s skippy the bush kangaroo

skippy the bush kangaroo

Sunday, August 29, 2004

from smear to far

reader wingnut directs us (via buzzflash) to the editorial page of the minneapolis-st. paul star tribune, in which editor jim boyd laments the current smear tactics against john kerry:

i see the recent commentary by john h. hinderaker and scott w. johnson ("unwrapping kerry's story of christmas in cambodia," aug. 18) as part of that smear. it did not meet what i believe should be the standards of the star tribune's editorial pages. such pieces should not appear here, and that one does so for the second time in 10 days pains me greatly.

we have a responsibility to separate legitimate political opinion -- and the latitude is great -- from deliberate smear. that responsibility is especially important in this campaign. sometimes it's difficult to tell whether a piece crosses that line; to me, this is not one of those times. a legitimate piece might have raised hard questions about kerry in cambodia; theirs wasn't that piece…

then along came the hinderaker-johnson piece on kerry. it should have set off all kinds of alarms. as one of the editors responsible for these pages, i regret that it did not -- and that i was not here to weigh in on the decision.

now comes their second piece. i could do extensive line-by-line analysis, but i will not. it would take space i do not have. for the fair-minded, two examples should suffice.
the top of their piece is devoted to negatives: no record of this, no record of that, etc. this proves nothing. there generally are no public records of clandestine activities. the burden of proof here is on hinderaker and johnson, not on kerry and not on me…

this is not about who is elected, but about how we allow this campaign to unfold, especially on our pages. i am sick to death of being played for a chump by the likes of karl rove. america can definitely do better.
why not email mr. boyd and thank him for taking a stand against smear tactics?
posted by skippy at 11:13 AM |


Add a comment