The stupid. It burns us all.

SOP for rethugs. Attack based on your weaknesses.

Honestly, I expect it given the political back and forth on this. But to have the reporter utterly ignore his very up front role in the very issues that are now trying to be corrected? That was beyond sloppy.

Am epu’ing your question from the previous post, with edits:
Steele’s reporter’s utter ignorance of how DOJ their job is supposed to properly function is stunning. Or it’s deliberately feigned obtuseness, I can’t decide.
Or, is it lies by omission?

Oh, and I neglected to say that it was Charlie Savage doing the reporting — and he’s usually really good. Which poses the question whether it was an editorial decision to pull out any background on Von Spakovsky and his role in the politicization under Bush, and, if so, why.

Looking at the verbal diarrhea from the Dick, Steel’s word salads and this whiny baby stuff from Von Spakovsky, I can’t help wondering if there is a light at the end of this long dark tunnel. Why else would they be running (off at the mouth) scared?

Have you asked Charlie Savage whether his original text included a more vivid description of Von Spakovsky’s past sins in this arena? It does seem like an egregious omission, especially since it could be done in one paragraph, if not one line.

For example,

While he was at the Civil Rights Division, Mr. von Spakovsky played a major role in the implementation of practices which injected partisan political factors into decision-making on enforcement matters and into the hiring process, and included repeated efforts to intimidate career staff. Moreover, he was the point person for undermining the Civil Rights Division’s mandate to protect voting rights. Foremost amongst his actions was his central decision-making role on a matter where he clearly should have recused himself.

Yet another example of R’s accusing Dems of outrageous behavior — “politciizing!” !! — because they know they would do/did do it themselves.

They can’t imagine (as I thinkk Christy has probably said) anyone actually acting from principle, not for partisan advantage.

Only slightly OT, via Atrios:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09…..ts.html?hp

One of your “favorite” topics, Christy – how hard it is to get the “unqualified” people out of DOJ…

(That’s the first link in Christy’s post)

Remember when we used to have a functioning press corps? Oh, back sometime around 1973 or so?

It’s not an accident that it’s changed for the worse since then. It was made to change.

HI, There. I sort of wonder the same thing, + do they know how funny they are….sort of like reminding Laura that she lives with a dummy who murders lots of people and laughs….Just a reminder.

Is he allowed to say naked? I..I was just wondering.

So it’s Hans in the right-wing projection booth today? Not surprised. Oh, and please, Hans, don’t be naked.

Is this the start of a long expected GOP effort to make race an issue? If so then the rest of the Media should start reporting this story from Han’s viewpoint of course without mentioning his background.
Pat Buchanan and Morning Joe should be doing the follow up with Fox leading the charge.
Does the Public Option was the most popular sign at my Town hall in Washington state.

What is Hans doing now for a paycheck? Who is funding him Whole Foods, Wallmart, Blackwater, Steve Forbes? A consumer boycott of funders of right wing think tanks in this economy can hurt any business nobody can afford a 5% drop in profits now.

I would boycott anything anywhere anytime as long as it is labeled fascist .

Speaking of boycotts, could today be the day, that the men in white suits carrying butterfly nets finally come for Glenn Beck?

If (that) one is known by the enemies one makes, then I’d say Obama is doing a pretty good job.

Write to public@nytimes.com.
They should address that.

I like that visual. Beck running in circles, with his arms flailing in the air… wait a minute, he does that everyday. I guess the men in the white coats are the icing on the cake. Yesss.

Why today more than another? ;) And, OT: Gonzo has spoken back, taking issue with Dicky

The NYT article also made my blood boil–citing this horrible example of a politicization of his own DOJ job and his attacks on absentee ballots, without a word that his own words fall far short of any credibility on this issue.

The TImes should be called to account someday. I recall in a much earlier tribute to Teddy Kennedy, before his death, the largely laudatory quotations from the senator’s colleagues were interrupted with another, that of Anne Coulter, calling TK a drunken, fat slob… under the guise of ‘balance’ the Times saying he also ‘has his critics.’ This was not criticism, it was pure vitriol.

It’s a gosh-darned shame that the article could not include Hans Von Sparky’s voice. The credibility just falls to the way-side when that Tool speaks.

So who’s really surprised by V-Spak? The right is crawling with paranoid personalities. And the content of their thought is notoriously projective.

What does it say that the Bushies and Cheneys dispensed more Wingnut Welfare to Hans than to ‘Fredo, once his boss two or three times removed?

Why does ‘Fredo, who did so much to obscure the legal ground and permit Cheney’s worst abuses, “merit” so little support when his underlings (including Sampson, Goodling and von Spakovsky) received so much?

Why is ‘Fredo so expendable? Because he’s Latino and he’s lumped into the Right’s discriminatory anti-immigration basket? Because the Right has so much dirt on him and those he cares for that they are cocksure he won’t spill any beans?

Look how hard Cheney worked to garner support for Scooter Libby, a close confidante for decades. Imagine how much easier it would be for a top prosecutor to roll ‘Fredo and get him to turn state’s evidence? Or is he so easily rolled, his “integrity” so besmirched, his public lies and contradictory that the Right is confident his testimony wouldn’t hold up? Even if it didn’t hold up in court, his disclosures could help keep the Right from the White House or Congressional majorities for another election cycle or two.

Oops – that’s what happens when you skim really reallly fast….
mea culpa.