Will the Times be backing a "Clinton" for the job soon? Either a real one, or a sleazy liberal wannabe imitation? Inquiring minds want to know...
I have to admit, the NYT seems determined not to encourage Al Gore in any way whatsoever for 2004.
I have no idea. But, in the meantime, as the NYT continues to bury Gore and search for the next Clinton, I'll bet it keeps churning out negative editorials about Ashcroft.
