Consider the source

MeTheSheeple grabbed some food while his monthly laundry run was in progress, and heard something odd from FOX News on the television. It sounded a lot like this excerpt, about Seymour Hersh's report that the United States might pre-emptively attack Iran:

Another [administration] official said to "consider the source" when it comes to The New Yorker's reporting. "This story is breathlessly over-reported and hyped without knowledge of facts or the president's thinking. The president himself has refused to rule any options out and said that diplomacy is our strategy, that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon."

Now, it seems to me that we should consider both sources. On one hand, you have Seymour Hersh, whose reputation is far less sullied than Bob Woodward. On the other hand, you have the Bush administration, which is still trying to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, still trying to link Iraq to Al Qaeda, and most definitely pre-emptively attacked Iraq to prevent it from getting weapons of mass destruction. MeTheSheeple has yet to hear our fearless leader repudiate that policy of pre-emptive attack, making it likely it is, indeed, still the law of the land. If that's the case, then, Hersh's report on Iran is predictable. So why the huge backlash?