Shameless Media Retracting Palin Hit Pieces One By One

Thanks to Engram at BackTalk Blog

Anne Kornblut's truly embarrassing anti-Palin hit piece that appeared on page 1 of the Washington Post preposterously attempted to link Palin's comments about her son's departure to Iraq to the idea that Saddam Hussein was connected to the attacks of 9/11. The story was hastily revised, and today the Post issued this "clarification:"
A Sept. 12 Page One article quoted Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin as telling a brigade of Iraq-bound soldiers that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans." The report linked Palin's comments with the idea that Saddam Hussein was connected to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the McCain-Palin campaign, said Palin was referring to al-Qaeda in Iraq, a terror group that formed after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and claims to be allied with the global al-Qaeda organization.Now there's a wild theory that an ace reporter for the Washington Post can be forgiven for not having considered. I mean, the idea that al Qaeda in Iraq might be connected to the global al Qaeda organization is a top secret notion that only readers of, say, the Washington Post might be aware of:
Papers Paint New Portrait of Iraq's Foreign InsurgentsBy Karen DeYoungWashington Post Staff WriterMonday, January 21, 2008; A01The extent of al-Qaeda in Iraq's ties to the wider al-Qaeda network has long been a subject of debate within the U.S. intelligence community and military. Although its membership is overwhelmingly Iraqi, it has been led by foreigners with direct ties to al-Qaeda central, which has been based in Pakistan since being driven from Afghanistan in 2001.Al Qaeda in Iraq has been led by foreigners with direct ties to al-Qaeda central? Get out.The membership of al Qaeda in Iraq may be "overwhelmingly Iraqi," but not only are its leaders foreigners, its suicide bombers are as well (and they have killed more than 10,000 people in Iraq). Thus, beyond any reasonable doubt, the suicide bombers were funneled into Iraq with the help of al Qaeda's global organization. The fact that the suicide bombers themselves are also foreigners would only be known by readers of, say, the Washington Post, so Kornblut can certainly be forgiven for not being aware of this:
'Martyrs' In Iraq Mostly SaudisWeb Sites Track Suicide BombingsBy Susan B. GlasserWashington Post Staff WriterSunday, May 15, 2005; Page A01Who are the suicide bombers of Iraq? By the radicals' account, they are an internationalist brigade of Arabs, with the largest share in the online lists from Saudi Arabia and a significant minority from other countries on Iraq's borders, such as Syria and Kuwait. The roster of the dead on just one extremist Web site reviewed by The Washington Post runs to nearly 250 names......Many of the Arabs, according to the postings, were drawn to fight in Iraq under the banner of al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the group run by Jordanian militant Abu Musab Zarqawi that has taken credit for a gruesome series of beheadings, kidnappings and suicide attacks -- many of them filmed and then disseminated on the Internet in a convergence between the electronic jihad and the real-life war.Palin was named as McCain's running mate less than 3 weeks ago, but already the New York Times and, now, the Washington Post have been forced to back off their heated rush-to-judgment "news" reports. It's a sad spectacle.UPDATE: At Powerline, Paul Mirengoff brings us this roundup of extremely fair and balanced headlines from yesterday's Washington Post:
Today, the Washington Post's news section ran the following headlines relating to the presidential campaign:
"McCain Embraces Regulation After Many Years of Opposition" "McCain Able to Skirt Limits of Federal Financing""McCain BlackBerry Easily Connects With Gore Internet""Palin Exaggerates Alaska's Energy Role"The Post has no headlines or stories about Obama. It probably recognizes that, as John noted today, Obama is a spent force in any positive sense, and that the best it can do for him now is to remove the spotlight while amping up the attacks on McCain.The story about McCain "embracing regulation after many years of opposition" appears on page 1. Author Michael Shear, who has emerged as a top anti-McCain hatchet man for the Post (he also wrote the silly BlackBerry piece), makes no mention of the fact that in 2005, McCain cosponsored the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, the strongest legislation introduced up to that time to control Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. At first, I thought that that the Blackberry story might not be anti-McCain, but then I realized it was a story designed to connect McCain with the supposed claim that he invented the Blackberry (in the same way that Gore was skewered for supposedly claiming that he invented the internet).In fairness to the Washington Post, today's paper carries this story about how Obama exaggerated his role in the economic stimulus package:
Obama Exaggerates His Influence on Stimulus Plan...Barack Obama can fairly claim to have outlined an economic stimulus plan in January, parts of which were similar to the package eventually adopted by Congress and signed into law by President Bush. But the junior senator from Illinois is exaggerating his influence, and his role in the process of legislative give-and-take, to say that his ideas "formed the basis" of the final package. In today's Washington Post, there are no hysterical anti-Palin articles that will later need to be corrected (not that I can find, anyway). Let's give credit where credit is due.