My Full Email Exchange With Markos Moulitsas

After I published my story at Mediaite, Markos tried to weasel his way out of what he had done, first in emails to me, and then in comments to The Daily Caller. Here is the remainder of our email exchange, plus the original exchange, which contains a few emails I left out of the original story, for brevity:

VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:22 PM
subject VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

They are sources of mine, and scared shitless, please call me. xxx-xxx-xxxx

from Markos Moulitsas
to Tommy Christopher
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:26 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

Email me the info.

from Tommy Christopher
to dkos
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:29 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

These are confidential sources. If you can’t call me, at least have this blog taken down, or redact the DM screenshot, including the names (redacted) and the name (redacted), and the girl’s picture. And any reference to those names in the comments or story

from Tommy Christopher
to dkos
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:58 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

Please let me know what’s going on. I will be posting these girls’ story pretty soon, with proper protection. They just don’t want all these bread crumbs out there. They are 16 years old.

from Markos Moulitsas
to Tommy Christopher
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:34 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

That’s a community member’s post. Not my staff. I don’t exert editorial control over what the community writes absent legal imperatives or deeply offensive material. Right now, I’m seeing neither.

I’m not sure I get why you want me to pull that. Those DMs appear relevant to the story. As I understand it, those two individuals injected themselves into a political smear effort, why should they be protected now?

Open to a counter argument that has nothing to do with protecting your source.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:37 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

They are both minor children and (redacted) was not involved. Will discuss further if you need, not on email. There could be legal implications, I’m not a lawyer. I’m going to post their story fairly soon, but will discuss off the record by phone if you need.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:20 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

I’m prepping my story now. Are you going to leave it as is? These girls are afraid. Here’s a redacted version, if you want to drop it in. That’s all I ask. You’re a father, think about it for a sec.

from Markos Moulitsas
to Tommy Christopher
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:35 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

If they’re so afraid, why are they talking to you?

from Markos Moulitsas
to Tommy Christopher
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:35 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

And to be clear, no, I’m not getting involved. I see no reason to protect your scoop.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:35 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

Because I have promised to protect their identities.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:37 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

It’s not my scoop I’m protecting, it’s these young girls. Jesus, all I’m asking is that you redact the names of these children. Please.

from Markos Moulitsas
to Tommy Christopher
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:37 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

So did @goatsred.

Again, not my responsibility to protect your sources.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:40 PM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

Dude, it is your responsibility to protect the identities of minors, sources or not. I can’t believe you. This gesture will cost you nothing, and it will save these girls being subjected to fuck knows what. As a father, I beg you, please redact these girls’ names.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 12:17 AM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

This is the last I’ll say on the subject, and you can take it for what it’s worth, like I said, I’m not a legal expert, but this girl’s parents are livid and talking about legal action. Obviously, you didn’t know it was posted, but you know now.

from Markos Moulitsas
to Tommy Christopher
date Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 12:56 AM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

Wish them luck going after @goatsred.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:08 AM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors

Well, he has removed it from his YFrog. Probably not out of decency, but now, you’re the only obstacle to their safety. I really can’t believe you’re doing this. I hope you think better of it.

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Markos Moulitsas <> wrote:

You do realize you’ve just brought more attention to a semi-obscure diary that never ran on the front page of Daily Kos, right? So if you promised to protect them, you just did the exact opposite.


On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Tommy Christopher <> wrote:

Your diarist had the decency you failed to display, and took the picture down himself. Fucking asshole. You are a disgusting shitheel. For a father to act as you did is unconscionable.

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Markos Moulitsas <> wrote:

lol. You’re a funny man. Like I said, diarists control their content. You should bone up on how social networking sites work before acting as the OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVE of other people.

But aside from that, this is rich. YOU’RE the one dragging the kids into the story. Not me. You guys are the ones obsessed with Weiner’s pecker. Not me. You guys are the ones who keep flailing this dead horse in the hopes of …what? More pageviews?
What’s sick is how you’re exploiting these kids for pageviews. And in the process, you help further out them to score cheap points. So smart.
But funniest of all, you expect me to exert editorial control over community members, when your own site whines that your boss doesn’t exert editorial control over its PAID staff!
Something about glass houses comes to mind…

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Tommy Christopher <> wrote:

Glad you think it’s funny, you piece of shit. These girls came to ME because they were being harassed, and their identities would never have been an issue if your site hadn’t outed them, dumbfuck. And there is a difference between “exerting editorial control” and taking responsibility for possibly harmful information on your site. But it sounds like you’re preparing your defense, and by God, I hope you fucking need it.

from Tommy Christopher
to Markos Moulitsas
date Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:49 AM
subject Re: VERY Urgent you call me! One of your bloggers is compromising identities of two minors
hide details 9:49 AM (5 hours ago)
You’re trying to pretend you did this out of some respect for free speech, which is an obvious lie. You were perfectly willing to change it if you found my “counter-argument” satisfactory. The safety of children didn’t pass muster. Why? Because you think they deserve whatever they get for ” inject(ing) themselves into a political smear effort.”

Hysterical? You bet. If you ever did this to my kids, you’d be shitting your own teeth for a week, and I suspect you would feel the same were the situation reversed. That’s the real problem, you have an inhuman lack of empathy. You’ve demonstrated it before, plugging your goddam book while pools of blood were still warm in Tucson, but I never thought you could sink so low.

You can justify your behavior all you want, but your win-at-all-costs mentality only serves to undermine the values you are supposed to be championing. Is this really what you want, open season on 16 year-old girls? You think if you do it, the other guys won’t? They already have, and now, you can’t say a goddam thing about it.

I hope those girls remain safe, and I never have to resist the urge to tweet “Mission Accomplished, Markos Moulitsas.” You should hope so, too, if only to protect your own neck.


On Newsbusters, Michelle Malkin, Big Journalism, Alan Colmes, and David Shuster

Regular readers of this blog probably know some of this, but here goes anyway.

On Newsbusters: I wrote two stories today based on Newsbusters stories, and it occurred to me that I ought to clear a few things up. First of all, I have no axe to grind against Newsbusters. In fact, quite the opposite. Along with Jason Linkins, they saved my career. They did really excellent reporting on my firing from Politics Daily, without which I’d be a former troublemaking blogger-turned-fry cook. Melinda Henneberger tried to ruin my career, and she would have gotten away with it if it hadn’t been for Newsbusters’ and Jason Linkins’ refusal to let her muddy the waters, and for Ed Morrissey’s extraction of a slanderous lie from her. Conservative radio host Media Lizzy also pitched in the smoking gun, and was also shitcanned by Henneberger for her trouble.

For this, I will always be grateful, as I am to Michelle Malkin, who was also very supportive at that time, despite our near-uniform disagreement on just about everything.

More than that, though, I think people tend to dismiss Newsbusters too easily. Certainly, they make no bones about their point of view, and it shows in everything they do. But that doesn’t mean that if you don’t agree with them, you should stay away. The two posts I wrote today were perfect examples. If you strip away all of the editorializing, there are useful facts in both Newsbusters pieces that I linked to that I wouldn’t have gotten anywhere else. Is TPM going to count how many Bob McDonnell pieces were in yesterday’s Washington Post? Does HuffPo have those CNN emails? Looking back a bit more, is Daily Kos going to put together a montage of Ed Schultz spitting fire?

They also watchdog liberal shows and websites for quotes and coverage they don’t like, which has several benefits. First, if Newsbusters hates it, it’ll probably be good content to promote to the left. Sometimes, they have a point, and digesting that can help you become sharper, perhaps avoiding the same mistake. I also have long believed that it is important to call out your own side, as well as the other, because it is the right thing to do. For me, being liberal isn’t about being on a team, it’s about having a set of beliefs and values, and applying them with integrity.

Having said all that, of course, I reserve the right to criticize Newsbusters, and they, me. The key is not to personalize it, not to be completely and personally negating. Any wiseass can string together insults, but it takes real talent to learn from, and teach, your adversary.

That brings me to Michelle. In probably the least helpful endorsement ever, it turns out I’m Michelle Malkin’s favorite liberal. I’m actually very proud of that fact, because it’s easy to gain the admiration of people who agree with you. I also reserve the right to criticize Michelle, but I’m not sure if I ever have, at least not directly. Her influence is such that, like Keyser Soze, I’ve probably fought with those she influences without even knowing it.

I met Michelle at CPAC, and I was very nervous, for a few reasons. One of the things I admire about her is her toughness. The attacks she endures are way out of proportion, yet she doesn’t just endure them, she seems to relish them. For all of her outrageousness, she will feed your outrage right back to you. She also doesn’t try to weasel out of the inflammatory things she says, like Rush Limbaugh does.

This is why I don’t understand the way some people treat her. Max Blumenthal, for example, who I’m decent friends with, went up to her at CPAC once and tried to get her to sign a photo of a Japanese-American internment camp. Keith Olbermann, who I also like, always flashes that awful picture of her, as if being caught in a grimace makes you wrong. If her rhetoric is so wrong, why resort to these kinds of tactics?

In person, she’s just a tiny thing, underscored by this sick video of some guy getting in her face and screaming, followed by a violent fantasy shot of her bleeding. I haven’t read her book, but if I did, I doubt I would have to physically intimidate her in order to get my point across, or use Japanese internment victims as props, or try to deny that she is a very attractive woman.

Anyway, I like my relationship with Michelle the way it is. Despite her toughness, I sense some very raw nerves, and I’m sure her positive feelings about me are fragile. Whatever she sees in me, perhaps she can see in other liberals, so I didn’t want to screw it up by getting in an argument with her, or being too suck-uppy. There are a million liberals for her to fight with. So, I said “Hi,” and I hope I thanked her, and went on my way.

Similarly, I would urge those on the right not to dismiss sites like Media Matters or Crooks and Liars, or personalities like Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow. Any dope can work up a froth, but it takes talent to put your opponent’s argument in context, concede the points that have merit, and argue those that don’t. The right could learn a lot from Maddow, whose charm and cultivated sense of fairness trump a truckload of snark. If Fox News had any brains, they’d give Mary Katherine Ham a show at 9 pm.

That brings me to David Shuster. I did a write-around on an interview I did with him a few weeks ago, and everybody flipped shit when I said “From what I know of Shuster, I don’t think that he’s ideologically driven.” I’m not going to re-argue the point here, I just want to point out that clinging to assumptions is never helpful, it’s not going to help you “win.” I was one of the people who assumed that Shuster was a lefty. Now, whether you think he’s good at it or not, I think Shuster’s passion for journalism is what drives him into a ditch now and then. His contempt for James O’Keefe is obviously about that. Ditto Breitbart. But also, think back to the Chelsea Clinton incident. The central issue there was the Clinton campaign’s use of Chelsea on the campaign trail, while insisting the press stay away.

His throwdown with John Ziegler was also mainly about the press’ treatment of Sarah Palin.

What surprised me most about our interview was Shuster’s acceptance of the roles of people like O’Keefe, Breitbart, and Drudge in journalism. I assumed it might have had to do with his network’s reprimand of his handling of O’Keefe. Now, I think I get what he was saying. I think he views them the same way I view Newsbusters. While I understand, I have to disagree on the particulars.

That brings me to Big Journalism. The key difference here is the fundamental dishonesty with which they operate. It all started at CPAC.

First, a little backstory. I was outside the hotel copping a smoke when I heard some CPAC attendees buzzing about a run-in between Andrew and liberal videographer/columnist Max Blumenthal, that had just occurred (this is an annual rite at CPAC). I learned later, from Max, that he was on his way out of the hotel when he was accosted by James O’Keefe’s ACORN-busting partner, Hannah Giles.

According to Max, she began asking him “bizarre questions,” and a crowd quickly formed. He engaged the crowd for about an hour, and while they started out hostile, by the end, it was much more civil. As the gathering broke up, Breitbart saw Max, and (according to Max) started an argument, part of which can be seen here. (Max’s own video may be available soon.) The crux of the argument was Max’s accusation that Breitbart’s…independent contractor… is a racist. I find it instructive, though, that in both this argument and in his interview with me, he says that the worst thing you can do in America is to accuse someone of racism. Andrew, if you’re reading this, here’s a follow-up: How many notches below that is actually being a racist?

Max also claimed that the DC police who were handling security for the conference advised him to leave for his own safety.

Upon hearing this, I rushed into the hotel to ask Andrew about it. Aside from his dissertation on mucus and weird personal cracks, there are several things worth noting.

First of all, I did not accuse anyone of racism, no matter how much Breitbart wishes I did. I simply asked a question. Breitbart and his crew might want to paint this as an indictment itself, like “when did you stop beating your wife,” but this is just not the case. There’s ample reason to ask it, and it’s a gift-wrapped opportunity for them to put this issue to rest.

In fact, this points up a neat contrast between O’Keefe and myself. I had a reason to ask the question. It’s an issue that’s been raised elsewhere, based on O’Keefe’s own behavior. In fact, after my interview with Breitbart, several CPAC attendees thanked me for “calling it out.”

O’Keefe, on the other hand, decided to set up a sting operation to see if ACORN would give tax help to a pimp and a prostitute. Why? Did O’Keefe have any reason to believe that this was an issue for ACORN? He’s never said so. So what is it about ACORN that made him want to engage in the pimp attack? Where was the probable cause?

If only James or Breitbart would answer that. For it appears that Breitbart’s influence over O’Keefe extends to only let him talk to friendly journalists, but, as our encounter shows, his influence isn’t large enough to include taking responsibility for O’Keefe’s actual product. Apparently, O’Keefe has no editor. This is a great deal for Breitbart, as he gets to exploit O’Keefe’s work, but assumes less responsibility in protecting him.

Also worth noting is that when Breitbart realized what my followup question would be, he grabbed my camera and tried to end the interview. I shouted, to be heard above the crowd, “Because I got him, I got you!” I challenged him to stay and answer the question. As you can see, he wanted to leave because he had no answer, because there’s only one answer.

Now, for some reason, it’s very imp0rtant to Big Journalism’s John Nolte to believe that, after the interview, I said “We got him. We got him.” I don’t understand the significance, but it’s so crucial to him that he even made the quote a nickname for me. The problem is, that’s not what I said.

What I did say is pretty similar, and I only object for the sake of accuracy. The point is, Nolte refuses to correct his reporting.

After Breitbart used the crowd of 100 or so to get away from me, several CPAC attendees urged me to go after him, and I say “Nah, that’s ok, I got him. That’s why he’s running away.”

Saying “We got him” would make no sense, since there was no one there with me. If there had been, I probably would have said that. The fact, though, is that I did not.

Later that night, I went out for karaoke with about 10 other conservative bloggers, mostly from Redstate.

Christian Hartsock, one of James O’Keefe’s friends resourcefully trailed me to the karaoke bar, and accosted me outside, at about 2 am.We had about a 15 minute exchange, during which I completely demolished him. I asked him the same thing I asked Breitbart, and after dodging me for as long as he could, he predictably accused me of racism for equating a pimp costume with black men.

“So you’re saying that pimp=black is racist?” I said.

He warily agreed. “Then why did James tell Fox News that he was surprised anyone believed he was a pimp, when he’s the whitest guy ever? White=not a pimp?”

Boom! He had no response. Looong pause. “C’mon, that was a joke.”

I predicted that he would chop up the video, if he posted it at all, and I was right. Here’s what Hartsock put out. Even in his cherry-picked version, I still crush him:

It should be noted that the Redstaters surrounding me all promised, at the time, to loudly call Hartsock out if he tried to post an edited version. They have all chickened out, and can GFT. Ask any of them, they’ll tell you what happened.

Anyway, Nolte seems to think he can help himself by crawling onto Twitter every now and then to insult me, then run away when I challenge him ass to post the whole Hartsock tape.

The irony is that Hartsock posted the clip in an article where he tries to defend the heavily edited ACORN tapes. Awesome, right?

Aside from correcting the record, the point of all this is that these guys are fundamentally dishonest, so you can’t even trust the facts they present. Other partisan blogs like Media Matters or Newsbusters might leave out facts that don’t support their stories, but by and large, they don’t alter them. There is no place for outright liars like O’Keefe, Nolte, and Henneberger in journalism. I cut Hartsock some slack because I don’t blame him for hiding the utter humiliation I dealt him. We’re all only human.

The irony is that these guys are picking a fight with the one guy who can give them a fair shake. The right is certainly not going to tell them what they tell me, the left has no interest in their side of things, and the mainstream media is just happy to point at them until they stop being entertaining.

Which brings me to Alan Colmes, a guy who is unappreciated by the people he can most help. I said my piece about Alan on Mediaite, and I was humbled to get a big “Thank you” from him. This is a guy who is a better liberal than a lot of the posers who snark it up around the internet, he’s sharp as a tack, and he’s the only liberal who’s in a position to do any good. Everyone else is preaching to the choir, but when Alan points out something that doesn’t make sense, he does it in front of people who actually need to hear it. He might not convince them to love health care reform, but maybe he can convince a few that it’s not going to kill them. And if you think you could have done better than him against Hannity, keep in mind that Keith Olbermann won’t have any guests on who disagree with him.

If this business has taught me anything, it’s that you should always challenge your own assumptions, and that it’s rarely a good idea to personalize that which is not personal. Since I’m only human, I’m sure I will continue to do a little of both, but that’s how we learn. I suppose it’s also important to remember that Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Malkin, Keith Olbermann, Markos Moulitsas, and even Tommy Christopher are all human beings, not bogeymen.

Meghan McCain Quotes of the Week: Bras, Bugs, & Beta Males

Unfortunately, Meghan McCain’s boobs can’t really talk, but thankfully, Meg’s Twitter feed is such a treasure trove of good quotes, they really don’t have to.  Politico even put one of Meghan’s tweets in its “Politi-quotes: The week in one-liners,” but I think she deserves a whole list to herself.

First, there was Politico’s pick, Meg’s tweet about killing a cockroach in her sink.  Funnier than that, though, were her followups.  Apparently, this one spurred a flurry of cockroach fun facts:

WHAT? @HeyDaveJ Tip: Put a paper towel over the cockroach before you kill it. They carry eggs on their back, and that way they don’t spread. 9:58 AM Jun 27th from web

stop tweeting me about roach eggs people! good lord, I just killed one! 10:18 AM Jun 27th from web

I have to give Meg some props here.  Even though she said “Ewww!”, she did kill the roach herself.  Several years ago, I had a girlfriend who made me drive 2 hours to the City so I could kill a roach that she had trapped under a glass.  To be fair, the thing was the size of a Rottweiler puppy, but it was also missing a bunch of legs.

Now, killing is second nature to Meghan, putting her even more squarely in the “Cool Chick” category, the kind of girl that every guy wants to have a beer with, then have breakfast with.

My favorite Meg quote (aside from her perceptive take on our Meg story) was this 2-Tweet decimation of her conservative critics:

I love people that tell me “I’m doing damage to the GOP”, yeah cause Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, Sen. Ensign, Gov Sanford and the entire Bush administration have nothing to do with the GOP’s problems, no…it’s my 5″1 ass in a pushup bra thats the real problem with the GOP… about 19 hours ago from web

She’s right, of course.  The problem isn’t her ass, but the GOP’s habit of telling people what to do with their own asses, while stealth-hunting extracurricular booty.

