Letters to the Editor
-
finding it hard to care?
Ok. Boylan is a loose cannon and a bad writer and maybe half-way crazy when it comes to responding to critics. Is it wrong for me to think that this isn't much of a story? When he becomes a liability for Petraeus won't they just replace him and Petraeus can maintain plausible deniability regarding the unhinged blog responses? I mean, what does the readership / editorship here at Salon think will happen as a result of this story, best case? Boylan will probably get replaced as spokesman, as he is far too aggressive & emotionally involved to dispassionately maintain press/public relations for his boss. If the goal of the press that's been devoted to this topic is to highlight the current administration's pettiness, dishonesty, or one of its other negative attributes, then I must say that Col. Boylan is too far down the chain of command, at least in the public consciousness, to be an adequate symbol of the administration & its flaws. I guess my overall point is that, if the story begins and ends with Boylan & there will be no real repercussions beyond him losing his position as spokesman & perhaps some slight embarrassment for Petraeus, then it seems like sorta small potatoes.