The unending battle of the bulge continues to accrue casualties. "Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting," who've gotten bent out of shape over a killed New York Times article on Bush's debate suit-bulge, get smacked down by NYT public editor Dan Okrent over their concerns. Says Danny:
It is not unreasonable to argue that the Times should have run the article. It is a distortion of the truth to say that it "exposed" anything, and an outright falsehood to say that it indicated Mr. Bush "probably cheated during the presidential debates.Responds FAIR:
In fact, the article and accompanying photos (which Okrent fails to mention) did very clearly "expose" the president's lie, and given the strong likelihood that the device seen on his back was part of a cueing device, it is hardly a falsehood to say that the article indicated that he "probably" cheated in the debates.We salute FAIR for staying on this story. We're actually quite certain -- well, "probably," to use FAIR's construction -- that Bush's bulge is related to Karl Rove's ring of roving Beltway boy-hustlers who work for Saudi Arabian ambassadors and have sex with Deep Throat on board the fake 9/11 Pentagon plane. If we all keep our tinfoil hats on, the truth will out! —C.S.