Josh Marshall, on why the right-wing press gets it wrong so often:

But as a group, the standards of most institutional right wing journalism are just so appallingly bad that their stories simply aren’t credible. (I’d note that Lake works at either nonpartisan or slightly-progressive leaning pub.) Of course there are exceptions like the Menendez phony escort story. Which, wait, that ended up being a hoax enabled by appalling shoddy reporting standards. Again, if you wonder why conservative scandal mongers can’t have nice things … look at the conservative media.

Also, try finding real scandals.

Don't discount the possibility that getting it right is not the main goal. Most partisan media, left and right, is opinion-giving, not hard reporting. So, most of the right wing media exists simply to entertain, to tell clever variations on the story of Evil Mr. Obama And His Band Of Sinister Lackeys. They don't need to get it right, they just need to entertain. And, if they can create some general FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) about the Obama and the left in the process, maybe turn some of the undecideds away from Obama, all the better.

In other words: it's cheerleading.

mistermix is not aware of all internet traditions :

Finally, in the spirit of John’s post last night, reader L sends this Wonkette item on James Comey that coins the political blogging equivalent of TL;DR:

....GG;DR

Hey man, I beat James Comey to that one by just over two years! I've been ignoring GG since way before it was cool.

Female Breadwinners Are Antithetical To Nature

I'm surprised the left-o-sphere hasn't given more attention to the fact that Obama recently publicly asked Congress to repeal the AUMF. The Authorization for the Use of Military Force, from 2001, is the font from which all kinds of "national security" evils have sprung, over the last 12 years. From the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, to torture, to the problems in Guantanamo, to drones, our perpetual war, the targeting of American citizens, etc. - they all spring from this little, hastily-passed, law that gives the President the authority to go after al Qaeda, and anyone that aids or harbors al-q, anywhere in the world, in almost any way he wants to. And Obama just asked Congress to revoke that authority.

"I look forward to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF's mandate," he said. "And I will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further. Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue. But this war, like all wars, must end."

That's huge, in my opinion.

For a decade now, I've been getting good use out of the notion that "national security" is a ratchet: once the Presidency is given (or takes) power under the national security guise, that power will never be put aside, relinquished, or left unused, by him or his successors. I've always assumed no President would want to be seen as wanting to give up any such powers, for fear of being seen as "soft" on security matters. But, Obama just asked Congress to take them away.

Certainly, he would be far more praiseworthy had he never used those powers in the first place - and many now-bitterly-disappointed people who hoped that he wouldn't are more than happy to list his failings in this area. But, use them he did. Though now, perhaps after another long evolution, he's saying he wants things to change. And, ultimately, getting Congress to repeal AUMF is the right way to do it. Because even if a hypothetical Obama had never used what AUMF provides, nothing guarantees his successor would be as high-minded.

I hope Congress takes him up on the offer.

Tea For Hitler

VW's 261-MPG Diesel-Electric Supercar

Thinkin bout Medea Benjamin, Obama's heckler. I'm reminded of comment on a Balloon Juice thread that, over the years, I've found to be wonderfully handy when discussing these kinds of leftier-than-thou people; and so, from commenter, "Joe From Lowell", here is Joe's Protest People Hypothesis:

The most important thing to Protest People is their self-image as Protest People. If they’re the first to denounce something, that gets them mega-points on the Protest People scale. If they’re wrong, whatever loss of credibility they gain in terms of being reality-based is outweighed by the demonstration of what awesome Protest People they are. Heck, it actually helps their credibility among their intended, Protest People audience to be so wrong, because it’s just more evidence of how ideologically hard core they are.

Oh the poor little dears. They have become detached from reality and convinced that their wild Benghazi fantasies actually happened.

I recommend clozapine and cognitive behavioral therapy. As a secondary effort, electro-convulsive therapy may prove useful.

'Tornado Truthers'

Return of the Jedi was released.

Old. But not as old as ethernet. Or me.