Snoozepaper of record: Bush not concerned with fighting terror, but instead expanding pres. powers

No finer example of Bush Derangement Syndrome can be found today in the media than this piece from the editorial page of the NY Times.  Guess what? They’ve finally come out and admitted what their liberal cohorts have been saying or implying for years: Bush isn’t not interested in fighting terror, but instead has used 9-11 to feed his raging desire to increase Presidential power:

It is only now, nearly five years after Sept. 11, that the full picture of the Bush administration’s response to the terror attacks is becoming clear. Much of it, we can see now, had far less to do with fighting Osama bin Laden than with expanding presidential power.

The second paragraph is a contradiction of the editorial’s headline and basic premise, and you’ll know why I say that when you read the part I’ve added emphasis to:

Over and over again, the same pattern emerges: Given a choice between following the rules or carving out some unprecedented executive power, the White House always shrugged off the legal constraints. Even when the only challenge was to get required approval from an ever-cooperative Congress, the president and his staff preferred to go it alone. While no one questions the determination of the White House to fight terrorism, the methods this administration has used to do it have been shaped by another, perverse determination: never to consult, never to ask and always to fight against any constraint on the executive branch.

Right! That’s why they didn’t question the President’s determination to fight terror via use of the headline "The Real Agenda" as if to suggest what the President’s REAL priorities are (with the clear implication that it’s not about fighting terror) and didn’t question his commitment to waging war with Islamofascists in the opening paragraph by saying that, since 9-11, "Much of it, we can see now, had far less to do with fighting Osama bin Laden than with expanding presidential power."

The editorial writers at the NYT must think we are some-kinda-stupid and won’t see this hit piece against the Bush administration’s priorities in the war on terror for what it is.

If you’re as incensed as I am at this piece, which could very easily have been written by a member of the DNC, write Bryan Calame and let him know it:

On a related note,  Michelle Malkin  has some disturbing news on a pictorial tribute of photos – taken by award-winning NYT photographer Joao Silva – of Iraqi terrorists who kill American soldiers.  Right Voices comments on this, as does Jeff Goldstein

See also: Right Wing Nut House, John at Powerline, Riehl World View, Blue Crab Boulevard, Tim Blair, Red State

Comments are closed.