Chump Change Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 http://warner.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/05...st-a-president/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 That's a blog post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Did you notice the word 'blogs' in the url or the OPINION headline at the top of the page or does your indignant outrage blind you to such things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Change Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 Did you notice the word 'blogs' in the url or the OPINION headline at the top of the page or does your indignant outrage blind you to such things? Indignant Outrage? C'mon Genie Freckle, it was merely scarcasm directed at that joke of a paper. John Adams was correct (BTW, nice job parrot), that it was a blog and not a column. Yes, I should've noticed that prior to posting. As far as indignant outrage is concerned, I save that for the complete selling out of our nations future with this schit sandwich your peeps are trying to pass as beef. Have a nice day parrot boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I don't give a crap if it was a blog,or the front page of the wall street journal-that was gross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I don't give a crap if it was a blog,or the front page of the wall street journal-that was gross. Yeah, since it's an opinion piece, I don't file it under "journalism". But damn, it was a weird (and pointless) opinion piece. Why does she insist on sexualizing the first family like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly McButterpants Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 That was truly nausea inducing . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts