That "outplayed" stuff reminds me of the praise that's typically lavished on Karl Rove. "Love him or hate him, you have to concede that he's a genius -- that he perfected political strategies nobody else ever thought to use." . . . as if it had "never occurred" to politicians before Rove to use crime, fraud and character assassination to get ahead in politics. If we're inclined to be charitable, the reason politicians (on both sides) have rarely behaved so badly is because of their moral scruples. If we take the uncharitable (and probably more realistic) view, politicians have been reluctant, traditionally, to cross certain lines out of a fear of public disgrace and censure.

Rove's "genius" was to see that the media establishment had become so toothless and corrupt that there was no longer any mechanism in place for the censure of the most dishonest, cruel and cynical campaign tactics. The other part of his genius lay in his total amorality. The D.C. media praises Rove, in essence, for having grasped just how shitty and stupid they are, and for being shitty enough, himself, to take advantage of their weakness.

Similarly: even if it were true that the blogoshphere had been collectively "outplayed" by a military commander, it isn't clear to me why that fact would be cause for celebration by anyone. (Isn't this guy essentially gloating about the fact that democracy got "outplayed?" And that he and his winger cohorts were successfully exploited?) Nor is it clear what "countermoves" sites like Talking Points Memo and Salon.com ought to have used. Should Glenn Greenwald have bribed the editors at Time and Newsweek? Should he have slept with the editorial board at the Wall Street Journal?

Surely it occurred, in this case, to Greenwald and others that if they had the power, money, connections and prestige of the U.S. military at their disposal, they could exploit this power to inappropriately influence public debate.

Biographer Robert Draper explains that Bush has a surprising intellect but is incapable of curiosity and owning up to mistakes.

Nick R.:

Sorry - if you lack curiosity and are not self-aware, you are not intelligent - bottom line. Enough of this garbage ... Bush has "scruffy charms" only if you believe having an emotionally and intellectually stunted 11 year old for US president is a good thing. Most of the country would disagree.

Nick, word for word, that's the comment I was going to post.

Incuriosity and a strong intellect are mutually exclusive; they don't happen in the same head. If Draper's apology is to work, we'll have to redefine "intellectual" in a more Bush-friendly way . . . much as the Dems have helpfully redefined terms like "torture," "spying," and "criminal trial."

Whoa -- obviously, I don't have the hang of this whole formatting thing. (The slender column at the bottom of that last post was my own comment; the stuff before it was quoted.)

"Ur-nightmare" is exactly right; watching MTV's throw this bleeding hippopotamus to the piranha reminded me of the famous prom scene from "Carrie." In real life, of course, the bloodied and humiliated prey doesn't get to set the world on fire via telekinesis. (And it's probably for the best that Britney Spears doesn't have telekinetic powers.)

I second, also, the comment that Britney looked just fine in a bikini. It seems odd to me that there's now a 1.38 lb. weight range that women are allowed to inhabit; sink too low and the "concern" trolls will set upon them with "well-meaning" speculation about their anorexia; bob above the upper limit, and they'll be castigated for being "fat." It also seems to me that a lot of these rules are being created and enforced by other women; the truth is, any frat guy would be licking his chops if he ran into "fat Britney" on the beach.

In conclusion: blecch.

"watching MTV throw this bleeding hippopotamus"

Also, Sonia, sorry about that weird "well said" echo. I must have posted right after you did. I swear, I wasn't stealing your heading!

I hope Kathy Griffin doesn't eventually issue the standard apology -- though I'm sure she will.

The only thing more exhausted than literal-mindedness is faux literal-mindedness. When will it cease to be cool for adults to pretend to be slow-witted children?

2 Qs: Would Jesus really be pissed off about Kathy Griffin's quip? Would Mohammed be pissed off about some irreverent editorial cartoons? My own readings of the New Testament and the Quran make me think both answers are no.

PS: You're right, Glenn: Opus = woefully unfunny. Those lame Mohammed cartoons, too. Not funny.