Mrs. McCain as Portrayed in The New York Times GRADE ME

In one of the blogs suggested by Mr. Seago, one particular post caught my eye. It was a post concerning The New York Times and how they recently portrayed Mrs. Cindy McCain, the Republican candidate's wife. As of yet, I am not sure if they have done an Obama-related interview with Obama, his wife, or anyone close to their family. Here is the link to the post:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/10/021821.php
This clearly is done in the now-running fashion of mud wrestling that this election brings to the public. This election is probably one of the worst in history: debates consist of "My candidate, your candidate... blah blah blah negative negative negative..." and have very little focus on what might actually go on while the candidate is in office. They've both flip-flopped, we get it, now get on with campaigning for the FUTURE. How about we CHANGE in teat aspect. Hey, that's an idea!
Anyway, got a little sidetracked there... This, according to Power Line is another one of those reputation-scarring attempts on either campaign. Since we are targeting McCain's wife however, it's an attempt of the Liberal-based media. The New York Times has always been a seemingly credible source of news, being based out of the largest city in the United States and being seen from many different voices presented from various worldly viewpoints. Many articles coming from this particular newspaper have been award-winning and worthy of recognition. My personal opinion: with this article, they just got lazy, which is poor judgment on their part since the article pertains with a would-be first lady.
nothing is going with the books in this campaign.
When they cited tat she had stated she took "four months"to have time away from family to recover from a stroke, they also brought up that she attended outings with her husband and hat she claimed she was fine after one month. However, when you look at the big picture, don't people need physical therapy? Where is that in the article?
As for her "mercy missions" to Rwanda... Well, I don't know about all that, but I do know that even Princess Diana needed a little humanitarian side to balance the upset she was creating at home with her own scandalous lifestyle which upset the royal family to no end and created a rift between them an their people. People still call her a saint today, which is BEYOND me.
I think my favorite quote of the whole post was this one though: "'Some of Mrs. McCain's statements seem questionable.' Of such stuff are Pulitzer Prizes made."
Lastly, I would like to point out that Power Line had something going when they said The New York Times cited FACEBOOK above all things to dig up "facts"about McCain's daughter who is 16 and probably acts it. Where's the scandal there? Nonetheless, it was still scoured. That, in my opinion (and it seems Power Line would agree with me), seems too low for a formidable paper to go by.

A Critique from the LA Times GRADE ME

Recently I came across an opinion article (probably based off of a poll, judging by he way it's worded) about the upcoming 2008 elections and the two politicians vying for the spot: John McCain and Barack Obama.
The article can be seen here: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-klein-mcardle12-2008jun12,0,3981755.story
This is a critique for the first part of the article:
I'm supposing the person writing the article sides more with the Left-Wing since she clearly states that John McCain's biggest problem "is not his age, it's the 'R' after his name." It's a good article which explains that Americans do think that John McCain being older than the regular set of the last few presidents is indeed a handicap in his campaign, it also says that his father died of a heart attack at 70 years old. McCain had already passed that mark. He suffers from arthritis in his arms and legs, his face bears scars from when he fought melanoma, and his face is apparently abound with wrinkles.
However, Americans also said that experience will sway them in this race, as there is a vast "gap" between the two opponents. McCain has weathered many a crisis why Obama has only been in the Senate for a few years, has no military experience, and his choice in a running mate with a whole lot more experience) has people saying "Why don't they switch places?"
That being said, it also says in the article that "the Senate is not a particularly good training ground for a presidential career."

This is a critique for the second part of the article:
The second section cites that McCain's great weakness is "his ideas." His coveted support of the war in Iraq has most of the nation wagging their tongues since most people are now wanting for us to pull out. Catch-22. Bush is criticized on the daily about the war and yet, when the attacks first happened on September 11th, what did we want most in the world, avenging our country: "Smok[ing] ém out." Now that we are getting tired of hearing nothing but "victory is in sight"but seeing our men die still and us still not leaving, there is a different tune. Indeed, now that McCain is vying for office we are whistling to this new tune. Like my grandpa used to say: "Damned if you do and damned if you don't."
This section of the article also cited that he was old, saying the rather comical phrase of, "His speeches have a tendency to read like the political equivalent of leg warmer's and Rubik's cubes."
Talking about Obama's issues are Americans speculation about his religious affiliations, saying that he might be Muslim. This automatically sends a shiver down some people's spines since we've clearly witnessed what religion can do to you if you are in a leadership position. Just look at the Middle East, look at who we're fighting. He doesn't put his hand over his heart during the pledge and he doesn't wear the flag lapel pin which means that he is "different." The article says that "In politics, different is dangerous."

Overall both sections were very good opinion articles bringing up issues that might be on some American's minds concerning the upcoming election.