Obama's health plan will cover illegal immigrants, a majority of Americans told NBC/WSJ pollsters this week, among other things.

This falsehood has been debunked again and again by independent sources, even by the often establishment-friendly Associated Press. However, the numbers prove that the media needs to continue to correct the misinformed...which is the opposite of what Carrie Budoff Brown (a Politico pseudo-journalist) did today in this awful waste of 1,600+ words today. This is all she had to say about these falsehoods:

He (Obama) must contend with a skeptical public. According to the latest NBC News Poll, a majority of voters believe Obama's health care plan would cover illegal immigrants, launch a government takeover of health care and use tax dollars to fund abortions.

In this hack's world, wrong is now "skeptical." Casual readers' first reaction would be to wonder whether these beliefs are true or false. But Dear Carrie just won't say.Is she part of the "skeptical" crowd? Judging by her work, the answer is maybe. And that's bad. Very bad.

All I need is 10 or 20 of you, at least, to contact Brown at the address below and politely suggest that she issue a correction immediately or consider a career change: health industry lobbyist, hair stylist, janitor; anything but journalist.

Brown's contact page.

Former TPM'er Greg Sargent, one of my favorite bloggers, engaged in uncharacteristically shoddy journalism today.

He gave this piece the following headline: Rahm Emanuel: Bipartisanship Is Dead.

But Emanuel said no such thing. These are his only words to the New York Times, which is Sargent's source:

"The Republican leadership," Mr. Emanuel said, "has made a strategic decision that defeating President Obama's health care proposal is more important for their political goals than solving the health insurance problems that Americans face every day."

It is only in the last paragraph where Sargent admits that this is nothing but his own interpretation of Emanuel's statement:"It's tantamount to saying outright that bipartisanship is dead," Sargent said.

Emanuel's statement refers to the Republicans' obstructionist behavior so far (the past), as opposed to what approach Democrats should follow next in regard to this obstructionism (the future). Rahm just didn't go there. A follow-up question by the New York Times' reporter was in order, but never came.

These days, journalists and bloggers alike prefer big, bold, short, impactful titles over long, nuanced, boring ones (Drudge loves the tactic). But life isn't simple, and the media should not sacrifice accuracy for instant gratification, if you ask me.