Washington Post - do as I say, not as I do?

Which do you expect to follow a higher standard of accuracy - a political commercial, or a newspaper article? As much as we'd like both, obviously we expect the newspaper to be accurate, clear, and verifiable.

So it seems rather odd that a day after the Washington Post faulted a political ad for supposedly "confusing" viewers by quoting what the WP sources incorrectly called an "anonymous" blog comment, the Washington Post, in a front-page story about the mis-transportation of nuclear weapons, quoted -- AN ANONYMOUS BLOG COMMENT:

A similar refrain has been voiced hundreds of times in blogs and chat rooms popular with former and current military members. On a Web site run by the Military Times, a former B-52 crew chief who did not give his name wrote: "What the hell happened here?"

So the Post thinks it's OK to quote unnamed blog comments to support their reporting, but somehow wrong to quote a known democratic party activist who writes a diary attacking a democratic candidate for negative campaigning?