The fact that you seldom get to read about the scandalette of the day on this blog has nothing to do with journalistic ethics; it's simply the result of my being so hopelessly lazy that I generally don't bother to read stories that can't possibly be true. (Which isn't to say that they're not "accurate," of course, but that's a different issue entirely.) For example, if I stop by Drudge's place and see a link along the lines of "DASCHLE CALLS SODOMY 'THE GIFT OF A LOVING GOD'," it's exceedingly unlikely that I'll click through to the full story. Life's just too short, you know?

Anyway, that's the way I've felt for the last day or so about the Dick Riordan "stupid, dirty girl" stuff. There was just no way in hell that that story could conceivably be true in any meaningful sense, so I didn't take the time to learn anything about it. But now, thanks to Ogged, I not only know all about the story, I know why, in fact, it's not really true. And, best of all, I know that it's only right and proper for me to continue in my indolent ways.

UPDATE: This post was lightly edited at 6:21 pm.

--------