Nattering Negativity

Well, John Kerry has apologized, but the chattering classes are still chattering about him. In National Review, Thomas Sowell argues that the press has given JFK an easy time:

"Maybe Senator Kerry has a bad memory -- or maybe he is counting on the rest of us having a bad memory. He criticized more than 140,000 troops serving in Vietnam, making sweeping and unsubstantiated accusations against them of widespread atrocities back in the 1970s. He criticized them at home and abroad, giving aid and comfort to our enemies in wartime . . .

"How is this story played in the media? The front-page headline on the San Francisco Chronicle read: 'Bush, GOP seize on Kerry's Gibe to Turn Focus from War in Iraq.' The Chronicle has learned well the New York Times's technique of imputing motives instead of reporting facts.

"Has any Democrat ever been accused by the mainstream media of 'seizing on' some statement by a Republican, much less have bad motives imputed? This is not the first time the media have circled the wagons around Senator Kerry. Despite the fact that Kerry has shamelessly tried to exploit his military service in Vietnam decades later, Tim Russert is the only major media commentator who has ever asked him why he will not open his military records, as President Bush has done."

How anyone who can look at the last two days of Kerry coverage -- including strong suggestions that he's washed up for '08 -- and say he's gotten a pass is beyond me. And pointing out that the White House has exploited Kerry's blunder isn't tantamount to letting him off the hook.

Apparently Democratic politicians aren't supposed to say anything that might challenge anyone on their side, according to blogger Jane Hamsher :

"I can see we're going to have to set up some sort of 'Democratic PR school' soon. They've become so accustomed to being George Bush's whipping posts they no longer recognize it when they have the advantage, and as the John Kerry incident demostrates they are in sore need of a few remedial lessons on how to press it when they do.

"First of all -- I don't care if John Kerry was eating live babies on TV, one week out from an election you do not repeat GOP talking points. Ever. It makes you look like a big wuss who can't stand up to the Republicans, even when they're playing from an exceptionally weak hand on an issue you own. For all those anxious to be seen as the tough defenders of national security, huddling in a crouch position while they pummel you about the head and bleating 'yes, yes, we deserve this' does not have the best optics.

"Secondly -- did I mention that the Democrats own the issue of Iraq? Even the WSJ acknowledges it is the #1 factor influencing people's votes this election. If the Republicans want to bring it up, that's a perfect opportunity to pivot and attack ."

Of course, candidates like Hillary and Harold Ford may have been thinking of their own self-interest in criticizing Kerry.

Is the whole mess overblown? Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum says so, but he's still ticked at Kerry:

"I'm sort of loathe to even blog about the whole John Kerry flap. It's not that I'm flatly unwilling to write about idiotic and transparently manufactured political issues, but a man's got to have his limits. This 'controversy,' along with the almost insane amount of play it's gotten in the mainstream press, is surely a sign of the end times . . .