We have several stories in major papers in Britain on the alleged Kerry story. Some interesting angles. The conservative Telegraph suggests the following:
Democratic sources blamed the allegation on Republican “dirty tricks”. They said it marked the long-expected start of a campaign from the Right to smear the frontrunner and damage his chances of fighting a strong campaign against President George W Bush.
I don’t see any evidence of this at all, despite my reader’s worries yesterday. (I’m even beginning, in my paranoid moments, to wonder if that email was a plant. It reads a little too convincingly. Was I being set up by some Democratic activist to promote the new Dem line? I have no idea. But I’m ready to believe anything in this town.) In fact, it now turns out that the first blog reference to the story – which I linked to yesterday – was made by a man who worked for Wesley Clark. (Hat tip: Jonah.) Of course, that might mean nothing, as well. The story is on the front-page of the Times of London, which I think means it’s arrived globally. Oddly, it’s not in the Guardian. Maybe they think it’s a Republican plot as well. This is another new feature of the Internet, isn’t it? The English-speaking media are fusing somewhat – it’s so easy to click and read – so the number of “serious” English-speaking outlets increases the odds of any rumor story going mainstream. To recap: the food-chain is Clark or “X” blabbing to Washington reporters off-the-record; said reporters spilling to Drudge; Drudge to the blogs; then the Brits get to write about an “Internet scandal,” which loops back to Drudge. And now … Imus. Dizzy yet?
SILVER LINING WATCH: “Well, this is a good test for the general election. The Kerry campaign will have to swiftly respond to this stuff, and get Time, ABC, etc. to contradict Drudge. Otherwise, we have no chance against the Bush slime machine in the fall.” – an optimist on the John Kerry blog forum.
The Dish 