New York Times defends decision not to run McCain's op-ed, says...

Disgusted wrote:

<quoted text>
Ah, another "Brilliant" man who thinks only people like him can be smart. I don't suppose it occurred to him that the NY Times could have picked a different Republican.

Hey idiot, my reply was in response to someone saying that the NY Times is not bias because they endorsed a Republican. Try reading before you make comments that show what a fool you are.

Selective nonsense is very very irritating to me.

Tough Love wrote:

How could a man, in the wake of 9-11, turn almost the entire world, who was just standing behind us in solidarity, against us?

The world that was "with us" after 9-11 was "with us" in the same way as each of us is "with" the guy in the office that we cannot stand when his grandmother dies and we sign a sympathy card. It is in name only.

How could a man take us to war with a country that didn't attack us using selective evidence?(and, in effect, "retreat" from the REAL "war" on terror in the interests of a corporate wet dream)

Are you talking about A'stan? Cuz A'stan didn't attack us.

Iraq did.

...and yes: our military patrolling constitutes The US. Iraq shot at us and locked onto our aircraft with their SAM radar -- that is attacking us.

How could a man go into that 'war' based on his own arrogant quest and leave the real job unfinished?

Same as any other prez in the last 50 years has:
Clinton left the "real" job in Somalia unfinished when we started taking casualties; left the "real" job in Kosovo unfinished because he **didn't want** to take casualties;
Bush the Elder left the "real" job in the Gulf War unfinished;
Reagan left the "real" job in Lebanon unfinished;
Carter ... Desert One;
Ford ...okay, he gets a pass;
Nixon ... Vietnam;
Johnson ... Vietnam;
Kennedy ... ditto;
Ike ... Korea.

How could a man allow bin Laden a path of escape in Afghanistan?(Answer: his family's "long-standing, close relationship" with the Saudi's and the bin Laden's)

The Saudi's are the first targets of Wahabi-sect Sunnis [a.k.a., the group responsible for al Qaida]m and the bin Ladens have disowned Osama. That conspiracy theory means you're a crackpot.

How could a man sign laws passed by Congress and then flout them with stacks of signing statements?

Same way every prez has for the past et cetera.

How could a man allow torture to be used on POW's

We don't.

How could a man give tax cuts to the very wealthiest, all while creating a "grave economic crisis", huge deficit and borrowing from repressive Communist countries?

The tax cuts are the same as the ones offered by the Democrats -- who called it "tax cuts for working Americans". Odd how "working Americans" become the "very welathiest" when you switch parties. Just like Clinton's self-directed SocSec plan became a Republican "kill Granny" plan when Bush reiterated it.

How could a man increase government standing by rubber stamping every bill to come out of a Republican controlled Congress?

Same was as any prez has done for the past 80 years when Congress was controlled by his party.

How can a man, who is responsible for the many hundreds of thousands of deaths and maimings of Americans and Iraqis (not to mention the millions displaced from their homes) SLEEP AT NIGHT?

Same way FDR could sleep at night.

What a pawn you are, my friend. I'm sick of reading the lies, bigotry ... and false analogies that little minds like you absorb like an attention starved housewife reading the tabloids at the checkout counter.

Couldn't have said it better