Isn't this moving into "obsession" territory now?
I wrote about this for the first time on Sunday. Today is Tuesday. That's 48 hours. I think we have different definitions of "obssession."
If there were a nuclear war and a blogger wrote about that, there would always be someone in comments -- or several people -- to come and say: "I don't like this topic. Write about X or Y instead. Move on."
The good thing about blogging is that one writes about whatever one finds most interesting and where one thinks the biggest impact can be made.
I explained why I think the story is significant. I intend to see it through. The titles indicate what I'm writing about. If you're not interested in this topic, there isn't anything preventing you from skipping it (it will most likely have the word "Boylan" in it).
Can we move on, now? This blog is a lot more interesting when you take on the big boys.
Yeah - sorry for writing about someone as petty and small as the Public Affairs Officer and official Spokesman for the Supreme Commanding General in the Iraq War.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox