But if Romney wins, the Left will calmly sit down, agree that “the best man won”, graciously tip their caps to the Right for a “good game!” and then look for ways to support the newly elected leader.
They’ll wait at least four hours after the oath of office to declare that Romney is “THE WORST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY!”
I don’t think Rashad knows what an editorial is. If they didn’t “endorse a specific candidate,” it wouldn’t be an editorial. Newspapers have been doing this since the very beginning of the union.
What the fuck is CC talking about? Editorials mean nothing if the paper doesn’t come right out and say we’re endorsing a specific candidate. There are editorials supporting and criticizing candidates every single day. And I know this is an old tradition, but it doesn’t make it any better.
How am I not right you fucking dork? I bet you think you proved something don’t you? The fucking cover of a newspaper says “POST ENDORSES ROMNEY” but somehow that doesn’t imply the newspaper endorses a candidate. Fucking idiots.
Okay, I’ll explain. An editorial reflects the views of the publication. Therefore an editorial backing Romney would pretty much de facto be an endorsement. You appeared to suggest these things could be separate.
I find the idea of newspaper endorsements icky. Just shouldn’t be done.
“I find the idea of newspaper endorsements icky. Just shouldn’t be done.”
Yes — what the hell is the deal with Editorial & Opinion sections offering editorials and opinions?! It’s madness!!!
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/frank_rich_right_will_rage_if_obama_wins/
Frank Rich – “Right will rage if Obama wins”
But if Romney wins, the Left will calmly sit down, agree that “the best man won”, graciously tip their caps to the Right for a “good game!” and then look for ways to support the newly elected leader.
They’ll wait at least four hours after the oath of office to declare that Romney is “THE WORST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY!”
Yay!
MR. F: Are you blind or purposely dense? If it was “just and editorial” they wouldn’t be publicizing the fact that they endorse a specific candidate.
I don’t think Rashad knows what an editorial is. If they didn’t “endorse a specific candidate,” it wouldn’t be an editorial. Newspapers have been doing this since the very beginning of the union.
Travis doing what Travis does.
What the fuck is CC talking about? Editorials mean nothing if the paper doesn’t come right out and say we’re endorsing a specific candidate. There are editorials supporting and criticizing candidates every single day. And I know this is an old tradition, but it doesn’t make it any better.
‘Travis doing what Travis does’.
nakedman doing what nakedman does.
How would we cope with Travis without your incessant commentary?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/editorial
Cut and paste that into your browser, Rashad. I’ve got a feeling you’ll still manage to think you’re right, but hey!
I’m technologically impaired – if anyone can tell me how to post proper links it’d be great.
Oh. Magic.
How am I not right you fucking dork? I bet you think you proved something don’t you? The fucking cover of a newspaper says “POST ENDORSES ROMNEY” but somehow that doesn’t imply the newspaper endorses a candidate. Fucking idiots.
Okay, I’ll explain. An editorial reflects the views of the publication. Therefore an editorial backing Romney would pretty much de facto be an endorsement. You appeared to suggest these things could be separate.
“They’ll wait at least four hours after the oath of office to declare that Romney is ‘THE WORST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY!’”
Nope. Bush has that locked down for at least a generation.
Mulberry Outlet
Mulberry Bags
Mulberry Handbags
Mulberry UK
Mulberry Bags Outlet
Mulberry Outlet UK
search engine optimization Packages