These are the times of their discontent

Conor Friedersdorf is concern trolling over the "Obama/Clinton 60 Minutes interview. Young Conor is very sad that 60 Minutes "diminished their brand" when Steve Kroft failed to ask the tough questions.

To be fair, when it aired on Sunday, my twitter stream was full of White House press bitching about the same thing. Why weren't these two being browbeat over policy, forced to answer for every policy misstep -- real or imagined -- over the last five years? A sentiment that was echoed among the crackpot con punditry who feel so betrayed. Why didn't Kroft bring up every wingnut conspiracy theory? Why didn't he demand medical proof of Hillary's concussion? Why wasn't Kroft willing to take the idiot Benghazi hearings to the next level?

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the media conducting tough interviews and demanding answers from our political overlords. But give me a break. This was widely understood to be a goodbye gift to Hillary from Barack, to thank her for the good work she did as SoS. Something that appears to be somewhat unappreciated since she kept such a low profile. It seems people forget how many international crises they dealt with during her tenure.

It was supposed to be a softball interview. And I find it a bit too precious when the same press corps who regularly (without a hint of protest) "report" every half-truth and outright falsehood being spewed into the discourse by Republicans suddenly become so concerned about hard questions. Would be refreshing to see some equal outrage about that.

No easy climb for Hillary in 2016

I want to shoot myself for even mentioning 2016 yet again, but there's been so much buzz about Hillary taking another crack at it that it's worth mentioning briefly. A lot of her former supporters who populate my social nets have been chirping enthusiastically about another Hillary run practically since election day ended. Nate Silver says Hillary has a shot at it and would be a good candidate in many ways. Meanwhile, the usual GOPers are allegedly quaking in fear at the mere prospect of her running.

Hard to believe anybody is buying the GOP line. As so often happens, I agree with Charlie on the GOP's faux terror:

I am sorry, but does Newtie know something I don't? Is every talk-radio host in America planning on joining the Carthusians between now and corn-shuckin' time in Iowa in 2016? Are all the foundations who fund the bilge that passes for intellectual energy on the American Right going into funding the arts all at once? Is the political salience of outright hysteria going to wane that precipitously over the next four years? I doubt all of that at once. What you're going to see when and if Clinton announces is Whitewater-plus-Benghazi, all run through the massive post-Citizens United pukefunnels, and what a lot of fun that's going to be.

Would love to believe Hill could just stroll into the White House and protect our hard won gains. But I remember the awful graphics in all the ugly viral emails being passed around by the wingers when it looked like she had the nom locked up. I remember how loudly the GOPers, led by Rushbo himself, were cheering Hill on in 2008 once she started losing. They were dying to run against her. You could practically hear the salvering behind closed doors. Their megaton of oppo was already pre-researched and fully written. Rather doubt they threw it away. More likely they've been adding to it regularly.

And what do we suppose our fair minded media would do with another crack at the Clintons? This happened in 2009.