Keeping a jaundiced eye on the corporate media.
May 21st, 2006 at 8:03 am by Susie
The New York Times has an analysis piece today on how the Democrats treat presidential candidates who lost, and why that makes it unlikely Al Gore (and John Kerry) could have another shot at the nomination.
The Times neglects to mention the general public consensus that both Gore and Kerry won, and had the election stolen from them.
You are a Working Class Warrior, also known as a blue-collar Democrat. You believe that the little guy is getting screwed by conservative greed-mongers and corporate criminals, and you’re not going to take it anymore.
Take the quiz at www.FightConservatives.com
Add new tag Barack Obama Democratic Drinking Liberally John McCain Media Philadelphia political coverage polls primary race
casino tournaments
Bad Behavior has blocked 12069 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Puhleeeeeeeeeze…like I’m gonna waste my time reading the NYT about any gotdamn thing.
Why?
They lied about WMD.
They lied about Katrina.
They lied about wiretapping.
They continue to lie by publishing whatever BushMonkey, Condi-lies-a-Lot, ‘DeadEye’, ‘Dummy’ and SnowJob dribble out of their mouths.
NYT=waste of time.
Stik a fork in ‘em…they are done.
What I want in a candidate is someone who want to cut the nuts out of his opponent. I loved the Cuomo campaign against D’Amato. Who could forget that beautiful “McCarthyism” bomb dropped on Bush by Clinton? That incredible front page headline gave me goose-bumps! One almost has to hyphenate the word for type that large.
In summary, I am willing to forget candidates who can’t pull those coups off. Get me a killer batting cleanup; (and yeah yeah, the election was stolen, WMD’s were a lie).
General consesus? How can a minority (those who voted for the democrats) be a general consesus? The majority, who voted for the winner, surely believe it was fair. Just because you lose doesn’t make it stolen. Sounds like a kids’ excuse for losing a baseball game: the refs cheat!