Hugh Hewitt makes a good point about the media pushing the story about dissenting generals calling for Rumsfelds resignation:
Why are MSMers Broder and Dionne willing to assign such great credibility to a half dozen generals (out of at least 4,700 and perhaps as many as 7,000 retired gerenals and admirals) when there is no evidence that they have credited similar insider criticism of their own business, say from Bernard Goldberg, John Stossel and Michael Medved to name just three MSM-insiders turned MSM critics.
My news judgement tells me this is a popular story with the media only because they hate Rumsfeld (and the feeling is apparently mutual) and a perfect example of how the liberal media monoculture distorts not just the story, but story placement as well. Of course, I don't bother with Broder and Dionne because (1) I already know their take on any given subject, and (2) it lacks depth and undertanding.
