I can't imagine what Jodi Kantor is thinking when she writes that
... in interviews, current and former White House and campaign aides, donors and friends from Chicago said they could see how the president and the first lady had been affected by their roles.
Describing them, they used phrases like: more confident but more scarred. More isolated. Less hesitant about directing staff members, whether butlers or highest-level advisers. Gratified by re-election, which the Obamas view as sweet vindication, and bloodier-minded when it comes to beating Republicans.
Does she not have an editor? Or does The
Times not allow use of a dictionary?
blood·y-mind·ed [bluhd-ee-mahyn-did] adjective
disposed to violence or bloodshed; bloodthirsty;
sanguinary: bloody-minded anarchists.
Granted, the secondary, "chiefly British" definition evokes a less disturbing image: "unreasonably stubborn or cantankerous." But even so, who wants to see the First Family this way, especially on the eve of a presidential inauguration?
Pardon me if I answer my own rhetorical question, but It seems that the bloody-minded leftists in the bloody-minded leftist cultural-political ghetto are fascinated by and attracted to these bloody-minded images... of "The Second Coming."
Ew.
UPDATE: There must be something "in the air" (call the EPA!) because just as I was posting this, a friend sent me another article, from the NY Post:
Ew.
What could go wrong, given such an auspicious beginning?

Posted by: Mannie Sherberg | Monday, 21 January 2013 at 11:03 AM
Posted by: wendybar | Monday, 21 January 2013 at 12:32 PM