Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 10/28/06 3:43 pm:

Hello Steve:

The link didn't work. I'd like to read it.

But, I don't think Michelle Malkin works for the Times (maybe the Washington Times). She's actually a winger to the right of Hannity. They usually don't employ people like that. So, of course, she'll say those wrong things.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by MarySusan on 10/28/06 5:57 pm:
Michelle Malkin, THE HATE HAG?

No thanks.

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 10/28/06 6:23 pm:
ex, my bad in not clarifying. The quote is from the Times' Ombudsman, Public editor Byron Calame.

"the Times' own ombudsman admitted this week that the story should never have run. Public editor Byron Calame 'fessed up: "I don't think the article should have been published. . . . I haven't found any evidence in the intervening months that the surveillance program was illegal. . . . The lack of appropriate oversight — to catch any abuses in the absence of media attention — was a key reason I originally supported publication. I think, however, that I gave it too much weight."

I purposely only quoted the Times, not Michelle.

Steve

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 10/28/06 6:27 pm:
Hey Miss ad hominem, see the above clarification. Even though Michelle is right, my post is only about what the Times said.