"War in Iraq Defies a U.S. Timetable" That is the header the NYTimes put on a story Saturday. Pause to Remember. Oh yes, remember that the NYTimes REFUSED to print an OP-ED by presidential candidate John McCain in the run up to the 2008 election BECAUSE he refused to give a timetable for withdrawal in the Iraq war, saying: the war defied a U.S. Timetable and must be determined by conditions on the ground.

Thus the Times REFUSED to allow the American people to hear a rebuttal to Mr. Obama's OP-ED that promised a date certain timetable for leaving Iraq. The fright we should all experience at the Times' refusal to allow the Republican potus candidate to speak on how he would carry out war policy while simultaneously allowing The ONE to speak ad nauseum on the topic in their pages ...well I hope you all shiver duly on this 4th of July night. Press freedom means allowing BOTH sides opportunity to speak to the people and it Does Not mean the media should be able to force a candidate to adopt a war policy the paper wants but the candidate does not want. NOTE to the monkey's who run the Times: democracy means newspapers report our politicians policy choices; it does not entail forcing our politicians to adopt the paper's policy choice or be blackballed from speaking to the American people!

Of course conditions on the ground is exactly what Mr. Obama has taken to saying of late about Afghansitan when he is not saying July 2011 and then wiffn' back to "conditions on the ground"..... and NOW the Times is not only printing his policy (waffles) but running stories (er..the one above mentioned) that are meant to help Americans to "see clearly" the wisdom of Obama's wish to wiggle free of Iraq timetable by calling combat missions, "stablity missions." But as the Times admits: "In practical terms, nothing will change,” in Iraq missions ...meaning that the Timetable was so much bunk.

If this doesn't make you mourn for the state of journalism and the monkeys who now work at the Times, I don't know what will.