By ZamboniWe cats know what it's like to have something we've written rejected. Truly. Even though we don't have thumbs, and our deathless prose is typed for us, we've definitely experienced the pain of the letter that starts out, "Sorry, but your submission doesn't meet our current needs."
However, we find the bloviating by the right-wing blogosphere about The New York Times' rejection of Senator McCain's Iraq Op-Ed piece as Exhibit A in the "He Doth Protest Too Much" sweepstakes.
As Vincent Rossmeier points out at Salon, "In rejecting McCain's submission, New York Times Op-Ed editor David Shipley... explained his rationale by saying: 'The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans ... It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.'"
We cats say, thank you, David Shipley. We've often wondered what Senator McCain means when he talks about "victory" in Iraq.
You'll pardon us if we're a little skeptical, especially after George W. Bush's claim in May 2003 that our "mission" in Iraq was "accomplished." (Hey, we're still there.) But it's a particularly cogent point since Viet Nam vet McCain has declared he knows "how to win wars" — after the United States, um, failed to log a victory in Saigon back in 1975. Anybody who's seen a Broadway musical in the last 20 years knows that we didn't exactly win that war.
We PURR in the direction of David Shipley, and HISS at John McCain for being a petulant would-be author. Try again, John!
No comments:
Post a Comment