Double Standard Part II

Reader audie murphy writes:

Drew--I think you've touched the tip of the iceberg with your closing comments, viz. that presenting McCain as anything less than a foreign policy expert would be inconsistent with prior reporting. I'd take your logic a step further and say that if the news agencies to rigorously question McCain's positions on the war, then that would beg a whole host of other questions, chief among them being: is it possible for a highly decorated veteran and former prisoner of war to be wrong about war strategy? In other words, just because you are a good soldier does not necessarily mean that you're an expert in matters of policy, just as raising blue-ribbon tomatoes does not make you a master gardener. I think it's interesting that anyone criticizing McCain on the issue is always careful to say (usually in the same breath) that he is a hero and that they respect his military service. To suggest that he's wrong would be to turn the whole American notion of radical individualism on its ear by implying that experience is not always the best teacher...

A couple of points. I think audie's definitely on the right track. There might be an implicit hesitancy to delve into McCain's gaffes by the MSM because they would make themselves susceptible to impugning the military/foreign policy bona fides of a war hero and all the subsequent cries of anti-Americanism that would go along with it. Obviously, any critical eye turned toward these overt mistakes would be a non sequitur in relation to his war service, but logic too rarely dictates MSM news coverage.

Additionally, this might explain some of the MSM's hesitancy, but clearly not all, particularly as it relates to such examples as McCain's references to Checkoslovakia and repeated claims by his surrogates that "not a drop of oil was spilled" during hurricane Katrina, a demonstrable lie.

Lastly, it's worth noting that if audie's analysis is correct, on some levels this might actually hurt McCain. If the MSM started to overtly question his competence, particularly as it related to his age, the potential for a helpful "stop-picking-on-the-old-war-hero" backlash would be significant. Instead his claims get only a wink, nod, and cursory scrutiny, which allows him to be eternally (and without consequence) on the political offensive -- where he probably shouldn't be.