So the AP runs a “news” story about an “independent” report that says that Bush lied over 900 times after 911 to convince us to attack Iraq. It of couse did not say that this independent report was funded by George Soros whose vindictively unabashed hatred for Bush is unconstrained by his substantial intellect.

The omission of its source and funding is as much a disservice to the study as to the public. If the points are true (big if) its credibility is certainly brought into question.

Is it 900 lies or 2 lies told 450 times each? Is an error in judgment or mistaken assumption a lie? Was Hillary lying when she stated that WMDs were there or was she just misinformed? Am I to believe the dumbest president in history (according to some) was able to convince a bipartisan majority who were previously totally ignorant and unopinionated on the subject without sharing detailed intelligence? Please, this is old news. It is typical elitists drinking their own bathwater and calling it “independent journalistic” research.

My problem with the media is far beyond bias; it is basic jounalistic ethics and competence.

Tips to Blond Sagacity (See recommended sites).