He actually didnt talk to me for a while because last week or so when all the NY Times stuff came out and they were all outraged he told me that he hated the NY times for that. He told me how LIBERAL the NY times was. Well I then I told him that the NY times wasnt so damn liberal when Clinton got a blow job. He didnt know what to say. He just stood there. Didnt say another word. He didnt talk to me all last week and weekend, until yesterday. I get him everytime we talk politics. He hates talking to me about it.
When he starts talking to you again, if you want him to stop talking to you again, bring up the fact that the ultra-conservative Wall Street Journal printed the exact same story about the banking spy program, apparently with the blessing of the White House, since no one ever criticized the WSJ, or called them treasonous, or threatened them with prosecution.
The existence of the program was first reported Thursday night on the Web sites of
The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13492032/
Additionally, the Journal editorial defended the paper against those claiming that it should have declined to publish the article. According to the editorial:
Some argue that the Journal should have still declined to run the antiterror story. However, at no point did Treasury officials tell us not to publish the information.
And while Journal editors knew the Times was about to publish the story, Treasury officials did not tell our editors they had urged the Times not to publish. What Journal editors did know is that they had senior government officials providing news they didn't mind seeing in print. If this was a "leak," it was entirely authorized.http://mediamatters.org/items/200607010001