Predictable: NYT Endorses Obama. Pathetic: NYT Accuses McCain of Racism
On Friday the Times endorsed Barack Obama for president, an announcement that took up the whole of Friday's editorial space. In the process, the paper flung some more irresponsible accusations of racism on John McCain.
The endorsement opened with melodramatic liberalism worthy of a high-school newspaper:
Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation's future truly hangs in the balance.
Soon came the disreputable accusations of racism.
In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress.
The Times might be referring to the McCain ad linking Obama's "celebrity" to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, which the Times' editorial board bizarrely twisted into racism.
Then came this misleading attack on Republican fiscal policy:
The American financial system is the victim of decades of Republican deregulatory and anti-tax policies.
How refusal to raise taxes fits intothe current financialcrisisthe Times doesn't explain, though the paper never misses a chance to advocate for higher taxes.
The Times was no less deluded in its condemnation of McCain's policy toward Iran.
Both candidates talk tough on terrorism, and neither has ruled out military action to end Iran's nuclear weapons program. But Mr. Obama has called for a serious effort to try to wean Tehran from its nuclear ambitions with more credible diplomatic overtures and tougher sanctions. Mr. McCain's willingness to joke about bombing Iran was frightening.
The Times is talking about McCain singing "Bomb, bomb, bomb/ bomb, bomb Iran" to the tune of "Barbara Ann" for about three seconds at a campaign rally. If the members of the Times editorial board are truly "frightened" by that, and not just posing for effect, then thisparticularly collective is too neurotic to have its opinions taken seriously.