Faceless Sources

Brian Williams recently quoted an "unnamed source" as saying that Mitt Romney wanted to name an incredibly boring white guy as his Vice Presidential candidate.  Mitt had a clever retort.  See: Brian Williams Interview. Also recently in England, an "unnamed adviser" to Romney said that Romney appreciates the U.S./Great Britain Anglo-Saxon heritage better than Obama.  See: Washington Post Story.  This clearly reeked of total make-believe.  No political adviser with half a brain would say such a stupid thing.

So, here we go again.  The liberal news media is allowed to concoct any cockamamie quote and attribute it to some phantom or unattributable associate or insider or political appointee, etc.  Then the red-state politician is asked to respond to these rumors or charges as though they were real.  Then, his or her response is reported in a way as giving credence to the original chimera and to slime the politician.  (It occasionally even happens the other way around ... to liberals.) This is journalism at its worst.  How any fair-minded reporter can pull one of these cheap stunts (and not immediately have to take a hot, soapy shower) is beyond me.

I would like to offer the following advice to Romney (and other politicians) in the upcoming debates and media interviews -- if the questioner will not name the source of any scurrilous or leading comment, refuse to rise to the bait ... unless and until the source is named and when the quote was given.  And follow this up, if this info is not forthcoming, by unapologetically questioning the professionalism of the reporter.