My point, and I did have what I assumed was a glaringly obvious one, was that the NYT response to Reid's activities, however they play out on the scale of corruption, was to immediately downgrade Reid's offense and then list three Republicans that are in trouble.
If you need to have your nose rubbed in it a bit more, notice that Jefferson's name, while making headlines for weeks, seems to have evaded their little list of examples.
Now, I was going to write that last sentence like this:
"If you need to have your nose rubbed in it a bit more, see if you can see which name is missing from their little list of examples."
Except I was absolutely sure you were going to come back with "I don't know. Which one?"
I know it's a lot of fun to pull my chain. You can't be this damn thick.
Current Events » in reply to Ah. Inconsistency
re: Ah. Non sequitor
The whole thread (30 posts)
- Harry Reid ethics standards above the rest?