UPDATE: Joe just phoned in from Key West to tell me to look at the end of the article. Solomon does it again. He writes an entire article attacking someone, only to hide the tidbit exonerating the person at the every end of his story. This is exactly what he did to Harry Reid, repeatedly, and to John Edwards. Check out the end of the story - Common Cause, one of the biggest critics of big money in government - has given McCain the green light to do all the things the article criticizes him for doing, but you don't find this out until the very end of the very long story (quelle surprise):
McCain's allies in the campaign finance reform movement seem resigned to the fact that he will not abide by many of the principles he advocated for a decade as a reformer, including public financing and its associated spending and fundraising limits.
"Certainly we are disappointed that he has decided not to take the lead in fixing the presidential-financing system he is competing in," said Mary Boyle of Common Cause, the ethics watchdog that cheered McCain's reform efforts for years. "But it is understandable he is opting out.
"It is apparent to us that to run a competitive presidential campaign inside a system that is still broken, that is what he has to do," she said.
That quote from Common Cause IS the story. But it's buried at the very end - why? - because Solomon wouldn't have a hit piece if he put the truth at the beginning. The Washington Post should be ashamed of itself.
---------
If I need to write a post undercutting a story attacking John McCain as a hypocrite, in order to convince the Washington Post how serious a problem they have with reporter John Solomon, then so be it.
The Post has a front page story today, entitled "McCain Taps Cash He Sought To Limit: Onetime Reformer Calls on Big Donors," eviscerating John McCain for being a hypocrite on campaign finance issues. The problem? The article is written by John Solomon, the same mediocre reporter who used to work at the Associated Press, and who is known for "investigate reporting" that's not-quite-right.
McCain is an idiot, and has become absolutely two-faced over the past few years, going back on pretty much everything he stood for (straight talk, standing up to the religious right, defender of our military), so I'm happy to believe that he's become a hypocrite on the campaign finance issue - his signature issue - as well.
But the Washington Post made the mistake of using a reporter who has a track record of writing these kind of hit pieces, only to find that the hit pieces usually don't hold together on closer inspection.
And while I can't stand John McCain, Bush's biggest defender of sending even more American troops to the Iraq quagmire, I'm not going to endorse crappy journalism in order to take McCain down. Some of us still have journalistic ethics.
