How many times should I expect to read a moronic assertion such as,
The attacks on John Kerry's military service in Vietnam were politically risky, coming from supporters of a Republican candidate who didn't serve in that war. But it must be said that Kerry invited this sort of scrutiny by making his Vietnam exploits the centerpiece of last month's Democratic convention.While it could be said that Kerry's bringing his military record into his campaign opens it up for legitimate scrutiny, nothing about his use of his record justifies this type of smear campaign. And does Ignatius truly believe that these attacks weren't in the making long before the convention?
This type of comment makes it seem like the media is trying to cover for its pathetic failure to shoot the "Swift Boat Liars" out of the water the moment they launched their barrage of lies. As CJR Campaign Desk recently noted,
In a campaign season where the candidates have demonstrated a willingness (even eagerness) to misinform voters, it's the responsibility of the press to inform the public about who's enlightening us with fact and who's misleading us with fiction.