Adam Nagourney, still douche-baggy, but the GOP won't like this

The NY Times second most prominant "on the other hand" practitioner after Bobo, tried his best to be fair to both sides, but finally got down to the trivial thing that we liberals have to harp on, to counter whatever the fuck the right-wing noise machine will throw up.

We all saw it and have commented on it all ready, but for those who managed not to notice or didn't see it, this is important (yet trivial):

...for much of the debate, television networks showed a split screen, displaying Mr. Bush often scowling and grimacing as Mr. Kerry challenged his management of the war.

When Mr. Bush was asked whether Mr. Kerry had character issues that should prevent him from becoming president, he sighed loudly as he referred to that as "a loaded question."

The Times main Editorial today furthered that point. Saying Kerry looked Presidential while...

Mr. Kerry scored an important point when the president made a more significant slip and talked about the need to go to war because "the enemy attacked us." The person who sent planes smashing into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Mr. Kerry reminded the audience, was Osama bin Laden, who was operating from Afghanistan, not Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

Meanwhile, Mr. Bush, whose body and facial language sometimes seemed downright petulant, insisted, again and again, that by criticizing the way the war is being run, Mr. Kerry was sending "mixed signals" that threatened the success of the effort.

Who's Dukakis now Bitch?