"With at least 70% and more like 90% of public approval of the wiretapping, what makes you sure that the NY Times would have swung the election? If anything, the public would have reacted to the Democrats as being too soft on terrorism."
I'm not necessarily saying what I think. I am saying what I believe Calame and the NYT think. Calame is obviously disappointed that they didn't use this to help their side win the elections.
And I'm not so sure that this would have been presented clearly enough to the public by the DNC/MSM that they would have seen it as a nescessary move by the Bush administration in a time of war. It would have been portrayed as an outrage on the Constitution. And probably brought out so close to the election that nobody would have a chance to argue for its need.
But maybe this is another explanation. Maybe the DNC did some internal polling and found that this would hurt them. But I sort of doubt they would believe it without some kind of polls. They think they have the popular positions, you know.
There was a time when I would have thought this was terribly cynical, but no more.
I find myself suspecting all connected with the big media, and I think the day will come when we need someone we can trust to disemminate information, and because they have no credibility, people will die.
I have no doubt that people have already died because of the traitors who leak secrets as if they belonged to them.