Saturday, February 12, 2005
Winger doublethink: The Times covers for WSJ [cough] Editor Bret Stephens
OK, another winger circle jerk has come to its sad, and inevitable conclusion, and CNN executive Eason Jordan has resigned. ("First, they came for Dan Rather...."). But get this gem of a quote, at the very end (naturally) of the Times story covering the wank-fest:
Which is here online, edited as follows:
Golly! Thatlast sentence didn't make it into the online edition! I wonder why? Let's read it again:
Hmmm... That reminds me of something... But what could it be? I have it!
We have a President who wants to "field" only "softball questions"—and whose own press secretary's office has organized, in the person of Jeff "Not His Real Name" Gannon, a ringer to throw exactly that kind of softball question! A ringer funded by the Texas GOP, a ringer who was Unka Karl's channel for smearing Joseph Wilson in the Plame Affair, and a ringer who has evinced an, er, extracurricular interest in gay military porn (way to support the troops there, Karl).
Welcome to the delusional world of the wingers!
The doublethink:
It's OK to hound an executive who can't field softball questions out of his job—unless that executive is the winger chief executive of the United States!
So why did the Times slash that last sentence? Professional courtesy? They got hate mail already? You can ask Danny Boy here. He'll get to the bottom of it! Fer sure.
Which is here online, edited as follows:
Bret Stephens, a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board who attended the session in Davos, wrote in Thursday's Journal that Mr. Jordan had "made a defamatory innuendo" but added: "Mr. Jordan deserves some credit for retracting the substance of his remark, and some forgiveness for trying to weasel his way out of a bad situation of his own making."But [Stephens] questioned whether CNNs' news division should be headed by someone "who can't be trusted to sit on a panel and field softball questions."
Golly! That
[Stephens] questioned whether CNNs' news division should be headed by someone "who can't be trusted to sit on a panel and field softball questions."
Hmmm... That reminds me of something... But what could it be? I have it!
We have a President who wants to "field" only "softball questions"—and whose own press secretary's office has organized, in the person of Jeff "Not His Real Name" Gannon, a ringer to throw exactly that kind of softball question! A ringer funded by the Texas GOP, a ringer who was Unka Karl's channel for smearing Joseph Wilson in the Plame Affair, and a ringer who has evinced an, er, extracurricular interest in gay military porn (way to support the troops there, Karl).
Welcome to the delusional world of the wingers!
The doublethink:
It's OK to hound an executive who can't field softball questions out of his job—unless that executive is the winger chief executive of the United States!
So why did the Times slash that last sentence? Professional courtesy? They got hate mail already? You can ask Danny Boy here. He'll get to the bottom of it! Fer sure.