"who shredded his own reputation by smearing President Bush's military service with phony documents."


Here is the problem with that assertation. It is wrong. The documents where not phony, they just were not the original. How do we know this? Only two person knew for sure. The general and his secretary. The general was dead. The secretary confirmed that the document was not what she had created. And the right-wing press ran with that. Unfortunately, the complety ignored what she said immediately after: the were the words she had typed up.

Imagine this. Someone is going through a filing cabinet full of documents and finds those in the bottom drawer are badly water damaged. So they retype the docuements word for word and replace the originals with those documents. Are they phonies? Of course not, not originals, but facimilies. So by taking an old womans comments out of context, Bush was given a pass on his (lack of) service and a great journalist had his career trashed. But who cares, eh? Just politics right? Who need the truth!?!?

Amen Mr. Honohan. This column is quite a fine example itself of the ersatz journalism against which Propaganda Middleman Bozell rails. How did so many Americans get to the point of being suckers for this kind of hooey?