Even though it doesn't seem like anything truly newsworthy will come from their release, I think the NY Times showed incredibly poor judgement in writing a story on secretly made tapes of President Bush's private conversations, delivered by an acquaintance (I wouldn't take the Times' word that this was an "old friend", no matter how many nicknames he had).

The Times makes sure we know about the "friend" that "He said he made the tapes in states where it was legal to do so with only one party's knowledge." Taping the recordings may have been legal, but making any portion of them public with the explicit purpose of giving them international exposure seems incredibly unethical to me. I think it's actually worse that they were only given partially to the newspaper, which then of course edits the transciprts to mention only what they feel is important.

Shame on the New York Times.

UPDATE: Like I said.

“The governor was having casual conversations with someone he believed was his friend,” White House spokesman Trent Duffy said, referring to Bush.