It bleeds, it leads is bad enough. Staying in hotel rooms and not finding all the good news stories is bad enough. Now it turns out the NYT is actually turning good news into bad news. Jack Kelly has a tremendous column demonstrating this. When my brother was in Desert Storm, body armor could deflect shrapnel but not bullets. Thanks to Army innovation, body armor can now deflect a bullet shot point-blank from ten feet away, and it ways several pounds less, too. Every soldier in Iraq has it. There are some specialized bullets that could defeat the armor, but the enemy has never used them yet, and there's no evidence they have access to them. Nonetheless, just to be "proactive," to use a word I hate, the Army has come up with even better armor and is starting to give it out. In any normal person's book, this would be good news, right? Read Kelly's column and see how it was actually reported. I am angry, but I wish I could be shocked.
I don't question these guys' patriotism. (Ahem.) But I do ask this. If the NYT were on Osama bin Laden's side, how would we know? Curtsy to Powerline.
