Wall Street Journal Editorial Page

[Mister K]

First, Has anyone here been reading the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page and second, has it every said anything positive about John Kerry?

I read the WSJ every day and every day, someone is blasting Kerry on one thing or another. I have yet to read a negative Bush comment in this section.

Any ideas on why this is?

[Cha]

1. Because they're stupid corporate jerks who

would rather see this Country take a dive and keep their tax cuts then do the right thing and say something intelligent about Kerry?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Because their political leanings are to the right of Darth Vader's.

Always have been -- nothing new.

[keta11]

3. That editorial board is NEOCON n/t

[davhill]

4. Nobody should read the WSJ for the Editorials

The news articles tend to be fair and thoughtful however.

[papau]

18. I disagree - The WSJ needs the editorials as it has no formal Comics - and

I find the editorials amusing!

:-)

[antigop]

5. Wall Street will make a fortune through privatization of Soc. Security

n/t

[kanrok]

6. Gee...I don't know...maybe it's because:

The WSJ editorial page is run by freaking neo-con douchebags.

[Mister K]

9. Before anyone thinks me nieve,

I have been working in the city since July and have been reading the WSJ every day. I find it ironic that NY State is heavily Dem however, they have a Repub govenor and a Repub mayor of NYC.

These people have to live there don't they. I guess they make of the minority.

[kanrok]

15. The WSJ news section is top-notch IMHO

The editorial page sucks. Welcome to DU.

[KC21304]

7. Because the WSJ 's job is to look out for the rich.

So they are looking out for the one who wants to make the rich richer and the poor poorer and Bush and most other Republicans fit this description to a T.

[autorank]

8. Their editorial page is "Night of the Living Dead"

Somehow, they separate the news from the editorial group well enough to give the news portion of WSJ some real credibility. The editorial group is pathetic, now headed by Paul Gigot. They used to have a panel discussion on one of the cable NBC's with 8 or 9 of them sitting around a table discussing politics. Too many people reported seizures and spontaneous vomiting as a result so they pulled the show. If I had Bill Gates money, the first thing I did after giving a billion to the DNC would be to buy the WSJ and fire these fascist assholes en masse!

[Mister K]

11. I am really appalled by what I am reading

I usually give everyone a fair chance to speak their peace, but some of the things they come up with are off the wall by any means.

A few weeks ago, there was an editorial that took offense that Kerry suggesting that African-American votes were being suppressed in some states. I was going to write in that the idiot that wrote the article should read their own paper. An article was published the same day about voter suppression in Ohio.

[autorank]

10. also, Welcome to DU!!!

[Mister K]

13. Thanks.

[TomClash]

12. Brooklyn Bob Bartley made it that way

and then he went to his maker and Gigot is carrying on the hallowed tradition of neo-con supply side heaven.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

14. They had a great piece a few weeks ago wherein the author

made the case for Kerry- citing the Hooveresque job losses, gargantuan deficit, and the whole litany of Bush economic disasters- and closed by stating that on Nov. 2nd the nation was having its shareholders' meeting, and that he'd like their vote.
The guy who wrote it was John Kerry.

[DancingBear]

16. You think the WSJ is bad?

Try Investors Business Daily - makes WSJ seem moderate.

Yeeechh.

[Mister K]

17. I try to limit myself to one 'rag' a day

I also read the free ones like 'AM NY' and Metro. The editorial comics in Metro and AM NY are classic.

[question everything]

19. I would like to think that they have a real fear that Kerry will win

otherwise they could have just ignored him. Even the guy who writes the best of the web, once Kerry became the nominee, stopped referring to him as the haughty French-looking, etc.

I, too, read the WSJ every day and I agree with others that their news stories and their columns are superb but their editorial is like any other editorial, expresses the opinion of the publisher and at least they are not confused with the news. I often post stories from the WSJ here and almost always someone would react in amazement: this is from the WSJ?

Interesting, though, a study by Ned Davis Research, a Venice, Fla., securities research firm, found that from 1901 through April of this year, the Dow Jones industrial average had an average annual gain of 7.2 percent when a Democrat was president vs. a 3.7 percent gain with a Republican. That finding runs contrary to the conventional wisdom that Republican administrations are friendlier to business and benefit the market more than when a Democrat is president. From http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/5033881.html

[Mister K]

20. You will find similar stats...

if you look at Repub spending versus Dem spending. Beyond popular belief, repub administration have always outspend Dem ones. Go figure.

[cyr330]

21. The Wall SHIT Journal?

I refuse to read that ridiculous rag. I perused it a few times, and that was enough. It's not serious news; it's written by Republican stenographers who manage to pass it off as "serious journalism"--please! Gimme a fucking break. . .

[reprehensor]

22. A cheerily Fascist rag.

Why the fuck are you reading that propaganda? Tell me you are not a subscriber.

[Mister K]

23. Absolutely not...

I get it free at work.

[reprehensor]

24. You should soil it daily.

Spill your coffee upon it. Use it to sop up spills in the cafeteria, but save yourself! Don't read it! It's like 'a little bit of fascism never killed anyone!'

Dangerous stuff!

[Mister K]

26. I do shread it frequently and using it for packing

material for my ebay shipments.

[Kat45]

25. They had an op-ed by African-Americans supporting bush.

The byline included several names, including J.C. Watts and the guy in Ohio (whose name slips my mind) who was trying to refuse voter registrations. (I was surprised to see that the man who was trying to suppress votes was an African American--a bit ironic, don't you think?)

The editorial was so absurd and I almost sent a LTTE.