imjustagirl said:What am I missing? I see no suggested pick beyond Lieberman or Petraeus, and that's down in the second-to-last graf.
Then again, I'm politically retarded.
jakewriter82 said:http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/03/17/080317taco_talk_hertzberg/
This suggestion is more intriguing to me.
Especially if Obama wrapped up the Dems. nomination.
She's more-than qualified, but it'd be a risk. She'd have the Fredo scent attached to her, deserving or not.
pseudo said:Clarence Thomas?
WHAT ?!!?!
So help me God, I'd vote for Angela Davis first.
imjustagirl said:I've skimmed both of these. It appears to take 20 inches to get to the part anyone's talking about.
Who writes this ****?
imjustagirl said:I mean, is this how all editorials are written? "I'm going to ramble about some Democratic election, then talk about how ****ty Bush is, then rush my point in the final two grafs, then couch it all with a "sure there are other options" and hope people like it?"
imjustagirl said:OK, none of that makes any sense to me.
Here's what I'm asking. Two opinion pieces, two in which the nut graf (to me) was WELL down the story. Like 10-15 grafs down.
Is that customary?
BYH said:Is there any chance it was buried b/c even he knows how outlandish it sounds?
Perhaps he wanted to have it on record, in case hell freezes over and it happens and he can say he called it first...except he knows it's the longest of long shots.
Beaker said:Gotta love how Kristol calls Thomas the most impressive conservative in American public life. Yecch.