Instead of a correction and apology, how about the NYT do a little of that public service that everyone says is so important to our democracy and spend some resources investigating the underlying claim.  Personally, I'm a lot less offended that Maureen Dowd failed to rearrange the dependent clause with the independent clause, or find some other slightly new way to express the same basic point that Josh made, than in the fact that politicians may have ordered human beings to be tortured in order to score political points. 

What we need is not less plagerism of Josh's original point.  What we need is more.  In fact, I'd love to see every journalist in the country plagerize Josh, especially in any interview of any Bush adminsitration official, from now until the day we definitively find out whether people were tortured to retroactively justify the Iraq war.  Do your jobs people.