Monday, May 17, 2004
"WHERE ARE THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION???"
Here is your answer.
Want to take bets the loony left will still deny they existed?
UPDATE May 18 1:44pm CDT... My workplace subscribes to four major newspapers: The Chicago Tribune, The Chicago Sun-Times, the New York Times and the Financial Times (American Edition). Not one of them mentioned this story on the front page, not even to refer readers to a story on the subject within the back pages of the paper. Consider the lead story in the New York Times: "Hundreds of same-sex couples get married in Massachusetts." The Sun-Times front page verily shouts, "It's Mrs. and Mrs." I hoped maybe some major paper somewhere had this story on the front page of their online edition. Nope. Not New York Times, not the Boston Globe, not the Washington Post, not even the reliably conservative Wall Street Journal.
If concrete evidence of WMDs isn't enough to merit even a passing mention on the front page of the nation's major newspapers, then surely there must be other pressing, major stories occupying the news cycle. Such as "Pessimism deepens over Iraq" (Washington Post online). Or "Martha Stewart Living show on haitus" (Boston Globe online). Or "ABC makes big changes for fall lineup" (Detroit Free Press online). Or "Somali Bantu refugees adjust to new lives here" (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette online). Or "Tony Randall dead at 84" (Los Angeles Times online).
We have found the most solid evidence of WMDs since inspections ceased and they want to talk about ABC's television lineup and Martha f-ing Stewart. What the hell is wrong with these people?
|
Here is your answer.
Want to take bets the loony left will still deny they existed?
UPDATE May 18 1:44pm CDT... My workplace subscribes to four major newspapers: The Chicago Tribune, The Chicago Sun-Times, the New York Times and the Financial Times (American Edition). Not one of them mentioned this story on the front page, not even to refer readers to a story on the subject within the back pages of the paper. Consider the lead story in the New York Times: "Hundreds of same-sex couples get married in Massachusetts." The Sun-Times front page verily shouts, "It's Mrs. and Mrs." I hoped maybe some major paper somewhere had this story on the front page of their online edition. Nope. Not New York Times, not the Boston Globe, not the Washington Post, not even the reliably conservative Wall Street Journal.
If concrete evidence of WMDs isn't enough to merit even a passing mention on the front page of the nation's major newspapers, then surely there must be other pressing, major stories occupying the news cycle. Such as "Pessimism deepens over Iraq" (Washington Post online). Or "Martha Stewart Living show on haitus" (Boston Globe online). Or "ABC makes big changes for fall lineup" (Detroit Free Press online). Or "Somali Bantu refugees adjust to new lives here" (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette online). Or "Tony Randall dead at 84" (Los Angeles Times online).
We have found the most solid evidence of WMDs since inspections ceased and they want to talk about ABC's television lineup and Martha f-ing Stewart. What the hell is wrong with these people?
|
