AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, Slate’s new “Kerryism of the Day” feature is no better than its lame and sometimes dishonest “Bushism of the Day” feature. Now Eugene Volokh observes:

It’s remarkable, then, how bad the editing in the Kerryisms really is. The Kerryisms author strips away necessary material, not just the “pointless embellishments.” In the process, he substantially changes the original author’s meaning; this often leads to the result’s conveying something the original author doesn’t want to convey(something authors rightly hate). At the same time, the Kerryisms author often omits other edits he should be making. And he makes all these mistakes with a smug, self-satisfied tone that leads the errors to just be more annoying.

Read the whole thing. A perverse thought: I wonder if all the traffic following the links from Eugene’s critiques isn’t what’s keeping these features alive?