The Surrender Monkey is exhilarated by the Washington Post this morning. Any time he sees one of the major mainstream media outlets completely distort and dive in to Weekly World News territory, he gets a thrilling up his leg.

Surrendie wants to start with the sleaze: A Tangled Story of Addiction - Consequences of Cindy McCain’s Drug Abuse Were More Complex Than She Has Portrayed

When Cindy McCain is asked what issues she would champion as first lady, she often cites one of the most difficult periods of her life: her battle with — and ultimate victory over — prescription painkillers. Her struggle, she has said repeatedly, taught her valuable lessons about drug abuse that she would pass on to the nation.

While McCain’s accounts have captured the pain of her addiction, her journey through this personal crisis is a more complicated story than she has described, and it had more consequences for her and those around her than she has acknowledged.

Her misuse of painkillers prompted an investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration and local prosecutors that put her in legal jeopardy. A doctor with McCain’s medical charity who supplied her with prescriptions for the drugs lost his license and never practiced again. The charity, the American Voluntary Medical Team, eventually had to be closed in the wake of the controversy. Her husband was forced to admit publicly that he was absent much of the time she was having problems and was not aware of them.

Folks, what in the hell is the point of this very, very, very long story? How many times have you seen a 5 web-page hit piece on anyone else? And it is a hit piece. Is Cindy McCain running for President? Will we see anything similar about Michelle Obama? Hell, will we see anything similar about the guy running for president on the Democrat side? This is just sleaze journalism, and show how far in the tank the Washington Post is for Obama.

Next up, the Post uses its willful ignorance to say that Sarah Palin linked Iraq to 9/11 (apparently the WP has changed its headline since it went up on Memeorandum)

Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would “defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.”

The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaeda plan the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. But it is widely agreed that militants allied with al-Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion.

As Confederate Yankee points out

When Palin referenced “…the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans,” is was an obvious reference to al Qaeda in Iraq, an offshoot of the parent al Qaeda organization that plotted and executed the 9/11 attacks, and while still funds and loosely controls the failing Iraqi branch.

Perhaps the writer, Ann Kornblut, should go and do the style pages, because her grasp of the facts, not to mention that she calls stone cold Islamic terrorists “militants,” is sorely missing. But, she does a great job of supporting Democrat talking points.

Dan Riehl writes:

So much for all those layers of editors. Geesh! The soldiers are not shipping out to fight the Iraqi government under the control of Saddam or anyone else. They are shipping out to fight the remnants of al Qaeda still in Iraq and any other nefarious individuals terrorizing the people and the current freely-elected government.

At least if I was reading the National Enquirer, I would know if they were being stupid or malicious on purpose.