Not long ago, groundless paranoid conspiracy allegations were floated against John McCain. What irritated me was not the idea that some crackpot would be making the allegations, but that such claims are being treated as "news" -- and are then believed by bloggers who ought to know better. In the case of the McCain allegations (he was said to have turned traitor and to have been living high in Hanoi with two prostitutes while pretending to be a prisoner), the smear was easily debunked by Ed Morrissey. (And by one of McCain's fellow POWs.)

Obviously, no responsible person should take these kinds of smears seriously, and normally I wouldn't. After all, I don't spend much time debunking 9/11 Truther business, as it's beneath me.

But when they are repeated by news outlets that should know better, when bloggers who should know better take them seriously, at that point a certain line is crossed.

Just as I couldn't ignore the outrageous smear against John McCain, I find myself unable to ignore the latest outrageous and unsubstantiated accusation against Barack Obama.

Once again, the biggest culprit turns out to be WorldNetDaily. (Via Shaun Mullen at the Moderate Voice who treats the link with the skepticism it deserves.)

Apparently, WND is proud to break this "story" -- and their readers are congratulating them:

Today the conservative website prides itself on being the only news organization to report - and by report, I mean use the headline 'Sleaze charge: I took drugs, had homo sex with Obama' - that some guy in Illinois posted a YouTube video alleging that he had sex and used drugs with Sen. Barack Obama in November 1999.

Then World Net Daily goes so far as to post a poll on the site that says, 'What do you think of WND being the only news agency publishing Obama drug-sex story?'

The people have spoken, and apparently 38.83% of WND readers (very different from Washington Blade readers, mind you) say, "This is something we simply call 'news,' and obviously WND is doing its fierce, independent job as the news leader."

Way to go, WND. The validity of a home-recorded YouTube video titled "Obama's Limo Sex & Drug Party" surely can't be disputed.

Here's my problem. It pains me to admit it, but I actually like and respect some of WND's editorial columnists. That's why I feel obligated to say something, because if I didn't, I'd be giving WND a pass. They should be held to the same standards to which bloggers hold every other damn news outlet. If they're not, things will only get worse.

The accuser has made four YouTube videos: here, here, here, and here.

His credibility has been attacked and the whole thing has been called a hoax (before WND it had only been reported only by a questionable news site), and the bloggers who linked it are also accused of being Ron Paul supporters. (As to why Ron Paul supporters would be interested in sabotaging the Obama campaign, I'm not sure, but I guess they're kooky enough.)

A blog called The Right Perspective did a long podcast interview with the accuser, and because I believe in being thorough, I listened to it in its entirety.

To put it mildly, I find the accuser and his story wholly lacking in credibility. At one point, the interviewer asks him whether he contacted Drudge, and the man claimed he'd never heard of Drudge. How can it be that someone who knows how to use YouTube and has been interviewed on a podcast has never heard of Drudge? He also claimed that when he met Obama he was making $200-300,000 a month selling drugs, but that Obama -- a state legislator who had declared his intention of running for Congress -- got in his limo and then bought cocaine for him.

And if that isn't fantastic enough, he says he was introduced to Obama by a limo driver for the "5 star limousine service" after telling him he was looking to go out and wanted to meet someone who would "show him Chicago." So the driver just, you know, went out and found Obama somewhere on the street in front of a lounge, and introduced him.

Riiiight.

But this was not a sex and drug date! The sex later just "happened out of the blue." The accuser says he wanted someone to hang out with because he was traveling. They had drinks first. He said he could really use a couple of lines to wake up. Then Obama made a phone call, the limo drove him somewhere, he got out of the limo came back with the drugs and then they left in the limo. The accuser says he gave Obama $250.00, then did a line off a CD case on his knee, started making advances, and this led to the sex. Then Obama asked to borrow his lighter and he knew that he was smoking crack.

But seeing as you can't snort crack cocaine, and powdered cocaine is different, that means that Obama either already had the crack, and just went running around like an errand boy buying this total stranger powdered cocaine, or else he made two purchases while doing the errand, one for himself. (Common sense suggests that this is all such extremely reckless and risky behavior for an up-and-coming legislator as to be ridiculous on its face, but hey, I'm not WorldNetDaily.)

After trashing Obama for buying a mansion, the accuser recited the details of how he started rubbing Obama's leg while doing a line. "When you're rubbing against someone's leg and they're not saying no, then you know you have an opportunity."

By the way, he says "I have never said that he's gay.... I can say that he's bisexual."

Michelle Obama, he asserts, is also a part of this coverup.

He says that when the limo driver comes out and admits this, Obama won't be able to deny it.

I'm tempted to ask just where the hell is this limo driver who introduces state legislators to gay travelers as tour guides and drug dealers, but I hate to spoil such a rich story.

Oh, and the next day, Obama came over for more sex.

Forgive me for repeating the details, but I can think of no other way to demonstrate how ridiculous and how downright implausible this "news" story is.

There is not one shred of evidence save this one man's word.

A number of Freepers claim the Clintons are behind it.

I hope they are not, because people who will do something like this are capable of anything.

What I want to know is why WorldNetDaily isn't running this man's story:

OK, I'm trying to be funny, and I'd like to laugh this all off, but it isn't the first time. That this is being treated as news by WorldNetDaily left me no choice but to painstakingly hear out the entire claim, word by word.

I'm feeling a bit too tired and a bit too depressed to illustrate the logical error involved. Otherwise, I might put my camera on a tripod, start the video recording, and then relate the story of lesbian S&M orgies in which Hillary Clinton forced me to participate, and the drugs she sold me.

(I'm still suffering from post traumatic stress, because her riding crop hurt me. And she never even let me wear a condom even though I asked for one. She kept saying "NO YOU CAN'T!"

I'm telling you, it's all seared, seared into my brain! Oh the horror!)