The latest scandal emanating from the Iraq war is the story about the US military paying the Iraqi media to publish favorable stories. News media organizations and journalists continuously harp on how this amounts to the US military using the Iraqi news media for US propaganda. (Although, they don’t seem as concerned about terrorists or insurgents using the Iraqi news media for propaganda.)

When this writer observed Harvard University’s Marvin Kalb, an avowed expert on the news media and policy, on the Fox News Channel showing great concern over the Iraqi news organizations being part of a propaganda campaign, I laughed so hard, coffee almost came out of my nose. I thought to myself: Who’s this sanctimonious guy kidding, riding on his white horse and talking about the US news media as if they were some paragon of truth. They may not be getting paid—at least I hope they’re not—but they willingly indulge in disseminating the propaganda of the liberal-left and the Democrat National Committee.

Mr. Kalb, what do you call forged documents and phone calls between a CBS News producer and the DNC? And that’s merely the tip of the iceberg. But the news media do have one way of proving themselves to be fair and unbiased. All they have to do is show at least a little interest in using their immense investigative resources to delve into some suspicious behavior on the part of some Democrats. Not a lot of them, just a few.

Too be sure, the news media can—and will—continue investigating Scooter Libby and Tom DeLay. And if they are guilty, they deserve all the negative press they get. However, how about the media whipping themselves into a frenzy over a few more stories. Here’s a short list with which to start:

Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), who sits prominently on the Senate Intelligence Committee admitted on Fox News Sunday he did something that reeks of scandal: Prior to the Iraq war, he flew to the Middle East and met with Syrian and Saudi Arabian officials. At these meetings, he admits he told them that President Bush had made up his mind to invade Iraq. It was one of those “things that make you go hmmmm” moments. Syria was and remains on our list of terrorism-sponsoring nations; Saudi Arabia is a known financier of terrorism. Yet Senator Rockefeller felt they needed to be apprised of US government war plans? Hey, big media! Aren’t you folks even a tiny bit curious as to what Rockefeller actually told these officials?  Pretend Rockefeller is a Republican.

Meanwhile, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) has so much to investigate, media organizations would need to recruit dozens of extra investigative reporters. But how about choosing one recent incident that took place right in front of the C-Span TV cameras. During the UN ambassadorship Senate hearings with John Bolton, Mr. Bolton mentioned a CIA agent named “Mr. Smith.” Senator Kerry, a man with a propensity being a mindless windbag, referred to the agent—who is a real covert agent—by agent’s true name, Fulton Armstrong. Bolton continued to use the agent’s Mr. Smith alias and Kerry continued to refer to Mr. Armstrong. Now there’s a leak investigation one can sink one’s teeth into.

And last but not least, we have Sandy Berger, former National Security Advisor for the Clinton Administration. Berger stole secret documents and destroyed some. He admitted it. He even pleaded out on the case. And yet we still don’t know what was contained in those documents? He was to testify before the 9-11 Commission, so perhaps they were classified memos regarding Osama bin Ladin or Al-Qaeda. Maybe the destroyed documents had something to do with Able Danger, a term that has everyone in Washington practically running for cover. Okay, don’t investigate Berger. We know you members of the media love lap dancing for his ex-boss, Bill Clinton. But how about looking into Able Danger? Aren’t you curious? Yes? No?

So before the ladies and gentlemen of the press criticize a bunch of soldiers trying to win a war using propaganda, perhaps the denizens of US newsrooms should examine their own involvement in shoveling propaganda.