Is the NYTimes deliberately misleading its paying customers, or just not applying the expected quality to what is becoming a pretty shoddy product?

And for you paying customers and investors with the NYTimes, do you feel stupid for actually shelling out money for such inaccuracies as presented in today’s editorial on the filibustering of Bush judicial nominees? I for one would never spend my hard earned money for information that at a glance is in such obvious error.

..but Democrats have used the filibuster to block a handful. This is nothing new. In previous Congresses, Republicans blocked many Democratic judicial nominees,..

This is sadly laughable. The filibuster was never used on judicial nominees prior to 2001, with the one exception of Abe Fortis -who was such a disaster the filibuster was unnecessary since he would have lost the floor vote (my guess is the cloture vote was used to signal to him it was time to withdraw quietly and not embarrass the administration). What the republicans did was use their majority status to democratically vote to not let the nominees out of committee. Comparing a majority driven process with a minority driven process demonstrates either serious ignorance, sloppiness or blatant propagandizing. Ignoring 200+ years of Senate custom to not use the filibuster (as with Clarence Thomas) also demonstrates how fishy this editorial is.

Well, if the NYTimes wants to produce a lousy product it is a free country.