home

NYTimes' Ill Informed Editorial on the Iraq Supplemental

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 09:44:34 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The usually very good NYTimes Editorial page is very bad today on the Iraq supplemental funding bill. The basic problem is it is wrong on all the facts. The Times said:

The benchmarks spelled out in this legislation . . . require that the Iraqi government stop shielding and encouraging the Shiite militias that are helping drive the killing. . .

No it does not. The President "decides" if the Iraqis are making progress. Any doubt on what he will think?

The benchmarks also require the Iraqi government to take measurable steps toward national reconciliation . . .

No it does not. The President "decides" if the Iraqis are making progress. Any doubt on what he will think?

The legislation does not settle for more empty promises — from Mr. Bush and the Iraqis. It would require the president to provide Congress, by July, with an initial detailed report on Iraq’s efforts to meet these benchmarks. . . . If the benchmarks were met, American combat forces would remain until the fall of 2008.

Oooooooh. Bush has to file a report that is false. That has proven soooo difficult for the Bushies in the past.

Sheesh NYTimes, do you think we are stupid? Do you want us to think YOU are? If you are going to carry water for House Dem leadership, try a little harder next time. This does not even pass the laugh test.

< Subpoenas? Déjà vu all over again | Boumediene: SG Shies Away From DC Circuit's Constitutional Ruling on Habeas >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    NYTimes' Ill Informed Editorial on the Iraq Supplemental | 8 comments (8 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Pulling Strings (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by squeaky on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 09:58:45 AM EST
    The mechanice of a puppeteer.
    The President "decides" if the Iraqis are making progress. Any doubt on what he will think?

    Bad puppet theater.

    But what is the Times thinking? (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 10:09:26 AM EST
    Strange editorial. Not so much for supporting the bill, they want to buck up Pelosi, but for the horrible reasoning.

    [ Parent ]
    Did the NYT have (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Edger on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 10:59:39 AM EST
    Judith Miller ghost the editorial? :-/

    [ Parent ]
    And that's the whole enchilada! (5.00 / 5) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 10:00:47 AM EST
    Dubya has never had the same opinion on anything that I have had ever, not even once!  He's busy making his own reality!  Come on people, what is it that you don't get about this bill being 1000% wrong and most likely detrimental and/or deadly to soldiers and the credibility of Democrats?  On a bad day in Iraq the only thing this bill would expose is that Democrats are spineless, voiceless, little pansies when  Republicans are around!  It would reaffirm that if you fear bad people with evil plots in airplanes don't vote for a Democrat because they have no courage or strength in the face of any kind of opposition!  Dubya says he makes decisions from his gut and EVERYBODY AND THEIR DOG gets that that is all wrong now.  It's okay to make decisions with your head again but you need to at least have some guts.  Specter is up there having a fit today.....why don't we join him for cripes sake.  It's a good time to pile on and even get the right thing done!

    It's that simple (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 10:09:49 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    MSM showed a clip of the hearings (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 10:51:30 AM EST
    Take the WH offer. Is Spectre insane?

    Leahy did a Barb Boxer on him, shouting "It's NOTHING!"

    Didn't the NYT endorse the invasion of Iraq? (none / 0) (#7)
    by bx58 on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 12:50:07 PM EST
    And now we're shocked and surprised at this.

    Nana nana nananana leader!

    BTD, have you ever read the (none / 0) (#8)
    by bx58 on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:37:51 PM EST
    "usually very good" war-mongering NYT editorials from the fall of 2002 right up until the invasion?

    Read them and then tell me they're usually very good.

    NYTimes' Ill Informed Editorial on the Iraq Supplemental | 8 comments (8 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment