"I wonder what BushCo thought would happen with all their accumulated power once a Democrat became President?"

When I get tired of all the outrageous excuses/reasons for this administration's abuses of power offered up by my aquaintances on the right I say to them, "So I assume you will still be ok with this once Hillary is President." Conversation comes to a screeching halt and I am mightily entertained by how purple a person's face can become when struck with sudden apoplexy.

I suppose I could be more generic and just say "...once a democrat is President", but Hillary seems to really hit them where it hurts, in their overrated 'nads.

It's not simply a synonym for "the". This excerpt from wikipedia should shed some light:

Furthermore, teh is sometimes used in front of a verb in a novel form of gerund. The best-known example of this is the word "suck". Thus, the phrase "this sucks" can be converted into "this is teh suck"; the word pwn can be similarly converted (teh pwn). The latter phrase is primarily used by the computer gaming community, and often intended humorously.

In English, "the" can be used as an intensifier for the superlative form of adjectives; compare "that is best" and "that is the best." Teh has a similar use as an intensifier for unmodified adjectives, generally marking a sarcastic tone. For example, "that is teh lame" translates as "that is the lamest." This is similar to the use of the definite article lo in Spanish. For example, "Soy lo mejor" (I am the best) and "I am teh good". This contrasts with the use of the in English to construct mass nouns (substantives) from adjectives, as in "blessed are the meek," where the meek denotes a class of people who are meek, or perhaps teh humble.

I just read that...I really try to avoid reading Broder. What a waste of man-hours those columns are.

Thanks Glenn, I'm very interested in hearing what a good journalist has to say, and Savage has done tremendous work.

I just want to register how profoundly grateful I and so many others are for the efforts and accomplishments of both Charlie Savage and Glenn Grenwald. The world would be a much, much bleaker place for those of us who need to know like we need water for survival.

What's really shocking about that Broder column today is he equates Reid with Alberto Gonzales! You've got to read it to believe it. Someone must be putting PCP in the old geezer's Metamucil.

Jim wondered, "Is this story-fixing process an actual process, or are these publications part of a journalistic nervous system that simply knows without discussion . . . "

Herd behavior is as natural as a bunch of five year olds chasing a soccer ball.

People hesitate to enter a restaurant that's empty at 7:30 on Saturday evening.

People avoid "wasting" a vote on the candidate they like best, when they learn that other people won't vote for the candidate. (Polls can be partly self-fulfilling.)

People buy books that are on best-seller lists.

Crowds attract crowds. Blog commenters attract blog commenters.

We humans aren't completely different from a school of fish or a swarm of gnats.

Herd behavior, in moderation, is neither a good thing nor a bad thing. It's an aspect of democracy (and it doesn't require an authoritarian leader to steer the crowd).

Unlike fish and gnats, we humans can become conscious of herd behavior, and we can be aware that there are times when the herd benefits from some herd members, e.g. Charlie Savage, who strike off in a different direction.

You say you are done with the MSM and will no longer watch it. Well, doing that won't change anything IMHO at all about this problem. Simple fact is we are now a nation of 300+ million people, nearly all with radios, televisions, and internet connections.

There are enough people to "create" an audience for practically any viewpoint on a given issue. Shutting off the TV isn't going to help. What needs to be done in my estimation is for literally 10's and 100's of thousands of the viewers, us, to send letters to the powers-that-be (owners and advertisers) of our disappointment with the shoddy work they are doing.

See the Imus situation for an example.

Capus of NBC News would like us to believe Imus was let go after careful and thoughtful deliberations among the brass at NBC. I highly doubt it myself. Instead they heard the hordes of people in the private and public sphere, along with the advertisers, calling for his head, and they decided it was in their best interest to give it to them.

So it does work. The trick is getting the general public involved - Joe and Sally Sixpack who've never written a protest letter or posted an online rant in their lives.

You also ask "Why do these people still have jobs?"

That's an easy one. Because they bring in the eyeballs - ie audience - which in turn brings in the $$$ from the advertisers. I believe it really is that simple. Corporate ownership of the MSM has resulted in the total destruction of the mission and the infrastructure of the fourth estate. No longer is truth and justice important to these people. Educating people on the issues of the day is expensive. Reporters on the ground, actual physical bureaus (buildings, transportation, support) cost a whole lot of money.

It's easier and cheaper to simply produce reality shows and Dateline Specials.

If we the people held their feet to the fire, things would change.

Until that happens it is going to be same old ... same old ...

I agree with both Zach and Just an Observer -- it's clear that you can only do your job properly as a journalist if, besides maintaining a healthy skepticism about the spin of the day, you are also willing to work hard. What distinguishes journalists like Charlie Savage and the Knight Ridder/McClatchy reporters is that, precisely because they are not inside the Washington bubble and don't have high level sources happy to spoonfeed them, they go to lower level sources who know what's really happening or they examine the public record. There are a few honorable exceptions within the Washington press corps (I almost wrote corpse), but most of them really don't seem to grasp that paraphrasing spin is not journalism. Thanks Glenn for all the great work you're doing in pointing out the dreadful wasteland and the occasional bright spots in the media landscape.