Instapundit links up a nice roundup of the reaction to the "but this guy, this guy was lying!!!" that the recent WaPo article unleashed:
Something I said there that bears repeating -- the reason why the Christmas-in-Cambodia story is getting the media cold-shoulder, and why what SwiftVet coverage there is focuses on the medals, etc., is that the Christmas-in-Cambodia story is clear, and has already been proven false. It's easy to understand, and devastating for Kerry.
The medal stuff is complex, and can be spun in a way that makes people's eyes glaze over. So that's what we'll mostly get, along with "political" stories that will treat the SwiftVets stuff as partisan hackery in a way that Michael Moore never gets treated by the same outlets.
Ok, three time's the charm... I don't think any of it is important in and of itself. What I do think is absolutely scandalous is that the mainstream media just flat ignored one "screwed up memory" story and jumped on a different one like a drunken sorority girl on the star quarterback.
The difference? One of the stories was pushed by a candidate for the presidency, the other by someone who's not even tangental to running, let alone making their service record a central point of their qualifications. Tell me friends, which story is really more important?
Feh. Why bother. All I do is rouse rabble, no better than those I criticise. What the hell do I know...