President Bush's First Win (NYT editorial)

The New York Times ^ | 09/17/2001 | The editors

[Pokey78]

Did someone kidnap dowd, Friedman, Rich et al?

[ozzymandus]

Even the RATS of the NYT are going to have to pretend they like W for a few days. This won't last.

[Ruth A.]

After a shaky start Not on your life.

The armchair quarterbacks were the ones who didn't see how steady the President is.

[JeremyM]

This is in the New York Times? Are they trying to lower our guards through flattery?

[Vigilanteman]

Methinks the stock in political correctness may very well plunge further than Dow Jones.

[Rokke]

Yet one more example of egomaniac (and always wrong) liberal editorialists claiming Bush has changed to meet their standards, instead of them no longer being able to deny he has been a true leader and man of character all along. Screw em all. Bush has never needed them, and he sure as heck doesn't now.

[randog]

They may be dumb but they're not stupid. They know that their usual leftist rhetoric would be career suicide at this point. Problem for them is that they don't know anything else. Oh well--been nice knowin' ya....not.

[rb22982]

uh, the NYT is writing something good about Bush?

[syriacus]

Even the RATS of the NYT are going to have to pretend they like W for a few days. This won't last.

Yes. They've done their good deed for the week. Soon they can go back to making sure (in a very cultured and intelligent way of course) that Bush doesn't get too big for his boots.

[arkfreepdom]

As I said last week....the red zone is getting bigger.

[No Truce With Kings]

The armchair quarterbacks were the ones who didn't see how steady the President is.

Bush43 reminds me of a steam locomotive starting. Starts off kinda slow, without much apparent movement, builds up slowly, but steadily -- then takes off powerfully.

[MJY1288]

The NYT's have been trying to slow the President and mostly trying to trip him up, but mostly just bashing him, But NOW!!! as most of us predicted, THEY ARE FOLLOWING HIM because George W. Bush is a LEADER

[okie01]

"Yet one more example of egomaniac (and always wrong) liberal editorialists claiming Bush has changed to meet their standards, instead of them no longer being able to deny he has been a true leader and man of character all along."

Perhaps, it is they who are "growing"...

[onyx]

I don't like the tone of their editorial.... is he up to the job....?.....well so far. GTH, NYT.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

Bush's first win was the election.

[Bogie]

#2

Ditto.

[MJY1288]

That is true, but you must remember this is the NYT's. What the real story should be is "Mainstream media has had it all wrong about W"

[ozzymandus]

At least they're more cunning than the other leftist RATS like the school that wouldn't allow kids to wear the flag, or the company that forbade it's employees from displaying the flag, or the nut-groups like ramsey (ramses) clark organizing anti-American protests. The NYT is cagey enough to pretend to be patriotic for a few days.

[Lizzy W]

FYI

[ladyinred]

President Bush did not change, New York did. Some of us knew all along what he was made of, now a few others see it too. I do not trust them to continue this new found respect for long, however, it would go against their political agenda.
The difference is now when they bash him, they might feel a little bit of guilt!