The Increasingly Low Standards of The New York Times Editorial Section

9:10 pm EST October 29th, 2005 | Politics | 2 Comments

I’m glad I get access to TimesSelect because I subscribe to the Sunday Times in print, because if I paid for this sort of swill from David Brooks I’d want a refund. Big time.

So some Democrats were not content with Libby’s indictment, but had to stretch, distort and exaggerate. The tragic thing is that at the exact moment when the Republican Party is staggering under the weight of its own mistakes, the Democratic Party’s loudest voices are in the grip of passions that render them untrustworthy.

Right, because its not like the Vice President set up an operation to use national security information from the CIA in order to fuel a political smear campaign. Right? Just crazy liberal imagination run wild, right. Mmmmkay. Then again, this is just part of Brooks’ pattern.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

2 Responses to “The Increasingly Low Standards of The New York Times Editorial Section”

  1. Semanticleo says:
    October 29, 2005 at 9:10 pm

    Every newspaper should have their own resident Charles Krauthammer to level the unfairly graded playing field, so postulate with liberal bias.

  2. Tuco Ramirez the Rat says:
    October 30, 2005 at 5:10 am

    I don’t understand your outrage.

    This is a perfect description of your own behavior.

    A so-called “progressive,” you have declared Lewis Libby GUILTY!
    even after Patrick Fitzgerald himself advised us all that he is presumed innocent.

    You have declared that uncharged members of the administration are GUILTY!, not because you care that justice be carried out in a fair and even-handed (in other words, Constitutional) manner, but because you are angry and vengeful.

    I’m glad you don’t have any real power, because I’d be extremely concerned how you would use it if you had any.