The Economist!!

[UrbanPancake]

I don't know if any of you subscribe to the Economist but they just announced that they are backing Kerry/Edwards. This is what they said- "Our instinct is towards change not continuity: Mr. Kerry, not Mr. Bush." "Bush, who has been a radical, transforming President but who never seemed truly up to the job". Wow. It also goes on to call him incompetent.

 

[Hot N Bothered]

Isn't that published in England? Yet again, the Europeans telling us what we should do. Points in Bush's favor, if you ask me.

 

[dustin]

never heard of it

 

[UrbanPancake]

never heard of it

Are you kidding me? The economist has recognized that this is the time to change. President Bush has become a radical extremist who is steering our country into the bowls of Hell. (and I don't really want to know where we come out

 

[dustin]

Are you kidding me? The economist has recognized that this is the time to change. President Bush has become a radical extremist who is steering our country into the bowls of Hell. (and I don't really want to know where we come out

no i've never heard of that periodical.

 

[Nickel]

Um, the fact that no one has heard of it speaks volumes. That being said, it's "bowels", not "bowls". If you're gonna copy and paste you might as well do it correctly.

 

[Ken King]

Yeah, I am sure the British would once again like to determine our fate. As Hot N Bothered stated it is published in Britain with the majority of its circulation being outside of Britain (over 80%). Regarding the political leanings they state "the newspaper has lived on, never abandoning its commitment to the classical 19th-century Liberal ideas of its founder." I guess they have seen the direction that Kerry wants to take us and it appeals to these fundamental liberals. Is it any wonder that they would endorse Kerry?

 

[UrbanPancake]

Um, the fact that no one has heard of it speaks volumes. That being said, it's "bowels", not "bowls". If you're gonna copy and paste you might as well do it correctly.

sorry for the misspelling..... I'm only trying to become half of what Bush is. Stupid.

 

[UrbanPancake]

Yeah, I am sure the British would once again like to determine our fate. As Hot N Bothered stated it is published in Britain with the majority of its circulation being outside of Britain (over 80%). Regarding the political leanings they state "the newspaper has lived on, never abandoning its commitment to the classical 19th-century Liberal ideas of its founder." I guess they have seen the direction that Kerry wants to take us and it appeals to these fundamental liberals. Is it any wonder that they would endorse Kerry?

Hmmmm. You should have read the article. It was very informative on both candidates. Speaking bad and good of both candidates. But after they made a list of Bad and Good, Bush just had too many bad things in his list.

 

[2ndAmendment]

sorry for the misspelling..... I'm only trying to become half of what Bush is. Stupid.

Actually we are all convinced that you don't have to try. You are completely stupid.

 

[rraley]

This is good news...the Economist has been known for its conservative bent in the past, especially on economic issues (i.e., low business taxes, etc.). It has a great reputation with academics and other scholars and I think that their opinion should be considered. As for Mr. King's comment on the Economist's mission statement ("classical 19th-century Liberal ideas of its founder")...notice the use of the capital "L" in the term "Liberal." That does not suggest an affinity for American liberalism; rather its suggests political Liberalism in which the government does not rig elections and does not censor those that disagree with it. In America, Republicans and Democrats (well most of us), are upper case "L," Liberals.

 

[Pete]

I don't know if any of you subscribe to the Economist but they just announced that they are backing Kerry/Edwards. This is what they said- "Our instinct is towards change not continuity: Mr. Kerry, not Mr. Bush." "Bush, who has been a radical, transforming President but who never seemed truly up to the job". Wow. It also goes on to call him incompetent.

You will have to excuse me if I do not take foriegn periodicals seriously. I look at the decline of the British Empire over the last 75 years and feel they might be better served looking after their own mess. What degree of pompousness does it require for a foriegn media element to rudely insert themselves in another nations political process. Next thing you know the candidates will be taking money from chinese PAC's. Oh sorry that has already been done already.

 

[2ndAmendment]

It has a great reputation with academics and other scholars and I think that their opinion should be considered.

Academics in the U.S. are predominantly liberals in the political sense not the thinking sense and as such have no credence when it come to politics. The "liberal" academics are one of the reasons our kids can't read, spell, or do math without a calculator. They are anti war activists of the 60s in many cases or their protégés. They have not grown up despite their years. Age and education does not make you wise.

 

[Dymphna]

Academics in the U.S. are predominantly liberals in the political sense not the thinking sense and as such have no credence when it come to politics. The "liberal" academics are one of the reasons our kids can't read, spell, or do math without a calculator. They are anti war activists of the 60s in many cases or their protégés. They have not grown up despite their years. Age and education does not make you wise.

Funny you should say that. I had to read the Economist in college. Another professor, who was close friends with the one requiring the magazine spend a day in class discussing Vietnam war protests which occured on our campus. The professor knew of them first hand, because he was a protestor. I saw pictures of him from that time, complete with long hair and love beads.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Funny you should say that. I had to read the Economist in college. Another professor, who was close friends with the one requiring the magazine spend a day in class discussing Vietnam war protests which occured on our campus. The professor knew of them first hand, because he was a protestor. I saw pictures of him from that time, complete with long hair and love beads.

Ah, yes. The "good old days". I was once a war protester in the 60s. I thought it was wrong to fight a war if you were not going to fight to win. I fight like I think a war should be fought. You do whatever is necessary to win and you keep hitting until the other guy can no longer do you any harm. Since I think that way and am very well trained, I try to avoid physical altercations.

 

[Dymphna]

Ah, yes. The "good old days". I was once a war protester in the 60s. I thought it was wrong to fight a war if you were not going to fight to win. I fight like I think a war should be fought. You do whatever is necessary to win and you keep hitting until the other guy can no longer do you any harm. Since I think that way and am very well trained, I try to avoid physical altercations.

But did you have long hair and love beads?

 

[Otter]

Good editorial

t's only a day or so now till the chad-dangling round of Campaign 2004 begins but, when the lawsuits are over and the bloodletting begins, serious Democrats need to confront the intellectual emptiness of their party, which Kerry's campaign embodies all too well. The Dems got a full tank from FDR, a top-up in the Civil Rights era, and they've been running on fumes for 30 years. Their last star, Bill Clinton, has no legacy because, deft as he was, his Democratic Party had no purpose other than as a vehicle for promoting his own indispensability. When he left, the Democrats became a party running on personality with no personalities to run. Hence, the Kerry candidacy. Despite the best efforts of American editorialists, there's no there there.

Chicago Sun Times

 

[vraiblonde]

It has a great reputation with academics and other scholars and I think that their opinion should be considered.

May I ask why you think some foreign magazine editor's opinion should bear any weight on our elections here in the US?

 

[rraley]

May I ask why you think some foreign magazine editor's opinion should bear any weight on our elections here in the US?

Unlike some, I value the opinon that others' have and I believe that it should be considered. I am not saying that their opinion should fully be accepted; I am merely saying that it should be considered. That way, our decisions can be made with a broad, global perspective rather than a limited, single-minded one.

But your question hits something else that I believe should be considered: do newspaper/magazine editorials make a lick of difference anyway? No, they don't.

 

[vraiblonde]

But your question hits something else that I believe should be considered: do newspaper/magazine editorials make a lick of difference anyway? No, they don't.

Agreed, except that they have the power to influence so many people. *cough*UrbanPancake*cough*