[bd476]

Anti-Bubba182 wrote: "Drudge has this listed as:

NYT PAGE ONE THURSDAY: TOP CLINTON DONOR: FROM NOVICE TO A FORTUNE IN URANIUM...

The New York Times is not burying this story and that is especially significant this close to Super Tuesday."

Thanks Anti-Bubba182.

This story has been in the works a long time. The New York Times had to be working on this for longer than a week yet the New York Times Editorial Board endorsed Hillary just five days ago, on January 25, 2008.

The New York Times Editorial Board knew about this story and the havoc it could create upon Hillary's campaign, yet they still went ahead and endorsed her.

Something's up.

"...By choosing Mrs. Clinton, we are not denying Mr. Obama’s appeal or his gifts. The idea of the first African-American nominee of a major party also is exhilarating, and so is the prospect of the first woman nominee..."

Primary Choices: Hillary Clinton Published: January 25, 2008

[Anti-Bubba182]

A lot of people on the left are taking the risk to oppose Hillary. They have to know payback will come if she wins. So this kind of story fron the NYTimes at this time is surprising.

[STARWISE]

It sure is weird for them,
but it does seem to line up
with that info I posted above,
as far as the media powerhouses
allegedly now going against her.

[Rummyfan]

The idea of the first African-American nominee of a major party also is exhilarating, and so is the prospect of the first woman nominee..."

Race and gender, gender and race... the libs would be lost without those markers.