Let us assume for a moment that there lurks, somewhere in the Washington bureau of some major newspaper or TV network, a reporter who is a closet liberal, and who sincerely believes that President George W. Bush is unrelievedly bad news for the country. (I realize how implausible such an assumption may seem, but bear with me.) It is at least theoretically possible that such a person might simply invent a malignant motive for some action of Bush's and write an article "revealing" it, and attribute the revelation to "a source close to the president, who spoke only on condition of anonymity."
It's been done many times, already. Anyone besides me remembering an "anonymous source" saying Colin Powell wished to step down and because he "disagreed" with President Bush on the WOT? A year plus, back.
No comments:
Post a Comment