NYT: John Kerry for President

So the New York Times finally weighs in. This is an extremely well written argument for JFK, and I'd like to think we'll probably see some of this reflected in the polls. My personal regard for the Times may not match that of the average American, but I can certainly say that Kerry's chances of winning are definitely not hurt by this. The whole article is interesting and persuasive, and while I doubt you need to be persuaded of Bush's ineptitude, I know plenty of people who are not yet sure why they should vote for Kerry. Read on.

There is no denying that this race is mainly about Mr. Bush's disastrous tenure. Nearly four years ago, after the Supreme Court awarded him the presidency, Mr. Bush came into office amid popular expectation that he would acknowledge his lack of a mandate by sticking close to the center. Instead, he turned the government over to the radical right.
...
We have specific fears about what would happen in a second Bush term, particularly regarding the Supreme Court. The record so far gives us plenty of cause for worry. Thanks to Mr. Bush, Jay Bybee, the author of an infamous Justice Department memo justifying the use of torture as an interrogation technique, is now a federal appeals court judge. Another Bush selection, J. Leon Holmes, a federal judge in Arkansas, has written that wives must be subordinate to their husbands and compared abortion rights activists to Nazis.
...
The Bush White House has always given us the worst aspects of the American right without any of the advantages.
...
We look back on the past four years with hearts nearly breaking, both for the lives unnecessarily lost and for the opportunities so casually wasted. Time and again, history invited George W. Bush to play a heroic role, and time and again he chose the wrong course. We believe that with John Kerry as president, the nation will do better.