 |
NYT Editorial Board: McCain = Bush |
 |
My friends in the blogosphere and I have spent weeks now pointing out just how disastrously similar a John McCain presidency would be to the current administration. Friday’s lead editorial in the New York Times shows that one slice of the establishment media now agrees:
The United States needs a clean break from eight catastrophic years of George W. Bush. And so far, Senator John McCain is shaping up as Bush the Sequel — neverending war in Iraq, tax cuts for the rich while the middle class struggles, courts packed with right-wing activists intent on undoing decades of progress in civil rights, civil liberties and other vital areas.
In a column that mostly focuses on the need for the Clinton and Obama campaigns to begin to come together for the Democratic Conventions and the fall campaign, the Times editorial board makes it clear why it is so important that the supporters of both surviving campaigns turn out for the Democratic nominee this fall in the same record numbers that have momentously marked this long primary season: A vote for McCain is a vote for McSame. Taking your ball and going home—and then staying home on November 4th—is not an option if you care about the future of this country.
Whatever our differences, whatever our problems with either Clinton or Obama (and, readers know, I have had my problems with both), these issues are nothing in the face of another term of Bushian rule.
- - - - -
(cross-posted on guy2k)
YEs. If McCain won, we will have another set of "I'm Sorry" post appearing all over the internet…I for one can't ever fathom McCain as President…unless America truly believe and accept that THE GUY IN CHARGE (previously)should a monkey who think he's funny. Whatever gets asked, he treat it as a joke…That's real funny… I'd rather have Robin William be president if I want a funny man as president.
And why do you think this Red Wind? Because the press told you too? I'd take the last 8 Bush years of prosperity, tax cuts and protection from Islamic Jihadist over and over again verses, as Ann Coulter says, "insanely hyperbolic descriptions of Obama%u2019s %u201Celoquence.%u201D His speeches are a run-on string of embarrassing, sophomoric Hallmark bromides." Barack Obama | Change We Can Fantasize In |
You are accusing him of taking cues from the press, and then prove your point with an Ann Coulter talking point, so you are off to a bad start already. The fact that you are afraid of Jihadists pretty much sums up your stance. I would love to know how 8 years of a plummeting currency, a 3 trillion dollar war, a falling international reputation, a growing income gap, and the slow decay of your republican party as "prosperity". Oh but you have selected your "team" (the right wing) so you better repeat whatever your cheerleader (coulter) says, and don't bother with objective research, historical reasoning, and logic, as your house of cards may start swaying.
"one slice of the establishment media now agrees."
Sounds like a slave to the press to me! Do you even know what a bromide is?
I agree with this, but the fact that you use terms like "blogosphere" infers to me that you have no balls.
The fact that you use awkward phrases like "infers to me" signals to me that you probably shouldn't try to criticize others' use of language.
No person who will be the next President; whether it be Obama, McCain or Clinton will be a new or follow-on to George Bush.
Every person who is President wants to leave his or her own mark as President.
And events outside the control of any President will be what affects that Presidency.