December 19, 2003


Iowahawk locates the sneer quote of the year, in the Chicago Tribune:

The "capture" of Saddam Hussein is being hailed as a great victory for President Bush.

In other Chicago Tribune news, I did not "forget" to put out the "garbage" last night, and this did not lead to an "argument" with a certain beautiful woman with whom I share my life, and she did not threaten to "kill" me. Also, the Tribune has not "covered" the recent visit to "Sydney" of Texas-based "Dan Hilldale", who took several "photographs", one of which features a pair of "very hot" high heels, and a stupid-lookin' "journalist".

Posted by Tim Blair at December 19, 2003 01:01 AM

"Great" "post," "Tim."

Posted by: Ric at December 19, 2003 at 01:14 AM

Chicago Tribune, a "news organization" . . .

Posted by: tom beta 2 at December 19, 2003 at 01:29 AM

"Ha" "ha" "ha."

Posted by: Attmay at December 19, 2003 at 01:38 AM

Who ate all the pies?

Posted by: James Dudek at December 19, 2003 at 01:39 AM

Speaking as a "Chicagoan", the "Tribune" has been "trying" for "years" to become more like the NY "Times", in terms of that pervasive effete snobbish "tone" of "the" transnationals. "I" quit reading it years ago.

Posted by: Earl Camembert at December 19, 2003 at 02:09 AM

But what about "lunch".

Posted by: Independant George at December 19, 2003 at 02:34 AM

Er, Tim, about that "photo"---that's not how the "lap dance" is supposed to work, dude.

Posted by: Angie Schultz at December 19, 2003 at 03:46 AM

To be clear, this (flagrantly stupid) opinion piece was contributed by somebody named Marjorie Cohn. It's not a Tribune editorial. The Tribune is a pretty good paper, contra Earl Camembert, though I don't know why they felt compelled to run this particular item.

Posted by: Chris in Chicago at December 19, 2003 at 04:22 AM

The Tribune is a "good" paper when judged aginst the N.Y. Slimes, and it's local coverage is pretty decent. But genuinely good? Well, let's just say you should read more widely.

Posted by: superboot at December 19, 2003 at 05:28 AM

Margo moment: it's = its.

Posted by: suberboot at December 19, 2003 at 05:29 AM

How many people gave the Bondi photo a quick scan for topless broads?
You know who you are. Pervies.

Posted by: Joe Geoghegan at December 19, 2003 at 06:03 AM

Man, how'd you get to live this long? Throw it in your neighbour's bin!

Posted by: Pig head Sucker at December 19, 2003 at 07:42 AM

I read the same opinion piece yesterday. The writer is some prof from UC San Diego; definitely William Kuntsler material. After the first sentence, I thought the rest would be good stuff and she didn't disappoint. No lawyers for the boys in Gitmo, Saddam's on-camera medical exam was a violation of Geneva, etc.

You professionals out there, would an editor have called her up to ask her to at least justify the scare quotes, if not to tell her to remove them? If it wasn't a "capture", just what the hell was it?

Posted by: michael at December 19, 2003 at 07:49 AM

As kindaping!!!

Posted by: Puce at December 19, 2003 at 08:21 AM

Now he's the "Butcher of Baghdad".


Posted by: "ilibcc" at December 19, 2003 at 10:14 AM

Being a lifelong Chicagoan (I know, you're happy for me), I've followed the Trib's weird headlines for a long time. Their headline for the 1948 election, "Dewey Sweeps Nation", is a classic. Or my personal favorite, published when former Cubs manager Lee Elia spewed a tirade about his team's fans: "Elia to Fans: Kiss My Ass". Alas, that one appeared in only one edition. More recently, the Trib framed the story about the Iraq building contracts with the headline, "U.S. denies allies contracts in Iraq" - and no, "allies" was *not* in sneer quotes. Here's a link:

So the Trib, as usual, has things bass-ackwards: they sneer at a capture that was really a capture; and they take a face value allies who are no allies at all. Such is the publication that called itself "The World's Greatest Newspaper".

Posted by: Brown Line at December 19, 2003 at 12:40 PM

This kind of thing provides a good benchmark of US media. Keep in mind that the Tribune is generally considered to be a very conservative, Republican paper. However, they seem to get caught in the undertow.

Posted by: KenG at December 19, 2003 at 01:29 PM

I'm not sure "which picture" featured the "very hot" high heels, but the "woman" in the "red dress" was definitely a "male" in the recent past, if "s/he's" not still one, today.

Posted by: SWLiP at December 19, 2003 at 02:35 PM