Reasonable NY Times tries to redo history. Again.

Go Blog and Multiply won't let them Howard hounds them with facts that they conveniently left out of this editorial. First, he lets the Times Editorial do the talking:

The most cynical recent example was Karl Rove's absurd and offensive declaration this week that conservatives and liberals had different reactions to 9/11. Let's be clear: Americans of every political stripe were united in their outrage and grief, united in their determination to punish those who plotted the mass murder, and united behind the war in Afghanistan.

Then, he lets the facts speak for themselves:

"I am convinced that military action will not prevent further acts of international terrorism against the United States," said Lee. "However, difficult this vote may be, some of us must urge the use of restraint." - Berkeley's congresswoman, Barbara Lee- October 2001

"I'm not so sure that President Bush, members of his administration or the military have thought this action out completely or fully examined America's cause," said McDermott." - Washington State Congressman Jim McDermott- October 2001

"Nearly two-thirds of Americans favor use of U.S. ground troops to carry out President Bush's war on terrorism in Afghanistan, according to a poll released Friday by CNN/Time." - CNN Poll - September 28, 2001

That tells me that slightly more than a third of Americans polled were against military action, even when bodies were still being pulled from the rubble. Now read the Times quote above again.

Either the excerpt that Howard quotes from the NY Times is opinion or it is factual. If it's an opinion, then the editorial has not substantiated it with any facts. If it's factual, it's wrong. Either way, it's disingenuous editorializing for the "Paper of Record".

Once, the Gray Lady may have stood for authoritative news and comprehensive analysis from a centrist perspective. No longer. She's now a screeching nag for the liberal perspective, even while her editors deny their blatent affiliation. Sadly, the paper has become little more that a tired propaganda piece for a fastbecoming irrelevent political idealogy. If the Truth wants to get the story out, he better go somewhere else. No one at the NY Times appears interested any more. They have too many Reasonable points to make.

Update: Just one Minute wants to know who can rebutt the NY Times, since he doesn't have the time. Think Blog and Multiply has an answer for him?