Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New Yorker Mag breaks 80-year tradition, endorses Kerry

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 10:28 AM
Original message
New Yorker Mag breaks 80-year tradition, endorses Kerry
Edited on Mon Oct-25-04 10:30 AM by WilliamPitt
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/?041101ta_talk_editors

THE CHOICE
Issue of 2004-11-01
Posted 2004-10-25

This Presidential campaign has been as ugly and as bitter as any in American memory. The ugliness has flowed mostly in one direction, reaching its apotheosis in the effort, undertaken by a supposedly independent group financed by friends of the incumbent, to portray the challenger—who in his mid-twenties was an exemplary combatant in both the Vietnam War and the movement to end that war—as a coward and a traitor. The bitterness has been felt mostly by the challenger’s adherents; yet there has been more than enough to go around. This is one campaign in which no one thinks of having the band strike up “Happy Days Are Here Again.”

The heightened emotions of the race that (with any luck) will end on November 2, 2004, are rooted in the events of three previous Tuesdays. On Tuesday, November 7, 2000, more than a hundred and five million Americans went to the polls and, by a small but indisputable plurality, voted to make Al Gore President of the United States. Because of the way the votes were distributed, however, the outcome in the electoral college turned on the outcome in Florida. In that state, George W. Bush held a lead of some five hundred votes, one one-thousandth of Gore’s national margin; irregularities, and there were many, all had the effect of taking votes away from Gore; and the state’s electoral machinery was in the hands of Bush’s brother, who was the governor, and one of Bush’s state campaign co-chairs, who was the Florida secretary of state.

Bush sued to stop any recounting of the votes, and, on Tuesday, December 12th, the United States Supreme Court gave him what he wanted. Bush v. Gore was so shoddily reasoned and transparently partisan that the five justices who endorsed the decision declined to put their names on it, while the four dissenters did not bother to conceal their disgust. There are rules for settling electoral disputes of this kind, in federal and state law and in the Constitution itself. By ignoring them—by cutting off the process and installing Bush by fiat—the Court made a mockery not only of popular democracy but also of constitutional republicanism.

A result so inimical to both majority rule and individual civic equality was bound to inflict damage on the fabric of comity. But the damage would have been far less severe if the new President had made some effort to take account of the special circumstances of his election—in the composition of his Cabinet, in the way that he pursued his policy goals, perhaps even in the goals themselves. He made no such effort. According to Bob Woodward in “Plan of Attack,” Vice-President Dick Cheney put it this way: “From the very day we walked in the building, a notion of sort of a restrained presidency because it was such a close election, that lasted maybe thirty seconds. It was not contemplated for any length of time. We had an agenda, we ran on that agenda, we won the election—full speed ahead.”

...more...

====


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041025/ts_alt_afp/us_vote_media_newyorker&cid=1506&ncid=2043

New Yorker magazine breaks with tradition, endorses Kerry

11 minutes ago U.S. National - AFP

NEW YORK (AFP) - For the first time in its 80-year history, the venerable New Yorker magazine has endorsed a presidential candidate, urging readers to vote for Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) in next week's election.

"He is plainly the better choice," the weekly said in a lengthy editorial that excoriated the record of President George W. Bush (news - web sites) on everything from health and the environment to his handling of the war in Iraq (news - web sites).

"As observers, reporters, and commentators we will hold (Kerry) to the highest standards of honesty and performance," the editorial said. "For now, as citizens, we hope for his victory."

New Yorker Editor David Remnick told the Washington Post that he had no problem in breaking with tradition to endorse a candidate.

...more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cubsfan forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. This is another hopeful sign n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ksoze Donating Member (635 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
2. Worth reading entire story...
a nice synopsis of last elections annointment and how the last 4 years have gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zuni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. Editor David Remnick wrote an excellent book
called Lenin's Tomb, about the fall of the Soviet Union.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave502d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. That a long time
This has got to be good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. WOW! Never Realized This Before! FUCKING CREEPY!
Edited on Mon Oct-25-04 10:41 AM by Beetwasher
"...were mostly unpopular outside what became known (in English, not Arabic) as “the base,”

Damn, that's so true and just so fucking creepy...

Just FYI for those reading who may not know: Al Quaeda="The Base" in Arabic...I knew that, but never made the connection about how the Repubs always refer to "the base" as well...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
6. "Full speed ahead"
Damn you Dick Cheney. There was no effort to unite this country after the last presidential election. That much is apparent. They had an agenda and they didn't care if they destroyed this country to get it. That's what happens when you have Libertarians uniting with Right-wing Christians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjdee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
7. "Plainly the better choice"= No idiots at the New Yorker.
I'm still struggling with how anyone can look at the two and think Bush is the better candidate.

The fact that the New Yorker is changing its history to point out the obvious doesn't speak well for our country.

Don't more intelligent people (read: Democrats) read the New Yorker? Aren't they preaching to the choir?

Uh...being pessimistic, sorry. It is really great, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
8. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
9. Kick because they rip *Bush a new one
This is a keeper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rockydem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-25-04 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
10. I doubt this will have any impact on the election
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC