Therefore it is no surprise that the Standard is in full "damage control" mode in the wake of the PA report. As you read the Standard piece, notice a few things:
- Pennsylvania released the report today. The Standard article is dated today. So are we to believe that the Standard staff had time to study the report, write the article and upload it to their site on the same day that the report was released? Or was this sorry excuse of a rebuttal crafted ahead of the report's release?
- I fail to detect any specific examples of inaccuracies regarding Wuerl that are allegedly in the report. We see just a bunch of blather about "standards" etc.
In this same Standard issue is a letter that the Cardinal sent to his priests - again, the same smoke and mirrors.
Such speed! Such alacrity! The Standard is most prompt with its damage control, even if it's rather inept. However, they cannot be faulted, for no one can defend the indefensible and still claim to have an ounce of intelligence and integrity.
I wonder if the Standard will bring back its "letters to the editor" feature. Just kidding!
Such speed! Such alacrity! The Standard is most prompt with its damage control, even if it's rather inept. However, they cannot be faulted, for no one can defend the indefensible and still claim to have an ounce of intelligence and integrity.
I wonder if the Standard will bring back its "letters to the editor" feature. Just kidding!