I could buy Politics Daily’s premise, but I’d have to suffer severe head trauma.

Cap & Trade also does nothing to “fight global climate change.” As an aside, don’t you love how they’ve changed it from “global warming” to “global climate change.” Cap & Trade will make a very few extremely wealthy (including the darling of Dem’s, Al Gore), while negatively impacting millions of workers in various industries. These people will suffer for a bogus and
unscientific theory. Based on the flawed science that they are pimping, their “cap & trade” solutions will not solve anything. However, cap & trade will prove to be a fruitful revenue source that will also benefit a handful of heavily invested interests. I know the left loves the planet, but can’t they just go out in the desert and hump the earth rather than anally raping our emotionally fragile economy?

I personally think you’re reaching in this one, Tommy. They say they hold them to a high standard, but there is no there .. there. Does it meet the timeliness requirement? Well, given what passed the House and is heading to the Senate. I’d say the subject of her piece meets the timeliness requirement. Is the perspective fresh? For the Post, yes. She does have expertise in the topic and it does make her piece more interesting. By those measures she more than proves worthy of op ed space on this topic. A better question is, How is it justifiable to give junior Senator Barack “the community organizer” Obama op ed space in the NY Times?

Barack Obama, a first term Senator with a background in community organizing was given op ed space to write, “My Plan For Iraq.”. He was and is not an expert on international relations, national security, or the military. He offered nothing fresh or new in “his” plan. Hell the man even mentions the political campaign in his piece. These facts did not prevent the NY Times from providing him with a platform.

I’d love to see the numerous complaints from left leaning journalists, like yourself, concerning this illogical move by the NY Times. WaPo and the Times likely have different standards, but that shouldn’t have stopped left leaning journalists at Daily Politics and HuffPo from voicing their concerns. What on earth could explain the discrepancy? Don’t answer that question … it was purely rhetorical.

The desire of those on the left to see major papers keep their editorial pages completely to the left is understandable. The left has had a good thing for a very long time and they’re resistant to change. (irony alert)

I asked you to shake part of me like a crying baby on Twitter and that didn’t happen. However, that too was worth a shot.

Want a buh-zillion hits?
TAG: blow job

Nuff said?