rssWhen You’ve Lost Powerline…
Wednesday, January 07, 2009 at 9:16 am
- 11 Comments
The deeply flawed Wall Street Journal editorial on the Minnesota Senate recount was too much even for the bloggers at Powerline, the “Land of 10,000 Lakes”-based Website whose lawyer/writers pinned Dan Rather to the wall back in 2004. Scott Johnson writes:
There was no noticeable partisan division among the board. I reject any imputation of misconduct to the board such as is implicit in the Journal editorial. Whatever inconsistencies the board committed in ruling on challenged ballots and other issues do not result from partisan mischief.
This isn’t to say that Johnson thinks Al Franken’s win was legitimate: He attacks Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie for “collusion” with Franken and recommends that incumbent former Sen. Norm Coleman (R) hire a “new quarterback” who is tougher than his current team (which includes President George. W. Bush’s 2000 Florida recount lawyer Ben Ginsburg) to fight back.
But if the Journal is wrong about “partisan misconduct,” that takes oomph out of the argument that the Minnesota Supreme Court needs to intervene for a new recount. The idea that Minnesota Democrats stole the election is what Coleman and the conservative media are trying to push here, not the idea that the canvassing board made a few decisions that broke Franken’s way.
Follow David Weigel on Twitter
11 Comments
Comment posted January 7, 2009 @ 9:24 am
WSJ really lost points with a lot of people. The real disappointment is that WSJ has become more of a tabloid newspaper since Murdoch took over and it's telling of their continued downward trek toward mediocrity that this editorial spews.
Comment posted January 7, 2009 @ 9:57 am
“incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman (R)”
That label is so last week. An incumbent is someone who currently holds the office. At the moment, the office is empty. (In fact, it's locked.) He's “former Sen. Norm Coleman (R)” now.
Comment posted January 7, 2009 @ 12:17 pm
You are correct. This was my error in editing this post, not Dave's. The post has been updated to correct this mistake. My apologies.
Comment posted January 7, 2009 @ 5:24 pm
WSJ really lost points with a lot of people. The real disappointment is that WSJ has become more of a tabloid newspaper since Murdoch took over and it's telling of their continued downward trek toward mediocrity that this editorial spews.
Comment posted January 7, 2009 @ 5:57 pm
“incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman (R)”
That label is so last week. An incumbent is someone who currently holds the office. At the moment, the office is empty. (In fact, it's locked.) He's “former Sen. Norm Coleman (R)” now.
Comment posted January 7, 2009 @ 8:17 pm
You are correct. This was my error in editing this post, not Dave's. The post has been updated to correct this mistake. My apologies.
Comment posted September 5, 2011 @ 2:40 am
Karen Millen through the united states . states offers plenty of entrepreneurs additionally to clients.
Comment posted September 5, 2011 @ 2:45 am
Chloe Sunglasses aren’t limited to individuals who spend some time in water.
Comment posted September 6, 2011 @ 9:19 am
Congratulations on having One of the most sophisticated blogs Ive come throughout in some time! Its just incredible what you can remember from a little something simply because of how visually beautiful it’s. Youve put collectively a good blog space -great graphics, videos, layout. This is certainly undoubtedly a must-see weblog!
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
