Sometimes, I agree with Ann Coulter. For one of the world's most influential newspapers, the New York Times publishes nonsense.

A few months ago, they hired this new columnis David Brooks. This guy promptly displaced Safire as 'first hawk' and went on churn out completely nonsensical partisan propaganda. And we are forced to read his drivel every week.

A couple of weeks ago, this guy David Brooks said the following:
"history shows that Americans are willing to make sacrifices. The real doubts come when we see ourselves inflicting them. What will happen to the national mood when the news programmes start broadcasting images of the brutal measures our own troops will have to adopt"

oh my god ... read, "we will soon need to conduct genocide on a large scale to sate our greed for oil, why dont you reserve your indignation for that?"

Today, he writes some rubbish that could have come straight out of Rush Limbaugh -- about the 'liberal' New York and how the poor conservatives will be hassled in the city.

And, of course, we have the anti-Arab racism that characterized 3 of the New York Times regular commentators at last count.
"We also need to tell them what they will need to blend in: ... Yasir Arafat-style facial hair .... We're going to have to give them phrases they can use in case they are called upon to make elevator small talk. We have to give them examples of sentiments they should avoid ('You're Jewish? Oh, I love your Ariel Sharon!')"

Why does the New York Times hire people like this? What do they contribute? political analysis???