While interesting information, I think that since the article comes from someone who was forced to step down due to the SBVFT flap, the sour grapes stench clouds any objectivity (which he seems so intent on bemoaning a lcak of to begin with) that may be there.
Also - The Kerry campaign has consistently denounced any releases by the mentioned groups (MoveOn.org specifically) that caused controversy.
The Bush campaign has never formally denounced SBVFT. Why is that I wonder? In fact, given Ol PAtton's association with the two here, I'd say this reduces his credibility evn further.
How is Ginsberg disgraced? And why should someone feign objectivity in order to have a valid point? Under those circumstances no lawyer could ever plead a case.
3 comments:
I think a better title would be:
Disgraced Lawyers and Sour grapes.
While interesting information, I think that since the article comes from someone who was forced to step down due to the SBVFT flap, the sour grapes stench clouds any objectivity (which he seems so intent on bemoaning a lcak of to begin with) that may be there.
Also - The Kerry campaign has consistently denounced any releases by the mentioned groups (MoveOn.org specifically) that caused controversy.
The Bush campaign has never formally denounced SBVFT.
Why is that I wonder?
In fact, given Ol PAtton's association with the two here, I'd say this reduces his credibility evn further.
Woop. Calrification. I was of course referring to Benjamin L. Ginsberg not the entire firm of Patton Boggs.
How is Ginsberg disgraced? And why should someone feign objectivity in order to have a valid point? Under those circumstances no lawyer could ever plead a case.
Journalists, however, strive for objectivity.
Post a Comment