From a reader:
You provided a link to Instapundit pointing out how Barrett lied.
I would point you to this article by Tim Noah over on Slate, in which he bemoans what is happening to Kerry, sarcastically decribing how to smear someone. I notice this:
“In lieu of actual evidence, it’s sufficient to find the accuser believable. That was Wall Street Journal editorialist Dorothy Rabinowitz’s justification for running with the story of Juanita Broaddrick, who claimed that Bill Clinton raped her.”
A cynic like me would point out how the entire story regarding Barrett involved the reporters finding the accuser believable in lieu of actual evidence.
Why do you think Mr. Noah didn’t write a similar piece on the anatomy of a smear against President Bush when it had been all over the media, and instead wrote one in response to the Kerry allegations which the media has barely touched?