And implicitly admits that it, the great New York Times, was fooled by a fake. Not the first time, by any means. Remember the 1930s, when it was fooled by Stalin. Thanks to its Moscow correspondent, Walter Duranty.
They've never returned the Pulitzer Prize Duranty won for being a useful idiot. They've never apologized for printing his glowing reports about the workers' paradise.
They lost all credibility decades ago. They should welcome Obozo to the club.
antacular: An op-ed is not the position of the WSJ editorial board. That's why it's called an "op-ed". The WSJ was giving space to differing views. You should address your stupid comment to the authors of the op-ed pieces. That's assuming any such were even published. You, being a lib, are probably lying.
Second, you are equating someone's opinion about derivatives to Duranty's lies about the USSR? Yeah, that figures, you stupid numbskull.
You must know that there are few if any publications that have not been"fooled"by politicians.
It is obvious that your post has been generated by your perception of an agenda that you do not share.
Try for balance.
I will let you off with this mild rebuke.
Please Accorb don't embarrass yourself. Balance is a two way street. Show me balance from this so called news outlet. Ignoring stories is balance?. Playing catch up after the fact on scandal after scandal is balance. What the poster failed to mention was the toning down of that statement
why because it was to harsh and they can't have that can they. Targeting conservatives because of our beliefs should bother everyone but I won't expect that honesty on your side.