Ah, the objective WaPo

Just a glance at the front page of the Washington Post’s main page this morning will tell you on which side of the political spectrum and civil society they land. It runs the gamut from sympathy for Saddam Hussein’s decapited half-brother to sympathy for Guantanamo denizens for whom the wheels of justice turn slowly (ignoring the fact that these people were all rounded up engaged in evil acts against the civilized world). Sympathy for all of the devils, as it were. 

And a vitually useless article that reports that the UN claims there nearly 35,000 Iraqi civilians killed in Iraq last year.

Gianni Magazzeni, the chief of the U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq, said 34,452 civilians were killed and 36,685 were wounded last year.

So we learn from the Washington Post that there are actually people killing other people in Iraq. Why didn’t the President tell us about that? Is this some kind of cover up?

I want to know how the UN can count the Iraqi dead from their luxury suites in New York City Hotels.

And don’t forget the story that President Bush will shift the ideological burden of the federal deficit to the Democrats next week;

When he takes the House rostrum next week for the State of the Union address, President Bush will list among his goals a balanced federal budget, a shift for a president who has presided over record deficits while aggressively cutting taxes.

Politically, analysts say, the president is calling the bluff of Democrats, who won control of Congress in part by accusing Bush of reckless fiscal policies. While Bush now shares the Democrats’ goal to erase the deficit by 2012, the politically perilous work of making that happen — cutting spending or raising taxes — falls to the Democratic-run Congress

I guess the Washington Post would prefer that the President not mention that Democrats have that responsibility now.

Category: Media