The New York Times’ Fever Swamp Editorial Endorsement of John Kerry
45% or so of the country is probably for John Kerry, but we fervently hope that they have their heads screwed on straighter than the NYT.
There is no denying that this race is mainly about Mr. Bush’s disastrous tenure. Nearly four years ago, after the Supreme Court awarded him the presidency, Mr. Bush came into office amid popular expectation that he would acknowledge his lack of a mandate by sticking close to the center. Instead, he turned the government over to the radical right.
Mr. Bush installed John Ashcroft, a favorite of the far right with a history of insensitivity to civil liberties, as attorney general. He sent the Senate one ideological, activist judicial nominee after another. He moved quickly to implement a far-reaching anti-choice agenda including censorship of government Web sites and a clampdown on embryonic stem cell research….
When the nation fell into recession, the president remained fixated not on generating jobs but rather on fighting the right wing’s war against taxing the wealthy.
On and on and on; here’s the summary: “The Bush White House has always given us the worst aspects of the American right without any of the advantages.” It would be interesting to know what the Times thinks those advantages might be. Making the trains run on time, one supposes from the tone of the editorial.
The editorial runs 21 paragraphs. Only two paragraphs cite reasons for voting for Senator Kerry. The number two or three reason provided by the Times is “stem cell research.” Pathetic.
One wonders, after reading this editorial, if Mr. Safire or Mr. Brooks could sue their employer for a hostile workplace environment.