Finally, she launches a funny one-liner at Hot Air blogger Allahpundit, who self-deprecatingly refers to himself as a “beta male”:

@allahpundit I don’t like beta males darlin’, I am a lot of a lot to date and guys gotta be able to handle it! 12:41 AM Jun 27th from web in reply to allahpundit

At least now, he’ll know who to call if he needs some exterminating done for him.

Other highlights this week include her run-in with an unhinged taxi driver, smackdown of a jerky Twitter troll, and coinage of a great Battlestar Galactica-related catch phrase.  What I’m saying is, you’re missing out on a full life if you don’t follow Meg’s Twitter feed.

Daily Kos Founder Twitter-Feuds with Meghan McCain Over Gay Marriage

This kind of thing really makes me mad.  I’m going to try to be chill, but there might be profanity below the fold.

Meghan McCain was tweeting about a Washington Monthly article that named her as a “meaningless” advocate of gay marriage:

It was pretty meaningless to hear Meghan McCain urge her Republican Party to come around on gay marriage. It seemed a bit more important when Steve Schmidt, John McCain’s campaign manager, gave the GOP the same advice.

But in terms of influence in Republican politics, Dick Cheney is on another level.

While their point is that Cheney carries more political weight, their swipe at Meg was gratuitous and inaccurate.  Meg has done more than most to publicize marriage equality, and not in the ugly, Perez Hilton way.  To call her meaningless, or all of the other non-Dick people who work hard to achieve equality for everyone, is just wrong.

So, when Meg pointed this out on her Twitter feed, here’s the response she got from Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas:


Before I comment further, and before I get to Meghan McCain’s statement on this feud, let me lay out the rest of the Twitter conversation for you, in chronological order: Continue reading

How Daily Kos Handles Criticism: Death Wishes and Cyber-Griefing


Just a quick side-note on the Daily Kos shitstorm.  I wrote a heartfelt denunciation of Markos’ joking Twitter exchange, posted a link at Daily Kos, and I did a followup piece at AOL today.  Never did I attack Markos personally.  In fact, quite the opposite.  It’s because he is so important that this matters.

So, what was the reaction?  Well, one of the Kos commenters wished me dead (arguably a threat), which the army of Daily Kos moderators seemed fine with:

Go figure. Kos Kommenters think Tommy deserves to DIE for his heresy:

Good bye. Scum like you should not be allowed to breath[sic]. More or less allowed to use a computer. What “Kos” said was true in every since of the word. I just wish you the best of no luck.

This morning, a DKos contributing editor has been Twitter-griefing Lee Stranahan about his article at HuffPo. Like most of the commenters at DailyKos, this guy doesn’t come within 2 feet of the substance of this issue. What I really love about this is the guy’s Twitter profile. Kossacks are notoriously dickish about anything that remotely resembles self-promotion, but this guy’s name and profile pic are of his goddam book!

People like this make me sick. So unaware of themselves, they’re going around shaming good liberals. Devilstower, you should be telling your pal, Markos, to watch his mouth while he’s still our spokesman, not griefing Lee Stranahan because he called your boss out yet again.


Twitter Badness: DailyKos Frontpager, Kos Joke About Pittsburgh Cop Shooting

Before I start, let me say that I’m pretty sensitive to this kind of thing.  I always hate the way the media covers these unbesttragedies.  It’s always all about the scumbag who killed people, and the dead are just “the victims.”  What was he thinking?  Why did he do it?  Where’s his Facebook page?

Having said that, and having written about the way blogs on both sides play politics with cooling corpses, I have to say that DailyKos frontpager Dana Houle and Kos himself have earned my “Unbest Individuals Upon the Earth” award (patent pending).  So badly have they made me sick to my stomach that I am resigning as a DailyKos diarist and reader. Here’s why: Continue reading