Eric Alterman Asks a Rhetorical Question

He writes:

Alterman: The lost Kinsley rule - Altercation - MSNBC.com : Jake Weisberg... is picking on Howard Dean and I can't believe it: "[Dean's] injudicious comment about the GOP being the party of white Christians was followed by his statement that 'the idea that we're going to win this war is an idea that unfortunately is just plain wrong'." Such gaffes lead to endless debate about how Howard Dean is screwing up, rather than about how Bush is screwing up." How... [can] Michael Kinsley's appointed successor... write... "gaffe"... without pointing out Kinsley's most famous observation: that "gaffe" is what Washington calls a statement by a politician that happens to be true? Would Weisberg argue that... we are "winning" the Iraq war...?... [B]oth Dean statement... are true. And it's the job of intellectuals to congratulate politicians for speaking uncomfortable truths--at least I thought it was.... I don't recall any cases in which when Kinsley wrote about such things, he was attacking the truth-tellers. But Weisberg seems to think Dean is deserving of contempt.... Am I missing something or is this as depressing as it looks?

Yes, Eric, it's as depressing as it looks.