Subject: NYT story on McCain
I said from the moment this story broke that it
was an exercise in reverse psychology.
The NYT has known the general outlines of the
story for months and has actually
negotiated with officials and agents of the McCain
campaign about the 'publication date,
and the general gist of the 'story'.
Doesn't it stand to reason that the NYT endorsed
McCain (because the NYT is one
of those 'fake' 'librul' MSM symbols) because,
like every newspaper with AIPAC
connenctions, they feel that McCain is the most-llkely
candidate to continue the Bush II policies in Iraq.
In order to give the 'ultra-conservatives' (Limbaugh,
et al.) as graceful a way as possible
to recant fom their savaging McClain and re-uniting
the GOP base behind McCain,
the NYT dreamed up the idea of appearing to be
'smearing' Sen. McCain..
It worked exactly as planned...All the nit-wit
doped-up screamers like Limbaugh
turned on a dime and devoted their invectives
against that mean, librul ol' NYT.
Think about it for just a moment...For the NYT,
whatever fake personna it has developed,
to endorse McCain and then engage in revealing
ANYTHING that would be really
damaging is dumb. They carefully crafted
this phony scandal to excite the right-wing
to defend him against unfounded stories of sexual
It might just backfire on them, though.
Back to Bartcop.com
to Bart | Discuss
it on The BartCop Forum | Comment
on it at the BartBlog