Complaining about media bias gets tiresome. But, come on.
Republicans finally challenge Barack Obama on national security and the New York Times thinks it's all politics. "Seeking Cudgel, Republicans Return to National Security Issue."
Memo to the Times: Some conservatives are genuinely concerned about the fact that Obama is: releasing al Qaeda-trained terrorists in the United States, closing Guantanamo Bay, banning harsh (and effective) interrogation techniques, sharing secrets with the world, withdrawing from Iraq, and apologizing for American power. Sure, it might be good politics, too.
But a headline -- and an article -- that assumes politics is the primary motivation says far more about the Times than it does about the conservatives featured in the article.
I'm still waiting for the front-page NYT "fact-check" on Obama's claim that he cannot talk about classified documents detailing the success of the enhanced interrogation program. Obama, of course, could declassify those documents in a day and if his name were George W. Bush, and if the documents were not likely so damning to the Times' own editorial position, the front-page analyses would have begun.
How can it be that the Times is losing subscribers?
(H/T Jonah Goldberg).
