Is this REALLY news??

The New York Times today, desperately seeking for an angle on the terror alerts story that would be negative for the Bush administration, came up with the following: Reports That Led to Terror Alert Were Years Old, Officials Say. Someone should point out to the Times that the planning for 9/11 began in 1996. I'm sure they would have criticized that for being old as well, had it not been for the fact that the attack was successful!

Of course both coastal liberal bastions, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times, picked up on the angle and gave it banner headlines as well. It's fascinating that in all three cases it took two writers to tell the story. That's how important it was to point out that the alerts were somehow tainted by their age. (Somewhere Howard Dean, who never misses an opportunity to reveal how completely clueless he is, is celebrating these headlines.)

Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the obstreperous nature of liberals. In the face of overwhelming evidence that extremists want to kill Americans, they will still try to put on a happy face and act as if all the warnings and alerts are just so much folderol. Of course, if an attack were successful, they would be the first to criticize the administration for being "asleep at the switch" or "too preoccupied with politics" to notice the warning signals or some such nonsense. In the crazy world that they inhabit, up is down, right is wrong and America is always evil, except when she kowtows to the European socialist elites. Then she is in her finest glory.

There is one positive aspect to the Times. The "old gray lady" (why isn't that sexist, by the way?) is always good for a chuckle.