It's strange. I've got a news hierarchy that I go thru. Sometimes you don't make it to the bottom because you're busy. What do you skip? For me, it's the mainstream analysis/opinion. First, I read the left wing blogosphere for the stuff I enjoy. Then a headline check of the NYT to make sure I've got the facts covered. Then the good lefties on the OpEd Page. Last and least is mainstream analysis/opinion.
So coming back from vacation, I know the facts about Syria, the President's actions and Congress's response, but I haven't read any analysis from the usual suspects or even much from my favorite bloggers. I just assumed everyone picked up on the obvious: throwing the vote to Congress was the smartest political move of Obama's career. Perfect move. Right on cue, in march the no talent ass clowns of the GOP, pretending to be serious about our troops. No matter how it turns out, any subsequent criticism of the administration will necessarily involve factions of the GOP attacking each other. The politics are so good, even the tourists in DC know Obama is being very shrewd here.
So imagine my surprise when it comes to my attention that the mainstream press is portraying the vote as a make or break moment for Obama? How do they say and write this stuff when they are covered in drool? Did scientists successfully bring back Neanderthals. Maybe crossed with really dumb frogs ala Jurasic Park?