In a sign of things to come, the Washington Post’s Manny Fernandez reports on forthcoming kooky-left Inauguration protests and finds no need to ideologically identify where on the frazzled America-hating fringe of the political spectrum they’re located. In paragraph 16, the Post finally acknowledges “Bush has been a popular target for left-leaning activists since he took office.” Left-LEANING? “Left-careening” would be a better term.

This is especially true of International ANSWER, described by the Post as simply “an anti-war, anti-racism coalition.” Their call to protest the Inauguration www.internationalanswer.org wildly states that President Bush “is determined to maintain U.S. occupation and aggression against Cuba, Haiti, Afghanistan, Korea, the Philippines, Sudan, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Colombia, and other countries.” That’s plenty kooky. (Hey, Ma, did you know the U.S. was occupying Iran?) But worst of all, the Post story excluded the very relevant fact that the “anti-war” coalition’s leader, Ramsey Clark, signed up last week to join the defense team for Saddam Hussein. Isn’t that a relevant factor in determining where International ANSWER stands on the war and human rights? Wouldn’t it be fair to assume that this lobby is pro-Saddam, not anti-war? Shouldn’t this lobby have to struggle with press questions about it? But then try to find the Washington Post story on Ramsey Clark’s newest job…