From the Mailblogbag…

Jim Keegan writes in response to my saying that Sean Penn's "WMD" line seemed a bit gratutious…

You know, Mark, I read your blog each day, but sometimes you really disappoint me. Penn earned his 90 seconds. It was his to do with whatever he chose. He wasn't a presenter abusing the privilege. He wasn't the host hired to do a job (Crystal made a few political comments too — where's the outrage?). Penn didn't rush the stage, he won the time fair and square.

Since the actual news media (and I use the term lightly) will barely mention the fact that there are no WMDs, I was proud of Penn for reminding viewers that THOUSANDS of people are dead and America's credibility has been squandered over those phantom WMDs.

You mention WMDs on your blog. Isn't that "gratuitous?" I guess the addition of the word "politics" on the header makes it okay, as opposed to Penn's hard-earned 90 seconds? Maybe you're planning on joining Bush on the missing WMDs, "What's the difference?"

Well, first off, I think the fact that we went to war based on an enormous false premise is and deserves to be the all-time great political scandal. And even if I were convinced that Bush and his men acted in good faith and didn't gin up the evidence, I'd think it was the all-time great political scandal that no one has been fired or, insofar as I can tell, even slapped on the wrist for what was, at best, a colossal screw-up. So obviously, "What's the difference?" does not begin to summarize my view on the matter. I also think it has gotten more attention in the press than you do. Polls do say that a majority of Americans think there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction, and I think that accounts for a large chunk of Bush's currently-dropping approval ratings.

That said, I still think what Penn said was gratuitous. You're right: He earned the time and had the right to say anything he wanted up there. I just thought he trivialized the statement by making it so off-hand and non sequitur. I would have preferred he say nothing rather than to say so little. It's not that I disagree with his message. I just think he picked a poor time and way to express it.