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

On Jul 23, 6:19=A0am, "MioMyo" <USA_Patr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:XJednXGjloKEkxrVnZ2dnUVZ_u6dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >news:w8whk.18247$Ri.18013@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@[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. =A0He 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
thi=
nk
> >> they have the right to condensendingly tell McCain what he should
writ=
e
> >> in
> >> his response.
>
> > No, dummy, it's what newspaper editors do.
>
> Not in a presidential campaign which is why they are in attack-mode,
dama=
ge
> control once again attempting to defend their all too obvious liberal
> bias.......

LOL...Yo-Yo. Editors send a badly-written, unnewworthy piece back all
the time. I'm a bit surprised you don't know this. What do you think
they do all day, knit?

Now, did you ever seecombat during the Vietnam war? I gotta tell ya' ,
by your refusal 471 times to answer this question, you are beginning
to look like a cowardly REMF.

S. Olson