Reply #26: As Ezra Klein said, the Rahm bashing is weird. And Cenk (former R) makes it weirder

[demhistorian]

Did Cenk choose to pile on Ezra Klein when he wrote, "It's a bit weird to see so much blame accruing to Rahm Emanuel for the administration's woes?" No, because a neutral-pro piece on Emanuel from someone like Ezra Klein that essentially said the same thing as Millbank's wouldn't create the rabid response from progressives that one from Milbank would. Millbank has more red meat potential for the left.

Did Cenk write a pouty conspiracy-filled piece in response to Ed Luce's article that not only blamed Emanuel for the administration's woes but also David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, Robert Gibbs? No, because to have done so, he would have had to defend Enanuel to a degree. And we can't have that.

So Cenk (former-R) waits until a target of the left, Dana Milbank, writes a pro-piece on Emanuel to pull out crackpot theories and push them as fact. And make no mistake, the technique is a hallmark of the fringe - make a popular proposition to your audience (Emanuel on the way out) and then invent little pieces of supporting evidence (Emanuel wrote the piece, not Millbank) to make the proposition more believable.

And to think all this weird obsessiveness springs from an undying love of Howard Dean.