It’s been going on for a while, and their stories are usually more objective, compared with the Times

True, the WaPo usually does outshine the NYT there. And on the entire WOT topic, there’s no comparison. The WaPo is actually closer to most of us here than they are to the Times.

One exception to the rule at the Times, however, is John Burns, their Baghdad bureau chief. He’s actually been quite evenhanded. You wonder how he’s managed to keep his job. Just within the past week he said this:

I think it`s a much larger truth that where American forces are present, they are inhibiting sectarian violence, and they are going after the people, particularly al-Qaeda and the Shiite death squads, who are provoking that violence. Remove them or at least remove them quickly, and it seems to me — controversial as this may seem to be saying in the present circumstances, while I know there`s this agonizing debate going on in the United States about this — that you have to weigh the price. And the price would very likely be very, very high levels of violence, at least in the short run and perhaps, perhaps – perhaps for quite a considerable period of time.

So the Times’ man in Iraq says our troops are serving a good purpose there and if they’re removed a bloodbath will occur.

Remarkable that this insight hasn’t found its way to the Times editors, or to professional dolts like John Kerry.

I have noticed a more moderate editorial policy at WaPo of late…

It’s been going on for a while, and their stories are usually more objective, compared with the Times, and deal more with what has happened than with what “sources say” has happened. In addition, they have better writers.

Is there any member of the New York Times editorial board who doesn’t live in a glass house?

Oh my goodness, no. They wouldn’t live in something so daring as that. They sleep in coffins in prewar apartments on the upper west side of Manhattan, and they only come out at night.

They talk only to each other, and they never would even think leaving their neighborhood, into which they try desperately to prevent new ideas from spreading.

Conservative Talk radio – Popular
Liberal Talk Radio – Practically Extinct

Fox News – Greater share of media
Liberal TV – Shares Dwindling

Conservative ideas (fence, immigration, cutting taxes, ect) – Popular
Liberal Ideas – (raising taxes, more social programs, universal health care, open borders, impeach the president, ect) – unpopular

Liberal papers like the NYT – shares dropped just points above junk status.

Liberals in Congress, now that they are the majority, have the lowest popularity ever, last seen at 14% (more than 10 points below the president) and even lower than the Republicans at the time they got voted out.

I think the problem is the conservative message is not getting out and carried out. People are sick of the corruption on both sides, and padding their pockets with earmarks, both on republican and now a tidal wave of earmarks with the democrats in charge.

Most ethical congress? No
Clean up congress? No
Cut back earmarks? No
Transparent Congress, nothing hidden? No

If this keeps going, I predict that congress wwill hit single digits in polls.

Business wise this is a smart move for Wapo. One has to wonder when the NYT will learn what Wapo seems to be learning, a lesson everyone who is in business learns over time and it is called CYA, which means, Cover Your Ass, for all events.