In his correction, Andrew Leonard

a) writes explicitly about his lapse of knowledge and clarity in a previous article,

b) lays out the correct information in an explicit way, but worst of all

c) seems to regard the whole business as an opportunity — an obligation, even — to engage with the subject matter in a way that further elucidates it to his readers.

What has the world come to when this is the standard of behavior for journalists? Defensive half-retractions, buried corrections, and sullenly uncooperative refusals to take responsibility served our national press perfectly well until now.

Who does Andrew Leonard think he is?

Snap!

@Amity:

I don't get your argument. It seems reasonable to confuse two people named Gramm, especially when both are involved in deregulating markets. And the mistake brings to light the fact that these Gramms are husband and wife, which is very interesting if you look into it.

As the article states, she worked in 1992 to deregulate energy derivatives, and her husband helped eliminate/prevent oversight of electronic energy trading in 2000. Enron, trading energy and energy derivatives electronically, eventually went bust in late-2001. We both know how pretty that was. Wendy Gramm was on the board of directors at Enron, by the way.

Did you know that right-wing religious creeps disapprove of Phil Gramm and Wendy Gramm, because she is Asian, even though he is a reglur white American who promotes all sorts of antediluvian fundamentalist-friendly, knuckle-headed issues?

They call this an interracial marriage, and they do not like it, no matter what they say in public. And both evil Gramm careers suffered as a result. McCain never will get elected if we publicize the fact that he has interracial Gramm on his board. The fundies will stay hope and vote in their hearts for pure-white Jesus, even though He has a Mexican name.