Journalistic Hypocrisy

On September 2, The New York Times ran one of its predictable editorials denouncing the Bush Administration in the wake of the hurricane. In part, it asked critically, "Why was Congress, before it wandered off to vacation, engaged in slashing the budget for correcting some of the gaping holes in the area's flood protection?

Only problem is that the sanctimony is totally at odds with The Times' own previous advice:

In 1993, The Times editorial board intoned that Washington should "resist pressure to spend more on flood control projects."

In 1997, the paper praised moderate Republicans for protecting the environment by blocking flood control spending.

And in April of this year -- yes, just five short months ago -- The Times denounced a Senate bill that would have added $17 billion to flood control measures, including what The Times called a "$2.7 billion boondoggle on the Mississippi River," calling the bill "bad legislation."

HT: Brit Hume.