We must admit, after reading the front-page story in the New York Times today, that the paper managed to sully itself (we looked it up, and it is a word). To suggest in the second paragraph that McCain had an extramarital affair-- and then offer no substantiation-- is something right off the cover of US Weekly or OK! (Weekly?). There are plenty of substantive arguments to promote the Democratic side that they favor-- and this may well discredit those later in the campaign, at least with those not already in the choir. In fact, this may counter the "old-age" thing as a sign of his virility!
But what do you expect-- they endorsed Hillary the day before South Carolina.
