Al Sharpton guaranteed himself a permanent place in the Ethics Scoreboard Hall of Miscreants by his performance in the infamous Tawana Brawley episode. You recall, don't you? He championed the plight of an African American girl who claimed she had been horribly abused by New York police, accused a city attorney of rape, and generally worked at stirring up a race riot. But Ms. Brawley's abuse was a hoax, a terrible plan by a frightened teen who wanted to avoid punishment for staying out all night. Sharpton's response to this revelation? It didn't matter, the Reverend said. If it didn't happen, it could have. He did not apologize for slandering the city's law enforcement officers and stirring up race hatred based on a lie. He hasn't yet.

Then there is Mary Mapes. The letter upon which she based her televised accusations of President Bush's misconduct in his National Guard service was shown to be a forgery, but she steadfastly maintained that it didn't matter: she knew she was right, and the public should follow her lead, valid evidence or not.

Perhaps naively, the Scoreboard has assumed that Senator Ted Kennedy's ethical sensibilities are of a higher level than those of Al Sharpton and Mary Mapes; after all, almost anyone's are. But the Scoreboard was wrong.

In a recent Op-Ed piece in the Boston Globe, Senator Kennedy seized on a highly dubious claim by a University of Massachusetts student to demonstrate the extent of First Amendment violations practiced by the Bush administration. The student's story was that he had attempted to check Mao Tse-tung's "Little Red Book" out of the school library, and Homeland Security agents paid him a visit as a result. To Kennedy, this proved that the administration's anti-terrorism measures were running amuck. He wrote:

Just this past week there were public reports that a college student in Massachusetts had two government agents show up at his house because he had gone to the library and asked for the official Chinese version of Mao Tse-tung's Communist Manifesto. Following his professor's instructions to use original source material, this young man discovered that he, too, was on the government's watch list.Think of the chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom when a government agent shows up at your home--after you request a book from the library.

Oopsie! The student, a la Tawana, admitted that he had made the whole thing up. Senator Kennedy's reaction? Al Sharpton,all over again. The Senator's spokeswoman stated that if the story was indeed a hoax, it didn't change the Senator's main point about the Bush administration's abuses.

But it did, of course! It had to. Before the story was proven false, Kennedy could cite proof of a chilling effect on free speech. Agents showing up at your home after you request a book!! Who could disagree? Now he has none. Whatever arguments the Senator wants to make against the Patriot Act, no citizen has yet faced a confrontation with the Feds for the innocent act of checking a book out of the library; but that is what Kennedy stated in his article. If the story is untrue, then how can his main point not change? "Think of the chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom when a government agent shows up at your home--after you request a book from the library"…why should we think about that if it's never happened, Senator? Heck, if actual facts don't matter, why stop there? Let's play a game, Senator Kennedy…call it, "Think of the chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom when…!" Here, I'll start: "Think of the chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom when… Federal agents come to your house and super-glue your lips shut!" What's that, Ted? You say,"Think of the chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom when…anyone who touches a book about Islam in the library is shot with a poison dart by Federal Agents posing as librarians!" Good one, Senator! Hey, this is a fun game! I bet Mary Mapes and Al Sharpton would love to play it with you!

In fact, I know they would.

Nobody likes to be hoaxed, although frankly, this was a pretty transparent hoax that only an extreme partisan who has lost grip on reality would fall for. Kennedy should have known better, but even if the hoax had been credible, it wouldn't change his ethical obligations now. When anyone, Reverend, TV producer, Senator or ethicist, makes serious accusations based on evidence that is shown later to be false, there is one, and only one, ethical response.

Apologize. Loudly, clearly, and unequivocally. No matter how much you dislike the people you accused, you did them wrong, and you have no alternative but to say "I'm sorry."

Just say "I'm sorry," Senator. Let Sharpton and Mary Mapes play by themselves.