Reuters can't even do an article about Memorial Day ceremonies without getting snarky:

Bush, who avoided combat in Vietnam while serving as a pilot in the Texas Air National Guard, calls himself a war president for his re-election campaign against Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran.

Matt Rosenberg opines that it's beginning to, and goes into detail while discussing Bill Cosby's recent NAACP speech. Took'em to woodshed, he did!

Via Instapundit

This post should get your blood boiling. Read it, then come back and finish this.

Ready? Good.

As to why the media acts as it does, there are many possible explanations. That, however, is for another time. My purpose here is to discuss the effects of their behavior, and whether it constitutes treason. I don't say that it is necessarily intentional, but in this case, intentions are irrelevant in light of the potential results. IANAL (I am not a lawyer). Having said that, let us proceed:

This, according to the 'Lectric Law Library, is the legal definition of treason:

TREASON - This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance.

The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death.

This is the only crime (that I know of) in which the Constitution itself prescribes the death penalty. With a crime and punishment this severe, it is critical that we define our terms clearly. What is aid and comfort?