1. Another sign the Washington Post REALLY wants Cindy Sheehan to succeed. See this headline from Sunday: "Refusal to See Sheehan Is Second-Guessed: A Decision Characteristic of Bush Has the Potential to Be a Consequential Act." And....it has the potential to be forgotten by almost everybody after a while.
Sunday’s New York Times Magazine cover story was one part ‘Mad Max’ mixed with one part poor economics. The 7,400 word piece by Peter Maass was a gusher of scaremongering end-of-world predictions and claimed that an oil “crisis” is imminent. Maass filled his story with comments and views from Matthew Simmons, author of a new book called “Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy.” The story did its best to paint a great scary oil conspiracy and an inevitable “crisis ahead” “whether in a year or 2 or 10.”
Believing that America can't get enough of its Protest Mom, the news media cover every aspect of her story.And how exactly is this different from the Americans that can't get enough of Natalee Holloway's mother pleading for her daughter?
How do they justify this hypothesis? Because in 1980, long gas lines "cost Carter his re-election".
1. Gas wasn't the only problem with Carter.
The Denver Post has finally broken its silence about the developing Air America story. Only, as with the New York Times and the Swift Boat Veterans, the first mention of it is a dismissal followed by a rebuttal. Dick Kreck addresses the scandal in his radio column in today's Entertainment section.
First, the setup:
First it was nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. Then he was AWOL. After that came Plamegate. So, what pray tell will be the next left-wing attack on our president?
Potentially, the manner in which the Vioxx story was covered this weekend by the New York Times gives us some clues.
To begin with, a front-page article Saturday by Alex Berenson reported the surprise verdict that gave the widow of a man who died after taking Merck’s painkiller an astounding $253.5 million award including $229 million in punitive damages.
Just in case people missed it, the Times ran another article by Mr. Berenson on Sunday -- again on the front-page -- that appears to move this story in a suspiciously political direction:
Mike Allen (or at least his editors at the WashPost) are REALLY reaching now to keep plugging the Cindy Sheehan Brigade even after Cindy Sheehan has left the ranch. On the front page of the Style section is this don't-lose-hope-lefties puff piece: "They Are Stardust, And in Texas: At the Crawford Protest Camp, Growing Echoes of Woodstock."
Pizzey did avoid openly slamming the pontiff from the Left on his culturally conservative positions, but hinted repeatedly that the German Pope Benedict was given polite but uneasy deference from his countrymen: "Benedict gets the adoration and professed love and respect one would expect for a man in his position, with a sense that there is also a 'but...' hanging in the air."
Cindy Sheehan. Cindy Sheehan. Cindy Sheehan.
I only do that to satisfy what I assume is a "Cindy Sheehan name content quota" in place for any newspaper article written on any subject related to the War in Iraq, whether it's about her or not.
Today's Washington Post features one of those headlines that make people who want to have an honest debate on illegal immigration shake their heads ruefully.
The headline reads: "Ranch Turned Over to Immigrants"
Would you know, from reading that headline that the immigrants in question were illegal immigrants and they won the ranch in a civil lawsuit?
Neither would I.