“Our leaders deserve a bow for this one, too, after everyone from buck privates to nine Democratic presidential candidates have called for their scalp: the battle plan is working, the enemy is on the run, and Iraq is already a better place than it’s been for 35 years. Only the “Ace of Spades” remains. The theory/ hope here is that high-profile success like this turns off most of the “bitter-enders.” Sure hope that’s the case.” – blogger Tacitus has an email from a marine in Baghdad as the news of Saddam’s sons’ deaths spread.
EMAIL OF THE DAY: “I watched the coverage of the deaths of Saddam’s poor sons last night, and wondered what the post-Raines NYT would say about this victory. First thing this morning I looked at the lead editorial–which I almost never bother with–to check the barometer, as it were. How would they spin this?
Under Raines, the tenor of the piece would undoubtedly have been: We can’t let this distract us from the central fact that the lying Bush administration tricked us into a quagmire by using faked evidence that got us into a war that despite the news yesterday we still aren’t winning and here are all the ways that we still aren’t winning it and did I mention the quagmire?
To my surprise, the “new” New York Times” largely played it straight. The editors did manage to be both platitudinous (Yes, there’s plenty left to do. No kidding.) and out of touch (Are you really “frustrated” that we haven’t captured Mullah Omar? Is anyone?). Yet I couldn’t help but be impressed that the editorial ended on a positive note. Killing these thugs has made America’s mission in Iraq easier. The Times, under Bill Keller, just conceded an important victory to the Bush Administration, without sneaking in a snide attack. I thought I’d never say this again, but hooray for the Times.” Amen. But typically classy of Bush as well to let the military hog the limelight yesterday. More feedback on the Letters Page.
The Dish 