Denver Post Bush Endorsement?

[Jeff1965]

WTF?
I read it this morning but couldn't believe it.

And then the editorial went on to trash Bush for his politics and made suggestion about what he must do differently in the next four years.

For me the thing GWB must do in 2005 is go home to Texas and wait to stand trial for all the crimes he had commited.

[Cha]

1. The dp is dreaming and I'm very disappointed in

the paper that has my city's birth in their name.

I'm hoping Coloradoans reject the dp and show them who has the Power!

[El Supremo]

2. It says "Bush is resolute against terrorism."

This ruined my day. It just goes to show you that even moderate papers' editors like the Post's can be brainwashed by war.

[F.Gordon]

3. My little note.....

Not that it matters, but I feel better.:)

Dear Gregory Moore

After reading the endorsement of George Bush for President by your "news" paper I am finally 100% convinced that your "news" organization is one; completely out of touch with reality; and two, solely driven by revenue and political bias. This particular quote is very revealing:

Our support for Bush is tempered by unease over the poor choices and results of his first term. To succeed in his second-term, Bush must begin by taking responsibility for U.S. failures in Iraq, admit his mistakes and adjust U.S. strategy. Big time, as his running mate might say.

You obviously missed the 2nd Presidential Debates. When you get a chance, when you aren't worried about Ad revenues from the likes of John Elway and Jake Jabs, you might want to read the transcript of this debate. You see, Mr. Moore, he was asked to admit 3 mistakes in this debate and admitted none.

Finally, reading your "to do" list for George Bush would be laughable if it wasn't produced by a "news" organization. In your case it's just plain pathetic.

Sincerely

xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx, CO

[earthside]

4. From Earlier Today

Take a look at this discussion from earlier today: Denver Post endorsement??

Here's my take on the Denver Post endorsement.

Like the Cleveland Plain Dealer, I suspect the editorial board wanted Kerry, but Post owner, Dean Singleton, is a Texas Bush super-Pioneer. In the end, the owner got his way.

But the endorsement editorial is hilarious. In paragraph after paragraph it points out where Bush has gone wrong over the last four years. Then it adds "To do" suggestions for Bush that completely conflict with his ideologocal positions and record in office!

The ONLY reason the Post editorial gives for voting for Bush is that he has "dogged resolution".

But then the endorsement says, " Our support for Bush is tempered by unease over the poor choices and results of his first term. To succeed in his second-term, Bush must begin by taking responsibility for U.S. failures in Iraq, admit his mistakes and adjust U.S. strategy."

See a contradiction here? "Dogged resolution" but he'd better "adjust U.S. strategy"!!!

This endorsement reminds me of that old saying: The words say no, but the eyes say yes.
The headline of the editorial says 'Bush for President', but the actual editorial says 'vote for Kerry'.

[paulk]

6. you're most likely correct

Singleton had his dirty little fingers in our recent mayoral race also.

[annerevere]

5. I wrote a ltte a few minutes after I read the editorial

It was so lame. They endorsed Bush because he is decisive and shows resolve. Folks, that was it. Then they presented a "to do" list for Bush which contained stuff (bring more moderates into his administration, task Powell and General Zinni with developing a strategy for rebuilding Iraq) that was sheer fantasy.

I was puzzled. It sounded like an endorsement they really didn't want to make, and so they waded through it.