This editorial strikes me as being right up there with Harry Reid’s insistance, after Fitzgerald didn’t give the Dems what they wanted, (Rove’s head on a platter) that Bush give it to them anyway!
“We don’t want him to be president for three more years! The ignoramuses in the red states might have elected him, but we’re not going to stop the tantrum until he’s gone!”
The NY Times, in this editorial, sounds remarkably like a frustrated kid in a snit. Like George Will, last month, writing about Harriet Miers, only with a less impressive vocabulary.
“We’ve done everything we can to take him down, and he’s still there, acting like the President! And he’s naming SCOTUS judges and he might actually name more! And he doesn’t seem to care that Scooter Libby is going to go to trial and possibly take us all down with him!”
This is my favorite line: But the rest of the world simply can’t afford an American government this bad for that long.
Look around please, editors: The rest of the world- that “world community” you so love – is teetering between tyrants like Chavez and Castro on one side, and the teeming mobs on the other. And strangely enough – “getting rid of Bush” won’t help a single problem they have.
This piece is 7 paragraphs of hate being spewed by people whose whole world is falling apart, piece by piece. It sounds that desperate.
It is also red meat for the extreme left. Is it a call for coup? A call for revolution? Discard Bush and Cheney, and you still have three more years of Republican Administration – unless you are planning to utterly discard the constitution, as well. Which wouldn’t surprise me.
Dr. Sanity has a diagnosis on the press