Where is a New York Times when you really need it?!
Not content with just continuing its highest and best use, which is training puppies to piddle and poo properly, the New York Times now demonstrates an uncanny ability to poop all over itself.
To recap, the New York Times said their disclosure of administration surveillance of terrorist financial transactions was necessary because the administration was too secretive.
Got that? Administration too secretive.
Ok, then the NY Times said there was nothing wrong with their disclosure, because everyone already knew what the administration was doing.
Got that? Administration not too secretive.
The New York Times considered the administration's surveillance of terrorist financial transactions an invasion of the privacy rights of American citizens.
Got that? American citizens' privacy rights invaded.
The NY Times said privacy rights were not invaded, because the terrorists, like everyone else in the world, knew that these transactions were being monitored.
Got that? Absolutely no one's privacy rights violated.
Now that all that is clear, please go to Villainous Company for an delicious eyeful, plus insightful analysis of New York Times historical revisionism. The "newspaper of record" is setting records for contradicting itself.
At this rate of dithering incompetence and incoherence, and adding the financial and journalistic failings of the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle, we may soon be forced to find suitable puppy trainer substitutes. It won't be an impossible task, but it will be very hard to find anything else so symbolically appropriate.
It's a shame CBS doesn't come in print.