Quote:
Originally posted by rufus leeking
About a week, the Wash Post produced an article summarizing how little we thought of the evidence of a nuclear program. of course, with the recent revelation of the NYT and its tendancies to create news, no one seriously believes it anymore, but the Wash Post is still clean, isn't it? the article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Oct25.html
includes this scathing summary of the progress:
okay, good investigation by the Wash Post, and some very revealing news, Bravo! but wait. Problems! Problems! Problems! the people quoted call bullshit.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...9199-2003Oct31
when we say NYT'd should it mean biased, or fabricated? Ty, where is your "who's misinformed" chart.
|
If you were truly concerned about bias, you wouldn't be relying on a letter from David Kay, whose interest in pleasing the Administration has been clear. Like so many conservative complaints about bias in the media, what you are after is an excuse to ignore bad news.
sgtclub:
Politics? In the Senate? I am shocked! I'm just glad to hear you think it's politics, and not racism. Now turn your politics-detecting radar towards the decisions to nominate Estrada and Brown, and see what you come up with.
On your planet, Clarence Thomas is the Oliver Wendell Holmes of the Court. Someday I will try to find a way to visit.
Others have answered the objections to vouchers as well as I have. It is a little odd that conservative politicians attack teachers for not surrendering some of their money to benefit kids in public schools when that is exactly what they will not ask of their own constituents.
