The New York Times has this remarkable statement in a "news" story.
Take Tony Rezko for example, a shady character for whom Obama sponsored legislation. Others have pointed out that Obama frequently stood in the way of reforming politics and reducing corruption in Illinois. Could the NY Times be correct? I am not going to argue that here, but the statement in the news article is not backed up by anything more than an assertion. At the very least, the NY Times statement is debatable.
Mr. Obama’s unusual decision to inject himself into a statewide issue during the height of his presidential campaign was a reminder that despite his historic ascendancy to the White House, he has never quite escaped the murky and insular world of Illinois politics. It is a world he has long navigated, to the consternation of his critics, by engaging in a kind of realpolitik, Chicago-style, which allowed him to draw strength from his relationships with important players without becoming compromised by their many weaknesses. . . .
Take Tony Rezko for example, a shady character for whom Obama sponsored legislation. Others have pointed out that Obama frequently stood in the way of reforming politics and reducing corruption in Illinois. Could the NY Times be correct? I am not going to argue that here, but the statement in the news article is not backed up by anything more than an assertion. At the very least, the NY Times statement is debatable.
What passes as a news statement in the New York Times
4/
5
Oleh
abudzar
