Well, it appears when you are not the incumbent, you are not teflon, even if you're Republican. For what it is - floating a balloon to see if this story will catch news cycles in an election - this story is balanced. It quotes for and against. What it fails to do is provide some key context. If this is a "Swift Boat" kind of smear, to what end? Who benefits? Guiliani? Surely not Democrats. Billing records is a red herring, when we're talking 16 years ago. A stronger point is buried in the story: "The Tennessean newspaper reported that Thompson, when filling out a 1996 Christian Coalition survey, marked himself as "opposed" to a constitutional amendment protecting "the sanctity of human life." The newspaper said he included a handwritten notation saying: "I do not believe abortion should be criminalized. This battle will be won in the hearts and souls of the American people." As we saw with Swift Boat, there is a huge pressure for responsible journalism to get the facts out right away. At least this story says Thompson sees no billing records. Is this a Dan Rather moment? we'll see. But again, this story is better supported than that one.