Deep Tweets

Why I stopped reading the news.

Photographer in press pool spots a bandage on the middle finger of Pres Obama's left hand.
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) August 31, 2014

Deep tweets

No, I didn't click the link and watch the stupid "faux ads" and neither should you encourage this sort of pathetic click-baiting. The tweets alone tell the story. Clearly The Lead has ruined Jake Tapper. I've been thinking for the last couple of weeks his work has been going downhill. This just lost any respect I had left for him.

What attack ads based on Bob Gates' book might look like #TheLead http://t.co/u9g6CkBoI7
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) January 8, 2014

Followed by this one. You probably know Sippe Cupp is the resident crackpot con on the tv somewhere. Forget what show she's on, but I think they took her from Breitbart's stable of failed excuses for human beings.

On @JakeTapper’s attack ad voice, @secupp calls it a cross btw Anchorman & Dr. Evil. @stefcutter: stick with #TheLead http://t.co/vbV2YLVbyH
— The Lead CNN (@TheLeadCNN) January 8, 2014

As I told Jake, I'm embarrassed for him and actually shocked that he would stoop so low. This is something you'd expect to see on far right wacko nutjob blog, not on an alleged news station.

Mitch McConnel: GOP's top ratfucker

Interesting profile piece on how Mitch McConnell rose to become the top gun of GOP ratfuckery. If you wondered how he gets away with his transparent dirty tricks, this would explain it:

McConnell nevertheless manipulates the press masterfully, using methods that are head-smackingly obvious and yet still elude most politicians. He knows exactly what he wants to say, repeats it with emphasis, then stops. He will not be drawn out, and has no compunction about refusing questions. He would never make Boehner’s mistake, because he won’t entertain hypotheticals. “We don’t issue a whole lot of currency,” his spokesman says. What McConnell does say makes news.

At the press conference, reporters jockeyed to throw him off message and extract some further bit that might drive the story forward. His unvarying reply when asked about Boehner was: “It does not make sense to raise taxes in a recession,” a phrase he uttered nine times in barely as many minutes. The effect was like watching a swarm of mosquitoes encounter a bug zapper. After he wrapped up the proceedings, the reporters broke their huddle and scurried to button­hole individual senators. McConnell ignored them and walked off. The story soon dried up. No vote took place. And the elections were, as McConnell intended them to be, an unadulterated referendum on President Obama.

And speaking of manipulated, compliant media, Mitch whined on the Senate floor today about the lost comity of the world's greatest deliberative body.

"What have we become?" cried Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell during a lengthy floor speech Wednesday afternoon. The Republican leader lamented the "theatrics and the messaging wars" that he said have come to define and "cheapen" the upper chamber today.

"I'm absolutely certain of one thing: the Senate can be better than it is," he said.

"We've gotten too comfortable with doing everything we do here through the prism of the next election, instead of the prism of duty. And everyone suffers as a result," the Republican leader said.

No mention in the articles that Mitch is spewing pure bullshit and he's preemptively accusing Democrats of doing what he and his party are doing themselves. Nor mention of his own significant role in sabotaging the work of the people and destroying what little was left of the dignity of the Senate. But they transcribed this quote nicely:

"If Republicans are fortunate enough to be in the majority next year, amendments will be allowed," he said. "Senators will be respected."

As far as I know, nobody asked him if that included Democratic Senators and I suppose it wouldn't have mattered since he wouldn't have answered anyway. Funny how you never hear the insider media complaining about McConnell's lack of access. Too busy whinging about not being allowed to follow POTUS around when he plays golf. This is why we can't have an informed electorate.

The power of dark money

Not much new in this Koch Brothers rehash. They raised 400 million from undisclosed donors and they had to hide the donors because, all these obscenely wealthy people are deathly afraid of hate mail. Or something. We'll leave aside that you can't get near a Koch Brothers confab with an army of angry citizens. I suspect between the few hundred oligarchs that pretty much run the world, they probably employ the equivalent of the entire Blackwater corporation, or whatever it calls itself these days.

As always, Charlie pinpoints the cause of this corruption. It is of course, Citizens United.

This is what Justice Anthony Kennedy helped bring about with a single sentence:

"We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption."

In a tragic sense, he was right. In a tragic sense, the system is not corrupt at all. The Koch brothers, and the forces that they represent, are getting exactly what they've paid for. It is an above-the-board transaction, and a fundamentally conservative one at that. The peddling of the public influence is now fully privatized.

Good to remember that it's not just the Kochs. The plutocrats have taken over all our public institutions. I mean, look at who owns CBS, new home of crackpot con propaganda. Who do think they're serving? Pretty sure it's not us little people.

Another BigMedia fail

While I've been offline for a few days President Obama held a presser. I didn't see it but Betty Cracker did and reports:

UPDATE: Conference underway. PBO started off talking up the economy, deficit reduction and healthcare enrollment. Noted that a budget passed. Called for an extension of unemployment benefits, saying GOP should have passed it before they left town.

She runs down the questions our prima donnas of the insider media asked POTUS. Of course almost none of them addressed the substance of his remarks. My personal favorite:

What is your New Year’s resolution?

Notably missing were any questions about the unemployed or any recognition that Obama is right about GOP obstruction. These are same people whining about lack of access. Have a hard time working up much sympathy when they ignore what Obama says and pursue their stupid "zomg, it's a failed presidency" trolling instead. I don't engage with trolls either.

Dancing with my selfie

Nelson Mandela's memorial service was an important occasion of international import. Yet with all the possible news to cover, the media went wild over Obama's selfie with David Cameron and Denmark's very attractive (blonde) Prime Minister Helle Thorning Schmidt. Thus ensued a tidal wave of thinly veiled snark about "angry black woman" Michelle Obama who was pictured looking serious, or (if you're a pro journo looking for clickbait)a  pissed off wife. Nearly everyone got it wrong and not just about Michelle Obama. Yes it said a lot about our bias, but no, taking the selfie was not disrespectful in any way. Funerals are not somber events in Africa. Surely the media saw the parties in the streets when Mandela died. They apparently do not mourn death there as we do. They celebrate the life of the person who passed. As for the misconstrued photo, let's let the photographer explain the selfie:

I’d been there since the crack of dawn and when I took this picture, the memorial ceremony had already been going on for more than two hours. [...]

Anyway, suddenly this woman pulled out her mobile phone and took a photo of herself smiling with Cameron and the US president. I captured the scene reflexively. All around me in the stadium, South Africans were dancing, singing and laughing to honour their departed leader. It was more like a carnival atmosphere, not at all morbid. The ceremony had already gone on for two hours and would last another two. The atmosphere was totally relaxed – I didn’t see anything shocking in my viewfinder, president of the US or not. We are in Africa.[...]

I later read on social media that Michelle Obama seemed to be rather peeved on seeing the Danish prime minister take the picture. But photos can lie. In reality, just a few seconds earlier the first lady was herself joking with those around her, Cameron and Schmidt included. Her stern look was captured by chance.

I took these photos totally spontaneously, without thinking about what impact they might have. At the time, I thought the world leaders were simply acting like human beings, like me and you. I doubt anyone could have remained totally stony faced for the duration of the ceremony, while tens of thousands of people were celebrating in the stadium. For me, the behaviour of these leaders in snapping a selfie seems perfectly natural. I see nothing to complain about, and probably would have done the same in their place. The AFP team worked hard to display the reaction that South African people had for the passing of someone they consider as a father. We moved about 500 pictures, trying to portray their true feelings, and this seemingly trivial image seems to have eclipsed much of this collective work. [...]

I confess too that it makes me a little sad we are so obsessed with day-to-day trivialities, instead of things of true importance.

I was especially disappointed to see my hero Charlie Pierce jump onto the scolder bandwagon.

@ESQPolitics Et tu? There's a few more out there that aren't getting RTed much. Like this. pic.twitter.com/nJuu6QpAGd
— Libby Spencer (@libbyspencer) December 10, 2013

Truth is there were many world leaders enjoying themselves at the service. Including this guy:

Such an eloquent look on Bishop Tutu's face: "Jeez, they'll let ANYBODY into these things." pic.twitter.com/QEcRVrfWCC
— billmon (@billmon1) December 10, 2013

This is why, as much as I support freedom of the press, I can't get too exercised over the WH Media's alleged lack of access to every waking moment of Obama's day. They're not really giving us some great hidden truth from behind the scenes. It's all about finding the clickbait to invent outrage and drive traffic. Just not seeing what civil society gets out of that.

GOP hypocrites hate handshakes

President Obama had the audacity to shake the hand of a world leader at Mandela's funeral. Before the internet was invented, we used to call this good manners. Some might even have called it responsible statesmanship. But the world leader in question was Raul Castro standing in for his brother Fidel. So of course GOPers immediately launched themselves onto the fainting couches, demanding smelling salts.

Maybe somebody gave them bath salts instead, because this reaction from Senator Grumpy Gramps was batshit crazy.

When asked if Obama should have extended his hand, McCain was quick to respond.

"Of course not," the senator said. "Why should you shake hands with somebody who's keeping Americans in prison? I mean, what's the point?"

Then, after a slight pause, McCain went there.

"Neville Chamberlain shook hands with Hitler," he added.

I'll spare you the endless photos of GOP illuminaries shaking hands with every genocidal tyrant our government propped up over the years when it was convenient to keep them in office and simply post this obvious answer to McCain's ravings.

Late evening with Col. Qadhafi at his "ranch" in Libya - interesting meeting with an interesting man.
— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) August 15, 2009

Meanwhile, Marco Rubio complains:

"If he was going to shake his hand, he should have asked him about those basic freedoms Mandela was associated with that are denied in Cuba," Rubio told ABC News.

Sure, if only Obama had immediately scolded Castro, all Cubans would be enjoying freedom right now. Hell, maybe all the world leaders there could have engaged in a huge argument upon arriving at a funeral because, what better way to show respect for the occasion?

In any event, perhaps Rubio could have watched the damn speech before he shot his mouth off. Not like Obama let anybody off the hook.



Yes I know our own record of supporting domestic dissent isn't exactly stellar but we're still better than most places and it was important speech in support of human rights. Not that the corporate media is much interested in talking about that. Too busy reporting every anguished blathering coming from the GOpers and other assorted cons.

Dan Rather was robbed

Wondering if Logan and McClellan are being paid while they're away.

Jeff Fager, chairman of CBS News and executive producer of '"60 Minutes," informed staff Tuesday that Lara Logan and her producer, Max McClellan, would be taking a leave of absence following an internal report on the news magazine's discredited Oct. 27 Benghazi report.

Fager's memo and findings of an internal review [are at the link.]

Always thought Rather was set up to take that fall. CBS caved to wingnut's invented outrage. Certainly Rather's investigation was not so thoroughly disgraced at this Benghazi hoax, or should we call it a paean to wingnut conspiracy blather. Yet he was fired and he was blackballed from appearing on air during their JFK anniversary coverage just days ago. At the very least Dan Rather is owed a huge apology.

Can't spell conservative without the con

And by con I mean lying, dissembling, inhumane ideologues who put politics above the public health and safety. In particular, I'm talking about today's alleged scoop by Tucker Carlson's vanity project, The Daily Crapper which breathlessly announced  Cleveland Clinic is cutting staff because Obamacare:

The Cleveland Clinic, which is ranked among the top four U.S. hospitals, is making layoffs and cutting its budget more than $100 million as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act, the Daily Caller has learned.

“The cuts for 2014, about half of those are related to the Affordable Care Act…We anticipate a reduction in workforce,” Cleveland Clinic executive director of communications Eileen Sheil said in an interview with TheDC.

The funny thing about that "scoop" is this was already reported on Sept 18th by numerous news organizations. Furthermore, as analyzed on Oct 11th, the cuts aren't a direct result of Obamacare. It's not that Obamacare didn't alter the reimbursement schedule. It did, but the overall program was designed to lower federal reimbursements for Medicare and Medicaid which would have been balanced by increased coverage under Medicaid and additional insurance subscribers who would sign up for affordable polices, thus cancelling out the unpaid debts that previously plagued hospital budgets.

All the parts were designed to work together and probably would have until the Republicans started screwing around with dismantling the balance points like actively discouraging younger, healthier people from signing up at all and GOP governors refusing to expand the Medicaid coverage after the cons on SCOTUS decided providing health care for poor people shouldn't be mandatory in a civil society.

The weird thing is, after the GOP majority in Ohio's state legislature refused to expand Medicaid coverage, Governor Kasich issued an executive order to do it anyway.

This should have solved the much of the lost revenue problem, except crackpot cons sued to keep the poor from getting Medicaid. They won an expedited hearing just recently.

The procedural ruling was a victory for the six Republican members of the Ohio House and two local Right to Life chapters who filed suit after a legislative-spending oversight panel approved the expenditure last week of $2.56 billion in federal aid provided under the Affordable Care Act. The Controlling Board acted at the request of Gov. John Kasich, who took administrative action to expand Medicaid after the Republican-controlled General Assembly refused to approve it.

Which would have been a big win for both Cleveland Clinic and the state coffers.

Expanding coverage to all Ohioans with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level — just under $16,000 a year for an individual — is expected to bring $13 billion in federal money to the state during the next seven years.

In other words, it's a great deal for the states. Of course common sense and humanity are not words in the crackpot Republican  lexicon. Nothing is more important than punishing the poor. They'll fight to the death of every last one of "those people" whom they judge to be undeserving in their relentless attempt to win policy concessions they didn't earn at the ballot box.

Cleveland Clinic should be fine in Ohio, if the governor prevails, but they have bigger problems. Thanks to hospital consolidation over the years, they own hospitals in other GOP controlled states where Republicans are determined to sabotage Obamacare. So in effect, they're not cutting staff because of Obamacare. Once again, the onus rests rather firmly on the crackpot cons of Republican party.

Deep tweets

Leading the network newscasts: CBS: Obama plunge in CBS poll; ABC: foreign terrorists in the US; NBC: seatbelts on buses.
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) November 20, 2013

My timeline: sequester murdering scientific progress, millions going hungry because SNAP cuts, Pentagon "lost track" of billions of dollars and BigMedia still arguing over exact appropriate analogy for Obamacare rollout.

No really, Obamacare is a big success

Shocking news. Obamacare rollout working well in states that aren't run by GOP thugs determined to sabotage it.

In our states — Washington, Kentucky and Connecticut — the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” is working. Tens of thousands of our residents have enrolled in affordable health-care coverage. Many of them could not get insurance before the law was enacted.

People keep asking us why our states have been successful. Here’s a hint: It’s not about our Web sites.

The Affordable Care Act has been successful in our states because our political and community leaders grasped the importance of expanding health-care coverage and have avoided the temptation to use health-care reform as a political football.

BigMedia hasn't been telling this story. For every economically secure whiner they're trotted out to wail about cancelled policies and raised premiums, there are dozens of success stories on the internets about people who found coverage on the exchanges. Some are getting better policies and saving thousands a year. Some are able to afford health insurance for the very first time. And how about those small businesses the GOPers are claiming will have to fire people because they can't meet the new requirements? Well there's this responsible employer.

Since Howard Stovall opened his sign and graphics business in Lexington, Ky., in 1998, he has paid half the cost of health insurance for his eight employees. With the help of Stovall’s longtime insurance agent and Kentucky’s health exchange, Kynect, Stovall’s employees are saving 5 percent to 40 percent each on new health insurance plans with better benefits. Stovall can afford to provide additional employee benefits, including full disability coverage and part of the cost of vision and dental plans, while still saving the business 50 percent compared with the old plans.

And something to think about. The majority of success stories are coming from states with Democratic governors. When's the last time you saw a feature on any of them on the BigMedia? A bit surprised this op-ed made the cut in WaPo but they made up for it in the related links at the bottom of the piece:

Kathleen Parker: Obamacare is sinking

Charles Krauthammer: Why liberals are panicked about Obamacare

Ruth Marcus: Obama’s political malpractice

The Post’s View: A prescription for fixing Obamacare glitches

Dana Milbank: Obama makes a desperate sales pitch

Clickbait journalism at its finest. This is why we can't have an informed electorate.

Today in inane analogies

For reasons unknown, BigMedia lapsed into the worn out "Obamacare is Obama's Katrina" mania today. With predictable results. News flash: comparing the rugged launch of a major social safety program to the bodies of Americans floating in a drowned city is always going to be really offensive. But I suspect that was the point. Trolling for outrage. It worked.

I have nothing to add to this. It pretty much captures the day perfectly.

.@DukeStJournal I do believe that Tea Pot Dome was known as "Harding's Obamacare" at the time.
— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) November 15, 2013

What if Obamacare was repealed

For all the carping about the flaws in Obamacare, and granted there are some big ones, the bigger question is would we better off without it? The answer is no. For the naysayers, Ericka does the maths at the link and this is a conservative estimate. :

The GOP has gleefully jumped on media reports about Americans having their health insurance plans nixed because of Obamacare. "Obama lied. My health plan died," conservative blogger Michelle Malkin wrote in September, referring to President Barack Obama's promise that people who liked their health insurance plans could keep them. But how many Americans' health plans would receive some form of cancelation notice if GOP hard-liners got their wish and repealed Obamacare? Probably at least 137 million. [...]

