Why so many find the NYT ridiculous

NRO has this:

On Sunday The New York Times editorialized:

Mr. Bush has nothing to show in the way of political progress, which is even more important for ending the war.… Mr. Bush’s troop buildup was sold as a way to buy Iraqi politicians breathing room to finally address the tensions driving sectarian violence, including an equitable division of oil wealth and strategies to bring more Baathists and Sunnis into the Shiite-led government. Those goals have not been met, and the administration has virtually abandoned them.

On Sunday The New York Times reported:

BAGHDAD — The Iraqi Parliament passed a bill on Saturday that would allow some former officials from Saddam Hussein’s party to fill government positions but would impose a strict ban on others. The legislation is the first of the major so-called political benchmark measures to pass after months of American pressure for progress… President Bush, traveling in Kuwait and Bahrain on Saturday, praised the vote, calling it “an important step toward reconciliation.”

Why would editors run an opinion piece that is false on the same day they report a story that proves such?