Rolling Stone article

Anyone survive the hella long article in the current Rolling Stone on the 2004 Election fraud in Ohio?

Great stuff packed into Robert Kennedy Jr.'s piece.

Sounds like a whole lotta dirty shit went down in Ohio in the months, days, hours leading up to Election, and even on the actual day of it.

It's worth a read, though I still have another page and a half to go, plus the sidebar.

 

Xan ... I read it. And I understand the whole consider the source thing, especially with Rolling Stone. I enjoy the mag, but it's a little too far left. I expected the article to be a lot of sour grapes, instead it seemed to be packed with legitimate information and good reporting.

 

Yes, good reporting. They talked to the people with no vested interest in either side of the aisle.

The numbers game from Ohio '04 is just disturbing.

 

I'm afraid I can't get past the source on this one.  I've grown too weary of Rolling Stone's bi-monthly "Bush Killed Tupac!" articles to take them seriously on political issues anymore.

 

Take a crack at it. If what you feel is validated in the first 15-20-25 inches put it down. But I think you'll keep reading well beyond the first page.

 

Wasn't there a thing on Romenesko about how there was really nothing new, national and Ohio papers already investigated the stuff, etc.? I haven't read the Rolling Stone article so I can't comment on it.

 

When Salon, which is no friend to Bush or most any conservative, says that RFK's arguments are filled with "distortions and blatant omissions," I tend to discount pretty much the entire article.

 

I've never read a Salon article, so I can't comment on your comment.

What exactly is a Salon?

 

Salon.com, which is a liberal-leaning website (similiar to Slate and most online rags).

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/

 

It's where Bubbler goes to GET A FUCKING HAIRCUT

 

Salon.com is not liberal-leaning. It is liberal. Slate is liberal-leaning, but like any good site that only leans it dishes it out equally.

 

I just looked at the article. I got as far as the part where Kennedy told us that exit polling has evolved into an exact science.

Uhhh... no.

Sorry, but all I saw was a series of very, very questionable declarations with absolutely no substance to back them up.