Benefit of a doubt ... I don't think so!

So, according to Brett Stephens of the WSJ, we are supposed to take Eason Jordan's whole career into account before judging him on his recent inflammatory comments? As Austin Bay points out, this is asking for consideration that many in the media are not willing to extend to our brave service men and women. First off, I'm not inclined to give any one who calls themselves a journalist a pass for making rash and irresponsible statements, especially when made towards the very people who provide for his freedom of speech. Secondly, Stephens himself commented on Hugh Hewitt's radio show recently : "And I mentioned what I think all of us at the Journal think, was really the most egregious offense, which was this April, 2003, New York Times op-ed where Mr. Jordan basically said that he knowingly suppressed stories about what was going on in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, because he wanted to maintain his access to Baghdad...." Yeah - that made a BIG difference to me, and I'm sure glad to know that I can detest Jordan for many reasons.