This just cracks me up. You won't hear about it anywhere, it's just something I caught in passing, and I doubt anybody will talk about it because it's just not that big a deal, but it'll go into the "background" files of many pundits and ideologes on the right, for later use, I'm sure.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2208&ncid=742&e=15&u=/ucgb/20040701/cm_ucgb/michaelmooreandbush

Boyd, of course, is fully in love with Moore and his movie, and it shows in this "review". He can't get enough of it. He ate it up. He just can't praise it enough.

Now here's the irony: Boyd is the lesser-known of the two New York Times editors (along with Harold Raines) who resigned, following... now get this... the Jayson Blair scandal! Blair was the reporter who admitted to having *fabricated stories* for the Times.

But you know what? The average reader of that article will have no idea that it's THAT Gerald Boyd, or even who Gerald Boyd is, because there's no mention of it anywhere on the page, which lacks even the usual little bio piece at the bottom.

Incredible.

Now here's the irony: Boyd is the lesser-known of the two New York Times editors (along with Harold Raines) who resigned, following... now get this... the Jayson Blair scandal! Blair was the reporter who admitted to having *fabricated stories* for the Times.

So because he wasn't the greatest of newspaper editors, his opinion is invalidated? Incredible indeed...

Rather than second hand information about the author's intent I believe it would be more cogent to address some of the "facts" presented such as Colin Powell in 2001 before 9/11 stating that Saddam Hussein had no WMD and was effectively contained as well as Condaleza Rice stating the same more emphatically within the same time frame. Seems the both of them changed their minds with no new information, just speculation. See the many times Bush said unequivocally, "he's got 'em" over and over again. From the aluminum tubes to the Niger yellow cake to the mobile bioweapons labs, that Bush each time reiterated were proof of WMDs, they were all proved false. Does any one think that Bush did not stretch the truth if not outright lie to get the congress and the public behind an invasion that was planned from before Bush entered office?

I'm surprised that Moore didn't include the PNAC document or Brzenski's plans (The Grand Chess Game) that the neocons appear to be following to the letter, even to the extent of having their "Pearl Harbor" type event they so craved to set it all in motion.

So because he wasn't the greatest of newspaper editors, his opinion is invalidated? Incredible indeed...

Oh no. His opinions on journalism are invalidated because he compromised his professional ethics as a journalist.

Of course, it's just my opinion that his opinion is invalidated. I have no problem with him saying whatever he likes. I'm no censor. :D

Pangloss your attack of the man only re-enforces his line of argumentation, and highlights the weakness of your own. So I wouldn’t smile too much…