Tuesday, November 20, 2007

New York Times' Duelling Dual Personalities

After refusing to acknowledge the signs of success for months, even offering a discounted rate to MoveOn.org to slander Troop Surge architect General David Petraeus, the New York Times has finally been forced to eat some front page crow:
...for the first time in nearly two years, people are moving with freedom around much of this city. In more than 50 interviews across Baghdad, it became clear that while there were still no-go zones, more Iraqis now drive between Sunni and Shiite areas for work, shopping or school, a few even after dark. In the most stable neighborhoods of Baghdad, some secular women are also dressing as they wish. Wedding bands are playing in public again, and at a handful of once shuttered liquor stores customers now line up outside in a collective rebuke to religious vigilantes from the Shiite Mahdi Army.
But the Gray Lady's editorial board can take comfort from this glimmer of hope amid the awful news of Coalition success:
Iraqis are clearly surprised and relieved to see commerce and movement finally increase, five months after an extra 30,000 American troops arrived in the country. But the depth and sustainability of the changes remain open to question.
Am I being too harsh?

Three days ago the NYT ran an unsigned editorial:
It has been two long months since Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, cowed Congressional Democrats into silence, championing President Bush’s misguided course on the war. We’re pleased to see that the effects of his briefing are finally wearing off. The bad news, as ever, is that Mr. Bush and his Republican allies continue to resist reason.