Regarding the New York Times' interpretation of the Australian election, Marcus (the finest sidekick in Twin Cities Saturday morning conservative talk radio) writes in with this analysis:
Thanks for pointing out the coverage, or lack thereof, of the massive Howard victory. I'm sure if he had been defeated, we would have been reading front-page stories about Australia leaving Iraq and rejecting the Bush Doctrine--like we did after the Spanish Election.
To make matters even more disgusting, the NYT has no problem calling the Australian Economy "booming," yet the Australian unemployment rate is higher than the American unemployment rate and they even lost jobs in August, unlike the 13 straight positive-job-growth months under the Bush Administration.
I greatly look forward to seeing the NYT continuing this logic into some stories about the booming American economy and how it should surely carry Bush into office despite the "widespread anger" over the war in Iraq.