AWOL Again?

I am reading Drudge and see that the major news outlets will be pursuing the Bush-National Guard Story again. Furthermore Kitty Kelly will be on the TV promoting her book.

I think this is a great example of how the press treats Bush vs Kerry. When the Swift Boat Vets came out with their book, the press and TV ignored them. Now Kitty Kelly comes out with a book full of accusations...she will be on TV. I am not saying she is lying, etc. We can go into that later. I simply want to point out the difference in the way the candidates are treated when allegations come up.

The press promotes allegations against Bush yet seems to attempt to discredit allegations against Kerry.

I would like to know what is the standard whereby Kitty Kelly and her book (alleging cocaine use at Camp David) gets to be on TV (NBC) and the Swift Boat Vets are dismissed as partisan?

How many times must the press bring up the National Guard angle? It is interesting that they seem to pursue the idea that maybe Bush is hiding something and that the accusations are true. Yet their attitude towards the Kerry Vietnam stories show a completely different take. They are skeptical with regards to the stories about Kerry. This is even more interesting based on the fact that as a result of the Swift Boat Vets...Kerry has had to back of some of his stories.

If the treatment of the two candidates by the press does not show a bias, I don't know what does? This is why more and more people are turning away from the mainstream media.

I for one would like the standards by which one set of accusations are pursued vigorously while another are dismissed.

We at the very least deserve consistency on the part of media.

We are waiting...