Indeed, it would be nice to leverage Bill Kristol’s screwup into a net win for Obama. The story will undoubtedly catalyze some reporting on how much of the anti-Obama narrative out there is sourced from baseless innuendo, and that’s nice. But before Kristol will become a public symbol for frothing dishonest bullshit (or anyway, more so than he already is) Teh Left needs to put in a little more work on their own part. Really, the Dan Rather story didn’t write itself. The base spent a fairly long going apeshit and picking every conceivable thread. Then Rather and his managers handled the response badly. Then the base went even more apeshit. By the time Rather resigned dead people and rocks were paying attention.
Still with me? If Dems want to stretch some mileage out of Kristol’s shame then they need to do more than hope that it happens. For example, who exactly was this Weekly Standard correspondent who started the mess? Has he had his stuff published before? It would help to know whether the story comes from a journalist or a some mentally ill vagrant who sent in the “scoop” in return for ten bucks and a forty of St. Ides. Do editors at the Weekly Standard have a history of printing nonsense and unsubstantiated fables? Who will be held accountable? This crap is SOP for the activist right.
Sure it would be nice if Kristol became a public symbol for anti-Obama idiocy. Now excuse me while I make a Montgomery’s cheddar and cave-aged gruyere souffle appear just by thinking about it.
Brain fart. When I wrote about Kristol I thought about the Weekly Standard so I wrote that instead of Newsmax. The management regrets the reduced morale caused at least in part by Scott Beauchamp’s dog story.
And honestly, it is pretty silly to ask whether anybody at Newsmax will be held accountable. That’s not how they roll. Setting up an if…then syllogism in which the if… part is unlikely is another way of saying that the then… statement probably will not happen.