You know, if the MSM is going to go through the effort of a coordinated "doom and gloom for Republicans" campaign you'd think they'd try to spread it out more so it's not as obvious. Today must have been circled on their calendar because they're really unloading as much as they can at the same time.

That last one is particularly blatant: Approval of Republicans At Record Low. BullDogPundit noticed something about the data:

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.

Posted by: Gary at 10:15 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 2 kb.

1 It is a great headline, but a damn dangerous one. Have you figured that out?

Posted by: Fresh flowers delivered at October 20, 2006 04:07 AM (vcUSw)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

So the Washington Times has an editorial up calling for Speaker Hastert to resign.

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.

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.

UPDATE:
...or better yet, as Hugh Hewitt advises: "Don't Resign, Speaker Hastert. Swing Back."

Posted by: Gary at 07:15 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 301 words, total size 2 kb.

First let me be point out that, as I posted earlier, I'm disgusted by Rep. Foley's actions. I've already made it clear what course of action the Congressman should take.

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.

Both Curt at Flopping Aces and Mark at Decision '08 have found some sources for that smell. Go read through what they've found.

Posted by: Gary at 07:25 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.