It seems gratuitous. I won't even link to it. It's nasty (again).
I know why. It's because the Clintons (correctly) talk about the press's bias against them. And the press doesn't like it.
Since Mr. McCain doesn’t kick reporters like dogs, as the Clintons do, he will no doubt continue to enjoy an advantage, however unfair, with the press pack on the Straight Talk Express. . . .
If Mr. Obama doesn’t fight, no one else will. Few national Democratic leaders have the courage to stand up to the Clintons. Even in defeat, Mr. Obama may at least help wake up a party slipping into denial. Any Democrat who seriously thinks that Bill will fade away if Hillary wins the nomination — let alone that the Clintons will escape being fully vetted — is a Democrat who, as the man said, believes in fairy tales.
Frank Rich is always on his own power trip, the good of the country be damned.
2 comments:
All US columnists in unison:
"THE CLINTONS ARE BAAAAAAAAAAD!"
It's every right wing columnist's MISSION to help the Republicans get power when they're "out" and hold onto when they're "in"... and since the Repubs have been lousy at governing for some time, they can only accomplish this by dumping on Dems. I know that and accept their columns will be 100%partisan...especially when they write about the Clintons (which is ad nauseum). But must the progressive columnists slime, snarl and claw at them too? It makes the election "news and analysis" very redundant and totally unbalanced.
I agree. It makes me sick. Thanks for the comment.
Post a Comment