"[R]ight now the media are paying the most attention to people who are [getting cancellation notices]," Jost says. "Bad news sells better than good." But ACA benefits have kicked in already, and others will be coming online soon. So imagine the fury if Republicans repeal the law and 137 million Americans get cancelation notices. Then the media might have a real scandal to report.

Right now BigTV is fully invested in their lazy "Obama lied about keeping your plan" which wouldn't be quite so annoying if they showed the same interest in playing syntax police on the GOPers as well. But the bigger media malpractice is they could be using their time to explain the exchanges. Especially since every one of their "Obamacare cancelled my fabulous policy" stories has fallen apart under scrutiny. One of the so-called victims has since recanted her complaints and now calls her cancelled policy a blessing in disguise. Can't fail to notice, that isn't getting play on the TV news. And as Brian Beutler points out, BigMedia look like bigger idiots every time they post a new so-called victim that turns off to better off with a crap policy.

Of course, BigMedia could be spending their time explaining the exchanges and interviewing success stories but screw the facts. Informing the public is so old business model. Must generate phony outrage. Clickbait journalism demands it and their big fat salaries depend on it. Hell of a way to make a living.

Massive media fail: Health care horror stories

Exactly one honest piece on the Memeorandum right now debunking the embarrassing clickbaiting about Obamacare cancellations. The majority are rife with disgracefully negligent coverage of cherrypicked whiners whose phony horror stories will most probably be debunked within hours. You want facts these days, you have to go to the honest journos like Steve Benen who exposes the media malpractice of the Clickbait Corps.

Bartiromo didn’t follow up with the guest, so Michael Hiltzik did. He discovered that Deborah Cavallaro has a pretty awful health plan, which costs $293 a month in premiums, along with a deductible of $5,000 a year and a limit of two doctor visits a year, each of which come with a $40 copay. If she sees her physician more than twice, she’s responsible for 100% of the costs.

Under “Obamacare,” she can sign up for a “silver” coverage plan for $333 a month with a vastly reduced deductible and no limits on the number of times she’s able to see her doctor. She can also sign up for a “bronze” plan and pay as little as $194 a month. She’d have the same deductible she has now, but she’d save on premiums and have no limits on the number of visits.

Any so called reporter who doesn't start with the specifics about policies being cancelled in their lede is simply a disgrace to the formerly proud profession of journalism. They are many. The honest are few. This is why we can't have an informed electorate.

One dares to call them liars

News you won't see from the Clickbait Corps. BigMedia fears to tread where Brian Beutler dares to go with “Rate shock”: The GOP’s shameful new Obamacare lie. This in particular.

Some people who receive these notices will be pleasantly surprised to find that the most similar new plan offered by their current provider is actually cheaper than their old one. Others will be told that a similar plan will cost more. What they won’t be told, because insurers don’t want to downsell or advertise for their competitors, is that they’re likely to find a different plan available through their state exchange that’s closer to the same price or cheaper. If they can’t find a cheaper one, then there’s a decent chance that federal subsidies will reduce their out-of-pocket costs. It’s only the remainder — and it’s likely to be a small remainder — that genuinely will have no choice but to either pay more money (in some cases significantly more) or pay a fine and go without coverage.

The cancellations are for policies so crappy they don't conform to the bare requirements of meaningful health care coverage as mandated by Obamacare. So people complaining about not being able to "keep their plan" are basically whining they have to pay more to stay with a company that's been ripping them off instead of choosing from the other (far superior) 124 plans available on the exchanges. [Supply your own punchline.]

California rule raises Obamacare rates

Award for biggest corporate fluffer of the week goes to this annoying hit piece on Obamacare "sticker shock" at the LAT. I've seen this narrative developing in the courtier media for a while now. ZOMG! Some people are seeing their super cheap insurance policies cancelled because, they're crap. Obamacare requires policies to furnish actual coverage for medical care. Wonder hard LAT had to look to find that one disgruntled young healthy person in California?

Fine. I see LAT's self-serving anecdote and counter with this guy who is happy his inadequate insurance was cancelled:

Anyway, you may have seen in the past couple of days how some insurers are being forced to drop thousands of individual policies because they're not ACA-compliant. My current policy is among those, so I've looked for a new policy with my insurer (Anthem). And, thanks to the ACA, I can finally get a more traditional policy because the insurer has to offer ACA-compliant plans and can't exclude for preexisting conditions. As a result, I'm switching to a Silver level plan with a $2,000 deductible, free preventive care, reasonable co-pays ($30-$45) for doctors' visits pre-deductible and reasonable co-insurance (25%) post-deductible, all for a premium that's only $20 than what I was paying. Significantly better coverage, in other words, for about $240 more per year. The media, however, are depicting the end of those policies as a bad thing, apparently because insureds may have to pay more now. But they don't mention that these insureds will be getting much better coverage. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison.

