Andrew Sullivan
thinks it a betrayal that McCain campaign official Michael
Goldfarb passed along emails Sullivan had sent inquiring about the
Trig Palin rumors:
But for the McCain campaign to go to these lengths,
violating core confidentiality of private good-faith questions, is
something that has never happened to me before in journalism. I am
also amazed that a fellow journalist would publish such emails in
full. But since this is now all in the open, you deserve to know
what your blogger has been trying to do in private for three weeks:
just get a factual answer to a factual question on the
record.
Respectfully disagree. If you want to smear someone, you don't go
to Howard Kurtz, who then emails you and allows you to explain
yourself. I don't know why Mr. Sullivan is intent on the Trig Palin
story, though I've read a few of the relevant posts. He certainly
knows more about it than I do.
But I also feel uneasy about the idea that emails should be assumed
to be off the record. If a campaign official ever sent an email in
which he doesn't specify something as off the record, any reporter
worth his salt is going to quote it. It's fair game when it works
the other way.
It
also plays into the McCain camp to have Obama supporters continue
asking about Trig Palin rather than letting it drop. Look, this may
appeal to liberal bloggers, but it's likely a big turnoff for
independents to even hear about this. When independents see Trig,
they don't see the political football the bloggers do. In other
words, Goldfarb doesn't "dignify the question with a response"
because it forces you to keep asking it. I bet Goldfarb's
assumption is that McCain wins the more you do.