what do you think the subscribership is in south dakota or alabama? they appeal to the socially liberal corporate types in new york who agree with the assessment that their republican party has been hijacked by the religious right. secondly the charm of the economist is the condescension. regardless of it being right or wrong, its always been the case.
I am no so sure about that, when there are evidence that WMD was fabricated, some of those folks calimed that they supported Bush becuase he is moral. Give me a break now. I agree the some of elitism shown in the magazine sometime annoyed me. But largely it's a rational magazine, unlike lot of news outlet here taking side for the sake of making profits.
if WMD was fabricated, i would assume that no one here would object to the war in Iraq. i think what you mean is that <i>evidence</i> of WMD <i>was</i> fabricated, and for that there simply is no <i>credilble evidence</i>
I think the Economist is what counts for conservative in the U.K. And because they have less of a personal stake in Bush's policies, they're less anxious about the effects that publicly criticizing him would have on his popularity and on his ability to implement his agenda. I'm sure Brits would feel the same way about Time or Newsweek if we ever actually wrote about them or any other foreign countries we hadn't just bombed.
