New Yorker Editorial- The Editors Weigh In On Election

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,335 • Replies: 23

No top replies

Thanks for that, p. I couldn't finish it, but what I read just reminded me of why my decision is what it is.

0 Replies

LOL...at least you're honest

0 Replies

Can't bother to read it, seeing as how the NYT has been showing their liberal colors and being a cheer leader for Kerry.

0 Replies

Did you decide that for yourself, B?

0 Replies

Re: New Yorker Editorial- The Editors Weigh In On Election

panzade wrote:

Issue of 2004-11-01
Posted 2004-10-25

That's true.;-)

It is a very interesting and good article,anyway the choice is already clear.

0 Replies

I understand Baldimo. How I feel about your poster boy Duh who's been cut and pasting volumes of propaganda...and that's a shame for both of us.

0 Replies

Good one Thok. Sharp eye. Unprecedent...must mean it's important.

0 Replies

Baldimo,

It's telling that you mixed up the New Yorker and the NY Times. It's also apparent you don't recognize the significance of this editorial.

0 Replies

Re: New Yorker Editorial- The Editors Weigh In On Election
" But when his foes sought to destroy him rather than to debate him they found no scandals and no evidence of bad faith in his past. "

I guess they did not look too hard did they?

0 Replies

You have evidence of scandal or bad faith?

0 Replies

Well, Baldimo could at least have made the great mental leap of distinguishing The New Yorker and The New York Times.

Pan
It's an extraordinary piece. Thank you. May I return the favor (if you have bumped into it yet)...
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17511

Though as it has New York in the title, Baldimo will likely be further confused.

0 Replies

trying to find it...lol

0 Replies

Thanks Blatham...I'm a reading. But what the hell does castruisties mean?

0 Replies

Yeah Wo, that line is the one Republicans are bound to jump on.

0 Replies

panzade wrote:

Baldimo,

It's telling that you mixed up the New Yorker and the NY Times. It's also apparent you don't recognize the significance of this editorial.

Funny. I completely missed that.

0 Replies

there could be no other choice pan..this incumbant is probably the worst fiscal president since Jimmy Carter..let alone the worst in foreign policy...I can only hope that voters decide wisely next Tues...thanks for the article ..I DID read it all :-))

0 Replies

panzade wrote:

Thanks Blatham...I'm a reading. But what the hell does castruisties mean?

I think you have the spelling wrong... here's a web resource I use often...
http://dictionary.reference.com/

New Yorker Editorial- The Editors Weigh In On Election

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know