(My headlines keep getting filthier, don't they?)
There's little point in my directing your attention to a story that Buzzflash has pushed so heavily, since nearly everyone reading these words also reads that site. But just in case you missed it, David Lindorff has THE last word on the bulge, and how it might have changed the election.
Uh...David? Maybe the controversy did change the election. With computerized voting, how would we ever know?
3 comments:
I don't think there's any doubt that the election results would have been changed if this story had been given a fraction of the MSM coverage that the smear vet story received. Rove, Blackwell, et al would never have been able to cheat enough to make up the difference, which is probably the reason the NYT editors received a call from Rove himself the day before the story was to have been printed. Wonder what he was calling about? I don't.
The MSM have begun to epidomize the battered woman syndrome, rising up ever so slightly only to be slapped down again, hard. They can either leave the "relationship", publish the truth, and risk the short-term reprecussions, or become apologists and reliable stenographers. The path the NYT has taken apparently is painfully obvious.
I was rather more interested in your thoughts earlier about the possibility that Bush was wearing a heart monitor.
This New Yorker article has an interesting take on the relationship between Rove and the Times... Apparently, the Times knows it's being used, but still wants to please.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?050214fa_fact1
--Eric
Post a Comment