The NYT is the dreadful central clearinghouse of party line progg and feminist cant. This has been the case for a long time, and has become much more relentless and fanatical since the Jill Abramson hag took over.
For this reason, I read it quite a bit. I want to be apprised of just which way the cant winds are blowing and whether there are subtle shifts in emphasis and rhetoric.
Right now I sense a kind of long-term tense hush. They think that things are lining up well for Hillary I, and they don't want anything to mess it up.
If and when Hillary I actually happens, the NYT will be intense. It will be their absolute apogee, and there will be a bizarre and unprecedented level of triumph, glee and contentment emanating from every pixel of the screen, as it were. The Hagsreich shall be immanent. It will be a sight to behold, and some part of me looks forward to this orgy of hard-mindedness.
Until then, one sits back and takes in one's daily dose of boomer bereavement/"Sandy" porn for what it's worth.
For this reason, I read it quite a bit. I want to be apprised of just which way the cant winds are blowing and whether there are subtle shifts in emphasis and rhetoric.
Right now I sense a kind of long-term tense hush. They think that things are lining up well for Hillary I, and they don't want anything to mess it up.
If and when Hillary I actually happens, the NYT will be intense. It will be their absolute apogee, and there will be a bizarre and unprecedented level of triumph, glee and contentment emanating from every pixel of the screen, as it were. The Hagsreich shall be immanent. It will be a sight to behold, and some part of me looks forward to this orgy of hard-mindedness.
Until then, one sits back and takes in one's daily dose of boomer bereavement/"Sandy" porn for what it's worth.
same old shit, sixes and sevens Shaft...