Your argument is well taken, but you're incorrect about 'Eisenstadt'. The hoax was his claim to be Carl Cameron's source. He wasn't. Cameron's source was presumably an actual McCain campaign adviser. That doesn't make it any more or less true, but the unveiling of the Eisenstadt hoax (which was actually unveiled ages ago) doesn't impact Cameron's reporting in any way.

I understand. Just so I have the right information for the update, who was the leaker?

truthseeker:

You are spoiling all of the fun. It is not enough to elect a man like Senator Obama who, even to the most cynical among us, appears to at least have potential to move beyound the mundane political quagmire that defines us. No, some of us would simply replace the right-wing echo chamber with its mirror imageon the left, and create our own version of something that is not of the muckraking variety that many drew many of us to places like TPM in the first place.

Perhaps where we differ is that I have read Josh Marshall for many years and I remember how he reported on North Korea's acquisition of a nuclear capability, and how he, unlike anyone on the internet, reported on the lead-up to the Iraq War with unmatched objectivity and with unmatched comprehensiveness. I have to believe that after he and his colleagues have had the chance to catch their breath, and after the dust has settled from this long campaign that included a very harsh civil war between brothers and sisters in the progressive coalition, they will return to that kind of tough and probing and honest journalism that set them apart from the rumor mongers and the shrill who dominate the internets. Keep hope alive truthseeker.

Bruce

Recommended because we like it here and we remain.

I have not seen a supported accusation about reporting on matters of substance. The two you mention are either snarky fun concerning a howling embarrassment to our politics or internal Senate caucus politics, with dueling assertions.

Not losing sleep over it. Especially since, as Bruce points out, on matters of great substance TPM has been valuable.

O come on.

Every major news outlet carried the Palin story. TPM has done a lot of really good journalism - they kept on the DOJ story until it became a national story, among other things.

You obviously don't basic journalism or blogs. Stories that turn out to baseless get corrections, often immediately in comments.

There's nothing dishonest about this site - if there was it wouldn't get noticed by the national press and quoted approvingly.

Now grow up and stop this.

There is nothing wrong with rumors and gossip; they are integral to news. They can be leads to big stories, their appraisal can augur what the true details really are, and they're fun. The error is believing rumors and gossip - and one of the pleasures of TPM is that it's apparently intended for readers and posters not that gullible.

But, but, but... that would mean everything I read on the internet would have to be true!

Unacceptable.

Let TPM go on reporting fabrications and leave it up to me to suspend my own damned disbelief. Just like when I watch the MSM.

The Mission Was, In Fact Accomplished. Wasn't it?