James Taranto points out just a single piece of selective journalism by Dan Rather last month published here.
In the end, what difference does it make what one candidate or the other did or didn’t do during the Vietnam War? In some ways, that war is as distant as the Napoleonic campaigns. What’s far more import is this: Do they have an exit strategy for Iraq? If so, what is it? How will they address the national deficit? And what are the chances their plans will work?
I have problems with that, but more in the last four lines than the first. Why is it that media types and opposition politicians are always asking for “the plan”? Countries the world over employ thousands of people who spend their waking hours trying to discern “the plan.” They are called Spies.
Why would any leader in any country explain his “plan” during wartime?