Could be, since they just endorsed Kerry in the most ringing terms — and they had endorsed shrub four years ago!

.. if Bush partisans could turn aside disagreement with a brusque “elections have consequences” in 2001, it turns out today that governing has consequences, too.

One of them should be that Americans elect John Kerry president in November.

Bush’s term in office has been marked by two major failures. One is his conduct of the war in Iraq. The other is his stewardship of the nation’s fiscal health
….
We believe the White House’s policy-makers approached the war with preconceived notions about success based on what the president later called “just guessing.” They brushed aside warnings and contrary opinions. They chose ideology over expertise. This arrogance led to a series of military, political and diplomatic blunders and, we believe, resulted in the unnecessary deaths of many brave Americans.
….
In almost every area, deliberate gaps between the administration’s rhetoric and reality have become routine. Last year’s misinformation about the cost of Medicare drug coverage is just one example.
….
When George W. Bush took office in a deeply divided nation, he promised to reach out to unite the country. If anything, he has helped make the rifts deeper. That may be his real failure as president.

John Kerry can do better.

No kidding. This is from Mark Kleiman, who asks, “Does anyone know of a media outlet or commentator that supported Gore in 2000 and is supporting Bush today?” I suspect he’ll be hard pressed to find any.

In the past two days Kerry has also picked up endorsements from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, The St. Louis Post Dispatch, The Atlanta-Journal Constitution, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Portland Press-Herald in Maine.