Weak offense? Maybe, but strong defense...

Nope, that's not an early Seahawks scouting report, just an observation on today's Washington Post editorial dealing with the Ashcroft v. Gorelick matter.

Atrios suggests that the WaPo attack on Ashcroft is handled "weakly," and he has a point. They start off strong, with headline branding his behavior for what it is - Mr. Ashcroft's Smear - but taper off by the end, implying that his behavior is somehow beneath him, or what we would expect of him. That's a sad case of confusing the man with his station, I'm afraid. Sure, I expect more from the Attorney General of the United States, until I consider who exactly that is, and then my expectations drop below the point where any disappointment is possible.

In fact, my anger with Ashcroft is less for his behavior, awful though it may be, than with the very idea that this man, who stands out as a miserable hack in a crowded Bushco field of miserable hacks, holds the position he has been assigned.

Still, the WaPo piece lays out the facts of the matter and successfully exposes Ashcroft's smear for what it is, while making a good point I haven't noted elsewhere. "...blaming her for the "wall"," they write, "is absurd in any event. The memo by Ms. Gorelick that Mr. Ashcroft branded as the culprit is not even mentioned in the history of impaired information-sharing that Mr. Ashcroft's department gave to the special court that finally lifted the barriers after Sept. 11, 2001."

It's definitely worth taking a moment or two to read.