I've spent years making medical decisions based on the out-of-pocket cost. I've passed on doctor-advised MRIs because they would cost me $1,000 (and don't even get me started on the myth of how patients can negotiate with providers--a notion propagated largely by people who've never had to try it), and just this week I had to decide whether to have a follow-up visit with a neurologist for vertigo or see a podiatrist about an ongoing running injury. I'm ecstatic to have this coverage. And I would not have had it without the ACA.

I've heard a lot more stories like his than I have of whiners like the single one LAT dug up to join the insurance corps spokesmouths parroting GOP propaganda. But the real annoyance is the misleading hed. It blames Obamacare for an additional requirement the state of California tacked onto the policy. Which you have to read pretty far into the dismal piece to find out. Which few will do.

This is why we can't have an informed electorate.

Profound BigMedia Fail

Real life still keeping me offline so just catching up. As always, outsourcing to Charlie Pierce's eviseration of Politico. Yes, read the rest that goes with this closer:

I think I can assure the kidz here that both the sequester and the government shutdown are having serious material effects on the lives of millions of people all around the country, regardless of what the polls say about their exhaustion with the rhetoric coming out of Washington. That they do not connect that rhetoric with the hardship in their own lives is a profound failure of journalism of which TBOTP is a perfect manifestation.

It's true Tiger Beat On The Potomac exemplifies the form, but they're tragically far from alone. The collective failure to inform is at the root of "what's wrong with everything." [graphic via]

Media malpractice

Real life taking up all of my time so I've been offline for days. I check the news and see the dutiful stenos of the BigMedia are pushing the GOP's phony "Dems refusing to negotiate" trope. This isn't even malpractice. It's media malfeasance.

I mean, what the fuck good does it to tell the public what stupid ploy the GOPers are using to cover up their responsibilty for the shutdown? How about they ask the damn GOPers what exactly they're willing to compromise on? Or maybe ask them why they're taking the food out of hungry kids mouths to "win" a political point?

Shutting down the government over a settled law that's been upheld by every branch of the government is extortion, not good governance. That clearly is why the shutdown happened. If the GOPers want to make the rules, let them win elections fairly and enact legislation through normal established practices. The media's job is to call the bastards out for destroying the lives of millions of Americans, not cheerlead their evil plots from the sidelines.

Not just Fox

This could be said of most of our teevee media. [photo via Kennett Area Dems]

What's wrong with the media

Jake Tapper explains how he conducts an interview:

Most interviews that I do are not super aggressive. They can’t be, and they shouldn’t be; that would get pretty tiresome. So when there’s an interview that’s tough or a question that’s tough, it’s something that raises eyebrows. It’s not easy to do that in the White House briefing room, at a press conference. That’s never easy. It’s not fun. Because as humans we are built to try to avoid conflict. Society constantly looks down its nose at conflict, even if the media doesn’t. And it’s not a comfortable feeling. It’s absolutely nerve-racking. It’s much easier to be chummy with people in power. It’s much easier to ask softball questions, to not upset the apple cart. And that’s why most people, including me, don’t spend all of their time asking tough questions. But there are times when they are called for, and I think definitely they’re needed in politics, in political journalism.

I actually like Jake. I cut him a lot more slack than most people do because I do think within the parameters of what passes for TV journalism today, he's more willing than most to challenge the GOP perfidy at least some of the time. But he's wrong about this. Aggressive interviews are not tiresome unless they're based on phony memes instead of facts. The traditional mission of the journalist was to engage in conflict. Afflict the comfortable and all that. When he says society "looks down its nose at conflict" he's talking about society inside the Beltway. He's talking about losing access to the insiders by not being invited to the important soirees. Not seeing that as a concern outside the DC bubble.

In my world the people are starving for reliable information on policy. The only thing they're "looking down their nose at" is the media fixation on horserace reporting, false balance and click-baiting. Which sadly, is now the norm in the news business.

[Big thanks to Tengrain for kindly linking in at Mike's Blog Roundup. Tengrain also blogs at of Mock, Paper, Scissors and Dependable Renegade. If you're not reading both, well, you should be.]