Letters to the Editor
-
But that implies we're dealing with journalists
One very simple and self-evidently warranted rule ought to be applied: no reporter should toss around "Rezko" innuendo unless they're able to explain what it means specifically when assessing Obama's conduct, what specific allegations of any substance are being made against Obama when the scary specter of "Rezko" is invoked. If they're incapable of articulating even those basics -- and they are -- then the whole exercise is just deceitful and worthless.
As ProWar informed us yesterday, such rules do not apply to journalists/reporters, because such people are no different from janitors, delivery boys, and other employees of the media.
I find it hard to imagine having a reporter working for me who couldn't explain the piece he had just submitted. How do these editors allow it? Is it so hard to spot "smoke"?
It's certainly easy to blow it.