Lowell Sun editorial

Has anyone read this piece of crap? There is so much disinformation in it, I'm surprised even a lousy rag like the Sun had the nerve to print it.



On edit, I'll be damned. The Sun must have removed this editorial, I can't access it. Do any of you Mass folks buy this rag? I'd like to know if it was printed. Thanks.

I just went to it.

You know this is what is wrong with the TV and print media, they just blatantly write whatever they please with no proof of what lies they spewl.

Since when did Kerry say:
Remember when Kerry said during the last presidential election that he voted for the war before he voted against it."

No, he never said that and they simply spread that lie by writing "remember", yeah well where is their proof that he said that. No, they need to be held responsible for their incompetent editors and journalists.
:argh:

The Lowell Sun has a long history of hating Kerry, as far back as his first congressional race in 1972. In fact, their constant anti-Kerry editorials and articles may have been the factor that cost him that election. They are an unabashed right-wing rag, so this doesn't suprise me one bit. I usually don't bother buying it, unless I'm looking for something specific in the paper. Or I'm doing some painting, and I need something to protect the floor from paint drips.

I was expecting this to come along. I will check it out in the paper. They do a double-reverse when it comes to coverage: they piss and moan about the plight of the soldiers and returning vets and wonder why they aren't getting the services they need and then they conveniently forget to connect the dots and figure out just who is behind the lousy services.

Typical Lowell Sun. They do now and always have been terrible toward Kerry. I just sit back and remember that 63% number that Kerry got in Massachusetts for President, despite this rag's endorsement of the Idiot. Must really, really grate on them that they have no effect whatsoever on the actual voting in Mass, all they can do is yip like a little puppy.

BTW, the pushback on the Sun editorial in the LTTE should be good. There have been some scorcher letters in that paper that have taken Bush and his War Pushers to task but good. The paper may be a RW rag, but the LTTE section is lively and has some real bite in it. It should be a good read.

I assume the Globe? I can't imagine a paper like the Sun having a large readership in the Liberal Oasis! And how does the Herald fit into the mix?

by far. However, their readership is shrinking. Readership around the country is shrinking, btw. It's one of the reasons that the newspapers are paying such close attnetion to the blogs and such. The growth is online. (Not so much a threat now, but it will be.)

The Globe is a moderate paper. They smacked both Kerry and Kennedy upside the head last year for opposing the Roberts nomination to be Chief Justice to the Supreme Court then ignored the Alito filibuster. Sigh! They are intimidated by the national RWers and are only promoting RW and moderate positions. And they have never been good to John Kerry. (They just plain don't get him. They never did. They write snarky peices about him that are sort of personal then write angelic and glowing endorsements of him during elections. Go figure!)

The Lowell Sun is RW. Has been for years. And they have gone from loathing Kerry in the early 70's to sort of tolerating him, sometimes, when the moon is full. Sigh!

We just upped our subscription from Sunday only to daily-plus-Sunday, because they have slashed the rates so low. It's only an extra 4 cents a day to take the daily Milwaukee Journal Sentinel now. And it used to be two papers, the Milwaukee Journal and the Milwaukee Sentinel, one a morning and one an afternoon paper. Those days are gone for good.

But there is only one paper, kind of a bummer. We do also have a small alternative free paper, but still.

By the way, TayTay, I just finished the Globe Kerry bio. Overall I thought it was good. They outlined what they felt were his mistakes without piling on too much, and they also didn't pour on so much praise as to seem totally partisan--which doubtless helped Kerry more than hurt. Brinkley's book was more definitively Kerry-loving,to be sure, and that was nice. I guess I appreciated this different view as well, for what it was. The Boston Globe was not able to dampen my enthusiasm for Kerry one whit! To me, he's still simply the best.

It's not completely about JK, but the positive mentions he gets in this piece made it worth posting :-)

Redefining what it means to protect America

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/06/17/redefining_what_it_means_to_protect_america/

snip

The hawkish Senator Clinton, one senior Democratic strategist observed, is prematurely positioning herself for the 2008 general election. First she has to win her own party's primaries. At the rate she's going, she is fast alienating the party's overwhelmingly antiwar base.

Senator John Kerry quickly differentiated his position from hers. Speaking shortly after Clinton, Kerry won cheers when he pledged to introduce a Senate resolution calling for withdrawal of most troops by the end of 2006 (though several in the audience could be heard muttering words to the effect of, ``Where was he when we needed him?").

snip

Globe (as well as writing for the American Prospect, I believe).

Welcome after the Joanie V.'s editorial assassinating Kerry a couple days ago. And unfortunately, this is more characteristic of the BG.