48 AM

Even in endorsing Kerry, the Times could not bring itself to telling its readers why it should vote for Kerry.

This piece was nothing but yet another “Anybody But Bush” rant.

How lame!!!

Posted by: Pat M. at October 17, 2004 12:14 PM

Yeah, all that Kerry ‘clear thinking!’… ha ha This man doesn’t even know for sure if he wants to kill babies….his religion says its wrong, but then why would anyone want to project their moral values on all the other murderers and slimy liberals in this country. Oh, ‘did you know I was an altar boy?’…ha ha That should lose about 20% of the Catholic vote…to have Lerch running around the altar is not a pretty sight.

Posted by: dickmr at October 17, 2004 03:53 PM

Kerry is the only politician I’m aware of who believes BOTH that life begins at conception, AND the mother has a legal right to terminate her pregnancy up to the point the baby’s head is out of the birth canal. In short, he’s the only politician I’ve ever heard of who supports infantacide at the mother’s choice.

And if he doesn’t want to impose his moral beliefs on others, why does he vote for making partial-birth abortion LEGAL? Is that not a moral belief? Or are we to suppose that only positions that support the right of the child to live are moral?

Does anyone else have trouble following his logic?

Posted by: torpedo_eight at October 17, 2004 10:45 PM

I wonder if anybody here read the whole opinion page. There is a very interesting article under the Public Editor. The question is ask is the New York Times is either left or right leaning…… If you are interested int the answer you should read the paper for yourself. Two very thoughful answers were giving space to ‘prove’ the point.

Posted by: colddog at October 17, 2004 11:10 PM