The Joosh wrote:

cold fury wrote:

In fact, any suggestion that if this trend continues, various Lefty asswads ought to be required by law not only to apologize for their arrogant stupidity, but that they should also be forced to submit to some sort of public humiliation—such as pushing peanuts down Pennsylvania Avenue with their noses while clad in nothing but a loin cloth and being pelted with flaming bags of dog crap hurled by miniature siege engines operated by laughing spectators—would be nothing but premature and unhelpful hubris, and should be studiously avoided by more sober and rational commentators.

Yup! I forgot why this should be, but it's a great idea.

O yea now I remember.

NYT: Saddam Had WMD Capabilities
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/13/international/middleeast/13loot.html?pagewanted=all&position=

In the weeks after Baghdad fell in April 2003, looters systematically dismantled and removed tons of machinery from Saddam Hussein's most important weapons installations, including some with high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear arms, a senior Iraqi official said this week in the government's first extensive comments on the looting.

This also happened today:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050314/ts_nm/media_report_dc
Study Shows U.S. Election Coverage Harder on Bush

Yahoo:

U.S. media coverage of last year's election was three times more likely to be negative toward President Bush than Democratic challenger John Kerry, according to a study released Monday.

Yahoo:

Examining the public perception that coverage of the war in Iraq was decidedly negative, it found evidence did not support that conclusion. The majority of stories had no decided tone, 25 percent were negative and 20 percent were positive, it said.