So what specifically did you find revisionist about the article? In any politically charged editorial column it should be expected to encounter a political bias. By their nature, editorials are not intended to be 100% neutral and expecting them to be so is illogical. The basic historical account of the S&L scandal is reasonably accurate and so is John McCain`s involvement. It is relevant to consider when we are being asked to put our trust in him as the leader of our country. Mr. Moore raises valid concerns and issues in this article.
It is clear that you pretty much dislike everything and everyone
, but the reality is we have two choices to make in November. One choice gives us a 100% chance of more of the same failed economic policies that have created the largest deficits in U.S. history and the worst economic failures since the Great Depression. The other choice has at the very least a real chance for progress and is based on sound economic principles. Blind loyalty to party is certainly irritating but allowing apathy and cynicism to promote doing nothing is even more irresponsible and anti American. To the cynics I would say that when faced with less than desirable choices, the smart move is to at least move in the right direction by actively choosing the better of the two "negatives"
I of course do not share this cynicism and it is not the result of inexperienced, uneducated idealism. As someone who has been politically active since Ronald Reagan`s first term, I can honestly say that I have not been so motivated by a single political candidate the way I have by Barrack obama. My enthusiasm for him is also not based on political party affiliation. I have voted across party lines; having supported Reagan and Bush Sr as well as been critical of Clinton. Everything about Obama feels like the real deal to to me and the man`s integrity speaks truth to me. McCain I see as a lurking serpent who puts his own interests ahead of the good of our country; his choice of Sarah Palin exemplifies this.