Its insistence on treating every little story with the same breathless voice has gone beyond annoying and has entered the realm of the comical. And of course, it makes a mockery out of Politico itself.

From yet another Politico party crasher story, this one with an emphasis on Obama's social secretary Desiree Rogers [emphasis added]:

In a White House not known for its tolerance of staffing errors, Rogers has been the beneficiary of an unprecedented show of support from senior administration officials.

And this

While Rogers isn't the first White House aide to take hits from the Hill, she may be the first to do so with such ferocious support from her superiors.

This is just dumb. Because what's Politico's evidence to back up the rather hysterical rhetoric? It's the fact that WH aide Valerie Jarrett answered a question about Rogers during an ABC interview, and WH spokesman Robert Gibbs answered some questions about Roger during briefings this week. Both Jarrett and Rogers expressed complete confidence in Rogers. That's it. That's the extent of the “unprecedented” and “ferocious” support that Politico manufactured.

Like I said, Politico needs to calm down. It also needs to stop making stuff up.

UPDATED: And oh yeah, the truly awful Politico lede:

If White House social secretary Desiree Rogers survives this week's withering attacks over her role in last week's state dinner security breach, she'll have gotten by with a lot of help from her friends in the West Wing.

Improving the story (i.e. just making stuff up), Politico suggests Rogers might no survive in her job, even though, as the Politico article itself stresses, she has the full support of the White House.

Question: Does anyone edit Politico? Or are the chronic deceptions purposeful?