Posted on 10/03/2004 6:50:36 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
"Anything to the rumor that the Washington Post is going to endorse Bush?"
LOL I don't believe it for a second. Their reporters and their readers would HOWL. It would be an open revolt. Remember this is a D.C. paper. The Editorial Board is slightly more conservative then the 70% of their reporters that are strait liberal, but I won't believe it till i see it. They have consistently run hit pieces on Bush disguised as news. But they also (IMO) one of the best non partisan investigative reporters in the country in Michael Dobbs. They also cover poverty and education with a liberal slant.
"I am confident that God’s plan will prevail."
As am I.
Tellmemore tellmemore. What rumours have you heard?
"I am confident that God’s plan will prevail."
I am too. This is just a setback that is a set-up for a comeback.
Bush will sign the tax cut tomorrow.
Volcano in Washington State may erupt.
VP debate Tuesday night.
We need a change of subject -- each will help to drown out the Kerry "bump."
The MSM is delirious with glee. In full cry like a pack of hounds after GW. It's the big lie again. If you say it long and hard, some will believe it. Believers will vote for Kerry, nonbelievers may be so dispirited, they stay home. This needs to be prevented at all costs. Every vote counts, and this year more than ever. That and widespread voter fraud are especially troublesome. GW will do well in the other debates, Cheney will clean Edwards' clock, but the MSM will continue to act as if Kerry is the Second Coming. What do we think Hill is making of this? Is she a tad upset? Worried? The Kerry campaign is being told by strategists to keep TerAYsa on ice for the next four weeks.
"Anything to the rumor that the Washington Post is going to endorse Bush? Anyone?"
Not after Bush's performance in the first debate.
Thanks for finding and posting that outstanding editorial endorsement of President Bush.
It's a keeper!
Is anyone even watching the shows? LoL! Y'all have some great comments, but usually we get good reports on what the Sunday shows are saying on this thread......
Buck up, matey. This was not a set back. If "this" is one Newweek poll, you must realize it was skewed in favor of Kerry. If "this" refers to W's debate performance, I strongly disagree he lost. I will only go so far as to say that Kerry superficially presented himself well, like the trained trial lawyer he was. contrasted with an emotionally spent President. Kerry's gaffes will hurt him this week.
I do suggest that the campaign rest the Pres. on the day of the next debate. And Central time Zone may also help. The first debate ended at 10:30 EDT, well beyond W's normal daytime patterns.
UN-eFFing believable!!!
The nitwit blonde of Michigan just called their citizens
Michiganians!!!
That serves those Michiganders right for electing a Cannuk.
"Is anyone even watching the shows?"
I noticed the lack of the usual "reportage" and wondered about it too. I did note that Bill Kristol on the FNC panel made an excellent observation (because, of course, he agrees with me) that OBL is not the end all and be all of the war on terrorism. There are lots of problems and people out there that need to be addressed and it is lunacy to say that just getting bin Laden will settle things.
Thanks again, upchuck!
Only 73 posts! What's going on? I couldn't bring myself to watch the morning shows this morning. I can just imagine the fun they were having with the Newsweek poll and the debate.
The overnight downtown time obviously handicapped this week's thread, AB. And there's so much blather out there after the debate....
____________________________________________________________
From today's front page article in the Washington Post---by Dana Milbank:
Asked what the Kerry Doctrine actually is, [Richard] Holbrooke, in a conference call with reporters, replied: "There is no Kerry Doctrine."How comforting.
Thank you for letting me vent.
I certainly am not watching them. I turned off F&F weekend because they are so ditsy. After taking three direct hits from three powerful hurricanes,and just getting my Direct tv back yesterday I refuse to waste good dish time on stupidity. It was great not hearing the media negativity for 6 days,but it was tough without freerepublic and my power for 4 days. I cannot believe freepers take newsweak polls seriously,or Tim Russert or any of the MSM Kerry lovers. Being at the mercy of mother nature and all it's destruction of life and property, it gives you new prospective on a Kerry Presidency,and how we would be dealing with 10 times the fury of Ivan,Jeanne,Frances,and Charley if we do not have a strong kick butt President to keep radical Muslim terrorists from our shores.
Oh, I would not be surprised at all if The Washington Post endorses Bush. Of all the major papes, the Post is the one that most "gets" the war on terror. The Post editorial board strongly supported the invasion of Iraq, to the howls of its liberal readers. They have run major hit editorials on Kerry and very few on Bush. They have continually called for Kerry to say and do things to improve his candidacy, nearly all of which he has failed to do. It's obvious that they wanted to support Kerry but are bitterly disappointed at what a bad candidate he has proven to be. They do not like Bush's domestic policies at all, but the tone of their editorials indicates they do not believe Kerry is serious enough about the war on terror or has offered serious enough alternatives to Bush's domestic policies except to raise taxes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.