If you have "no place to go," come here!

The Times really needs a new department

We've had it for years: The Department of How Stupid Do They Think We Are? The Grey Lady editorializes:

The administration insists that purge was not about partisan politics. But Mr. Sampson’s alternative explanation was not very credible — that the decision about which of these distinguished prosecutors should be fired was left in the hands of someone as young and inept as Mr. Sampson. If this were an aboveboard, professional process, it strains credulity that virtually no documents were produced when decisions were made, and that none of his recommendations to Mr. Gonzales were in writing.

Well, let me give the very well-paid Times editors a tip, because my "credulity" is undergoing no strain whatever:

If a Republican says it's raining, be sure you look out the window.

It's quite simple, really. Your typical DFH in the blogosphere knew never to trust a Republican right after Florida 2000. If you'd been right there with us, you would have saved yourself a world of hurt--Starting with the whole Judy "Kneepads" Miller fiasco, but there are plenty of other examples.

NOTE Oh, and when Gore runs, can your editors please make sure there that lazy reporters never reference any of the false stories the VRWC planted back in 2000? Thank you in advance for your consideration in this matter.

No votes yet


Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

... where reporters like Kit Seelye, who has just been moved back onto the political beat in time for the run-up to the primaries, weren't lazy at all — they actively made shit up.

Like putting "I was the one that started it all," (re: Love Canal) in Al Gore's mouth, for example. When he had actually said "that was the one that started it all." Or boldly mis-stating Gore's record of having criticized Clinton — criticisms she herself had reported at the time — as having "stood loyally behind" Clinton instead.

For just a couple of examples.

It's something — but it ain't laziness...