>>>>Some will reflexively say this is just a partisan post. But I don't see how anyone can read this article with any degree of open mindedness and not be troubled about the prospect of this person becoming President of the U.S.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?scp=13&sq=sarah%20palin&st=cse
>>>
>>>Once again, the New York Times addresses the scatilogical side of the news.
>>
>>I don't follow. Can you elaborate?
>
>You're kidding right? :o)

Nope. Here is the definition of "scatology" from Merriam-Webster:

1 : interest in or treatment of obscene matters especially in literature
2 : the biologically oriented study of excrement (as for taxonomic purposes or for the determination of diet)

Given that, I didn't get why Grady used that word to describe the article. Or the "once again." I thought it was a pretty good piece of reporting given the stone wall that has been erected around Sarah Palin.

I really get annoyed sometimes when the Times is dismissed as some loony left wing attack dog. When people say that I know they are picking it up from right wing "pundits" and don't even read the damn paper.