Help Me, Rhonda: A couple of months ago, NYT scribe Judith Miller was a hero of the first amendment, bravely going to jail in the face of calls to give up her sources. Now, apparently, she's just a right-wing shill, since she hasn't (as far as we know) stood up in a courtroom, pointed to Scooter Libby, and said, "That's him, your honor! That's the traitorous bastard!"

I don't get it. Sure, every reporter has a bias, and Miller might just be a flaming neocon of the first water, ready to hitch up the mules for an imperialist ride into whatever benighted territory is in need of a little shock and awe. So? Forgive the banal comparison, but a journalist protecting a similar source within the Clinton administration would be a secular saint by now. How transparent and frivolous can this profession be?

I said, how transparent . . .

As for the actual legal proceedings, you can't tell the players without a scorecard. It's hopeless. Let's just indict somebody so we can get to some serious smearing and character assassination.

More: "Crimes Against Journalism!" cries Editor and Publisher. I'm sure they all think this is roughly equivalent to "crimes against humanity." Here's E&P's Greg Mitchell:

[Miller] calls Scooter Libby, who helped take the country to war based on false evidence -- with a big assist from Judy Miller and her paper -- "a good-faith source who was usually straight with me."

Yeah, god forbid a reporter use a Republican as a straight source -- you know how they're all liars and pederasts hiding behind their Jesus-love. No, if you want to source the inner workings of a Republican administration, best you go straight to the horse's mouth -- the DNC -- like all the other DC journalists do.