All the News That Fits to Our Ideological Agenda

SHOCK: THE NEW YORK TIMES DECIDES NOT TO TELL THE OTHER HALF OF THE STORY!!

Via Matt Drudge, the NYT has rejected an editorial by John McCain in response to an editorial Barry Obama wrote about his position on Iraq less than a week ago. I'm personally flabbergasted. I can't believe the Times would risk its reputation of objectivity and even handedness. If they keep this up they might become known as left wing advocates posing as journalists. People might even believe that the last Republican they endorsed for President was Dwight Eisenhower.

On the other hand, I was surprised that the Iraq war was still going on. I never see anything about it in the Times anymore. I wonder why they don't want to talk about it anymore unless they get an editorial by Barry Obama('s staff)? A curious thought to ponder. They couldn't write enough about it in 2005. Are there no more Jack Murtha quotes comparing our soldiers to the imaginary Mongols John Kerry spoke of while he was in the SDS? I'd better stop there, if we delve into that, its enough for two or three more posts. Ah, you wacky libs. You're like the gift that keeps giving, or maybe the guy who keeps kicking you in the junk and taking your wallet.

Back to the point, I'm sure its just a matter of time before the Times corrects this error and regains its impeccable journalistic integrity. Otherwise people are going to begin to think they're just a mouth piece for the Democrat Party and that the NYT's whole reason for existence is to push a liberal agenda, not to report "all the news that's fit to print". But that's just crazy, right?

The Iraq War is Sooo 2005

Obama has scrubbed his website of all criticism of the Iraq "surge". That sound you heard was George Soros' head exploding.

MSM: Nothing to See Here, Let's Talk About Health Care

Oh look, another example of how the Iraq war has completely shifted Mid East politics. Israeli warplanes are now practicing for an assault on Iran in Iraqi airspace. Israeli warplanes. Eight years ago, I couldn't fathom this happening anytime in my lifetime. Apparently, the sources in the Iraqi ministry say:

"the American bases in Iraq might serve as a platform for the IAF from which to attack Iran. If Israeli warplanes will take off from Iraq, they can reach Bushehr in five minutes - a "record time," the sources said."

But of course, the Iraq war hasn't made us any safer, right? Say whatever you want about the justification for the war (and believe me their were many justifications beyond WMDs), but you cannot deny the strategic position it puts us in vis-a-vis Iran. We have friendly countries on two Iranian borders with American bases and a heavy troop presence.

The huge thing though, is that the source that leaked this came from the Iraqi Defense Ministry, which means, A: They're aware of it, and B: They most likely are leaking it because they're unhappy the Iraqi government approved it. I could be wrong on this last point, but I think the Iraqi government would have to approve something as controversial as Israeli warplanes using its airspace for an attack on Iran.

But of course this doesn't vindicate G dubya, this war was for oil, Iraq is a quagmire, its just a diversion from the war on terror, etc. etc. Hey, MSM, I hope you choke on that crow, asshats.