[wizzler]

You know what? Drudge sucks. Consider the difference between this ...

U.S OFFICIALS: IRAQI DRONES USING GPS TO TARGET U.S. CITIES

... and this ...

"Iraqi Drones May Target..." "Iraq could be planning..." "there is no proof ..."

The first is Drudge's headline. The second is the content of the actual story. A little less titillating, eh?

Drudge sucks.

[FairOpinion]

Well, that little difference by having that little word "may" in there. Drudge sensationalized the title. I actually saw the article at FoxNews.

At the same time, this "concern" is based on real intelligence info, as the article details it.

"But some experts say the threat is very real and should be taken seriously."

[FairOpinion]

Drudge must have read your post.

Now it says: "U.S Officials: Iraqi Drones May Target American Cities" at Drudge.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The lesson is not about Drudge in particular but about journalism in general. Journalism gets paid only by attracting attention, and to do that most easily/cheaply journalism produces negative, superficial reports.

And superficial negativity is cynicism--IOW, anticonservatism. Conservative commercially profitable general-interest journalism is essentially an oxymoron.