30 June 2006

The NY Times Looses Its Wingman

The WSJ defends itself while trashing the NY Times, in this editorial about the formerly secret Treasury Department weapon of the War on Terror.

It starts like this:
President Bush, among others, has since assailed the press for revealing the program, and the Times has responded by wrapping itself in the First Amendment, the public's right to know and even The Wall Street Journal. We published a story on the same subject on the same day, and the Times has since claimed us as its ideological wingman. So allow us to explain what actually happened, putting this episode within the larger context of a newspaper's obligations during wartime.

And keeps attacking the Times and their editorial stance on the issue.

Read the whole thing and judge for yourself, I already have.

I still have a problem with the newshole of the WSJ and hole they will slant a story even in a paper that is called conservative. They themselves talk about the difference:
We should make clear that the News and Editorial sections of the Journal are separate, with different editors. The Journal story on Treasury's antiterror methods was a product of the News department, and these columns had no say in the decision to publish.

But one again read it all and think about it

I'm So Proud

Last night I was explaining the foolish SCOTUS decision about Gitmo to Heidi and Joey.

Joey looked at me from the back seat of the car and asked "When was the Supreme Court taken over by chimpanzees?" He's 13.

First, I almost crashed the car from laughter, then I explained to him that the Chimps had taken over along time ago, and we were just now getting close to getting control back in human hands.

Well as cptham said when I told him the story. It's Nurture, not Nature.

29 June 2006

SCOTUS Joins The War On The War On Terror

The Supremes; well Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, Stevens at least, have sided with OBL's driver against the people of the United States in this decision, ain't that a kick in the teeth.

Well what I'm going to do is read as much of it as I can before my head explodes, and then I'll make my snide and pithy little comments about the decision.

See you later this week.

27 June 2006

A Soldier Fires Back At The NYTimes

Thanks to today's Laura Ingraham Show on XM I was able to here Laura read this letter to the NYTimes that the boys over at Powerline published today.

This is from a Lt sitting in the sandbox RIGHT NOW and it conveys his anger at the elitist snobs at the Times who determine themselves what secrets should stay secret. Some excerpts:

Congratulations on disclosing our government's highly classified anti-terrorist-financing program (June 23). I apologize for not writing sooner. But I am a lieutenant in the United States Army and I spent the last four days patrolling one of the more dangerous areas in Iraq. (Alas, operational security and common sense prevent me from even revealing this unclassified location in a private medium like email.) ...

And, by the way, having graduated from Harvard Law and practiced with a federal appellate judge and two Washington law firms before becoming an infantry officer, I am well-versed in the espionage laws relevant to this story and others -- laws you have plainly violated. I hope that my colleagues at the Department of Justice match the courage of my soldiers here and prosecute you and your newspaper to the fullest extent of the law. By the time we return home, maybe you will be in your rightful place: not at the Pulitzer announcements, but behind bars.

Very truly yours,

Tom Cotton
Baghdad, Iraq

He says it all and says it best.