Re: NY TIMES stops ****lling for McCain

"MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:w8whk.18247$Ri.18013@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:t5WdnTKpXrJXnxvVnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > The Boston Herald ran it, and it was typical of McCain's vacuous,
> > empty-headed sup****t of Bush's war.  He claimed we had to press on to
> > "victory" but never defined what "victory" would look like.
>
> Moron, it's uprecedented and unbelievably arrogant of the Times to think
> they have the right to condensendingly tell McCain what he should write
in
> his response.
>

No, dummy, it's what newspaper editors do.  I write for newspapers.  If
editors feel an article is unclear, as McSame's vague, amateurish screed
was, then they are *obligated* to tell the writer to redo it or else
reject
it.

If McSame wants his unedited gibberish read, he can start a blog, if
someone
can show the computer-illiterate codger how to get on to "the Internets."