| CBS News | 0 | |
| WaPo | 0 | |
| Zogby | North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan Trails in Potential 2010 Senate Match-up |
0 |
| SF Chron | 0 | |
| KDVR | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Big Government- Hot Air
- Michelle Malkin
- Wheeling & dealing: Snowe pow-wows with Obama; Landrieu, Schumer, Daschle behind the scenes
- Saturday in the Senate: Cash for Cloture; Reid gets 60; Update: 8:15pm Eastern cloture vote – 60-39; Voinovich absent; Dems invoke Teddy Kennedy; Reid: “Ted would be happy.”
- Another day, another Berkeley tantrum
- Jake Tapper
- Lynn Sweet
NYT writes a second endorsement for Ned Lamont – cites “growing sophistication about the issues” as a factor
With Nutroots candidate Ned Lamont’s campaign going nowhere fast, the NYT is pulling out all the stops in order to try and help him gain some momentum in the polls, going into the elections in just over a week. The latest poll taken in the CT Senate race shows Lieberman with a 12 point lead. Quinnipac has him up by 17.
To show their support, earlier this week the NYT published a hit piece on Senator Lieberman – two weeks before the election. And now, in addition to their first endorsement of Lamont, which they published in late July before the CT primary, they’ve posted a second endorsement of Lamont here. Check out this hilarious snippet:
Mr. Lieberman has changed his tone but not his underlying conviction that he has been right all along. He and Mr. Bush are still on the very same page, encouraging the American people to believe that there is a happy ending for American involvement in Iraq, and that all it takes is the perseverance to keep marching toward the end of the rainbow.
Translation: Shame on Joe Lieberman for not wanting to cut and run!
Ned Lamont has run a far less polished campaign than Mr. Lieberman, but the more we see of him, the more impressed we are by his intelligence and his growing sophistication about the issues facing the nation.
LOL – “growing sophistication about the issues facing the nation”? The NYT is too much sometimes. In this critical time in history as the war on terror is being waged, the NYT endorses someone who they feel has a “growing sophistication” about the issues facing the nation, rather than someone who has served for years in Congress. Apparently to the NYT, it’s ok to not have the experience you need to serve in the US Senate, as long as your beliefs and theirs mesh. And, assuming you get elected to the Senate, yours and the NYT’s meshing beliefs can grow – together.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
8 Responses to “NYT writes a second endorsement for Ned Lamont – cites “growing sophistication about the issues” as a factor”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
“Apparently to the NYT, it’s ok to not have the experience you need to serve in the US Senate, as long as your beliefs and theirs mesh.”
This should surprise no one! It’s pretty much par for the course when it comes to the NYT. There hasn’t been a shred of credibility at the “paper of record” for longer than I care to recall. But it’s always good to point out their biases once more.
Newspapers are suppose to report news, not make news and try and push a losing candidate that they want to win. This is so friggin evident, they hate the Conservatives so much and the President so much that they’ll write anything to make pencil neck look good even though he is losing in the very polls the dems so worship.
THEY TRULY MAKE ME SICK AND I WILL BE SO GLAD WHEN NOV. 8TH FINALLY GETS HERE.
Do peeps still read the NYT?
I am beginning to think that Ned Lamont and John F’ing were brothers seperated at birth. They both have a growing sophistication that could only be from having the same genes.
I am with you Drewsmom. I cannot wait until Nov 8th. I cannot wait until the Repubs not only continue to lead congress, but strengthen our gains. I know I know, I am setting myself up for a fall. But I think this whole Amendment 2 thing is going to translate into gains for Repubs. The People see this and know that someone is lying and it ain’t the Republican. We shall see, but if there was an “October Surprise”, it was for the Repubs and it was this Amendment 2. Dems lust for power continues to screw things up for them. – Lorica
Like this was a surprise?
You knew it would happen, I knew it would happen, and all God’s children knew it would happen. The next story for the Times will be, in the days after the election, “Will Senator Lieberman caucus with the Democrats?”
Go to greenwichtime.com and read the article “Where’s Bill?”. I’m not a Lieberman supporter, but it seems a shame the way his fellow Democrats dumped him. No Semper Fi here.
Ever notice that the word growing seems to the most overused word of the MSM? Like: “growing sophistication about the issues facing the nation.” Or: “growing opposition to the war in Iraq.” Or: “growing optimism of of Democrats that they will recapture Congress by big margins.” Or: “growing concerns about the economy.” In all of these cases, the MSM is trying to create a bandwagon effect – usually out of nothing.
Incidently, should not McCain-Feingold apply to the MSM? No one seriously thinks that The New York Times is a newspaper, for example. If I took out an ad on TV or in a magazine or distributed campaign literature praising Joe Lieberman (without his approval) or attacking Lamont, I could be prosecuted for violating campaign finance laws. So why not prosecute the MSM for blatently campaigning for Democrats in defiance of the most holy and sacred campaign finance laws that the MSM themselves agitated for? Free speech for everyone – or no one at all. That would be fair.