The mag's Matthew Vadum continues to star in his role as this weeks' right-wing rodeo clown. I suppose it's entertaining to watch, but I tend to lean towards depressing. Because it's depressing to see people like Vadum thrash around and try to concoct more ways to prove that Obama hates America and is bent on destroying everyone's liberty.

And then when I pointed out just one of the gaping holes in Vadum's dark fantasy narrative, he doubles down for more Kool-Aid.

Whatever.

Vadum responded to my critique by claiming “Boehlert doesn't like my article.” Not exactly. In my critique, I wrote that I had no idea what Vadum was talking about in his 'article'. I mean yes, I realized it was about how Obama was, supposedly, going to “desecrate” the memory of 9/11 (or something). But the rambling, contradictory item literally did not make any sense. At least not in the traditional sense of how journalism, or opinion journalism, is practiced.

The only specific point I made was regarding a glaringly obvious omission. And yes, it still stands. Vadum claimed that ColorofChange.org launched an advertising boycott against Fox News' Glenn Beck because Beck's show aired some mean reports about a ColorofChange.org ally, Van Jones. As everyone on the planet (besides Vadum) knows, the wildly successful ad boycott was launched in response to Beck calling the President of the United States a “racist.”

Somehow Vadum forgot to include that fact. Or, maybe as a member of the right-wing Parallel Universe Club, he's under strict orders not to dabble with reality. If so, then congrats, Mr. Vadum -- mission accomplished!