October 19, 2006
There is absolutely no demographic information given about the poll respondents. No party ID, no ages, incomes, no indication of how many of them actually voted in 2002 or 2004 (or an indication of who they voted for if they did vote), whether they consider themselves liberal, conservative or moderate. I mean, is context too much to ask of the MSM? No need to answer.And the data is "registered voters", not "likely voters". But, hey, it makes a great headline right?
October 03, 2006
Here's the funny part. Up until this moment, Liberals have considered the low-circulation daily to be nothing more than a GOP talking points rag and derided it every chance they would get.
Now watch them laud the paper for its profile in courage.
Bunk. Don Surber has hit the nail on the head here. The Times is taking the opportunity to force Republicans to clean house:
The Washington Times has an agenda to push the Republican Party further to the right, rendering it as useless as the lefty-dominated Democratic Party.Yes, the Right has its Kos-sacks, too.
There is no appeasing these loons on either side.
It's a fact that the Times often features the side of the story that the Washington Post and the NY Times won't. And I've often linked them to support my own arguments, as I will continue to do.
But this kind of a move, without the benefit of a full investigation, is ridiculous. And the fact that they leaked it to Drudge the night before to get the buzz going is indicitive of the agenda of their editorial board - a party purge.
Expect more from the ranks of the hard Right to echo the Times' demand. These are also the people who think it benefits the GOP in the long run to lose now so they can win later, with a more "ideologically pure" slate of candidates. Sound familiar? Maybe like the Ned Lamont supporters?
Sorry, guys. But losing is for losers. Not to mention the fact that the stakes are just too high.
Speaker Hastert would do well to ignore them.
...or better yet, as Hugh Hewitt advises: "Don't Resign, Speaker Hastert. Swing Back."
October 02, 2006
That being said, as the bigger story begins to spread to the GOP leadership who supposedly "knew" he was a pedophile, there's something about this that feels awfully familiar. Like Rathergate. The timing of this story is really suspicious.
And just as they did two years ago, the blogoshere is smelling a rat and doing some extensive analysis of the way this went down.
114 queries taking 0.0646 seconds, 227 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.