Fleisher appeared on Fox News this afternoon to criticize Sen. Arlen Specter's decision to jump to the Democratic Party today.
Specifically, Fleisher thought Specter's move was dishonorable and that Specter should have done what Sen. Joe Lieberman did in CT when he faced a tough inner-party challenge: take his lumps in the primary and then run as an independent in the general election.
You know there is a case where somebody actually did it honorably, and that was Joe Lieberman. He stood his ground, stood his principles, lost his primary and said I have more to offer, and ran as an Independent in a 3-way race, and the people of Connecticut elected him. Sen. Specter could have chosen that path. It would have been the more honorable, principled path.
Slight problem. According to PA election law, a candidate who loses a primary challenge cannot run in the general election, even if he/she becomes an independent.
You know WSJ editorial writers have lost all credibility when a right-wing partisan blog like Power Line calls them out for faulty writing/logic. The topic of the Journal editorial today is Norm Coleman's never-ending election appeal in Minnesota. There are all kinds of irregularities. Justice has been denied. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
Yet even Power Line concludes the Journal has no idea what it's talking about [emphasis added]:
The Journal doesn't show much familiarity with the facts related to the implications of wrongoing [sic] in their two editorials on the Minnesota recount. In particular, today's editorial shows no evidence of familiarity with (i.e., of its author having read) the three-judge election contest panel decision in favor of Franken. The decision bears reading by anyone seriously interested in the facts of the case. I am sorry to say that reading the decision persuades me that the Journal's encouragement of Senator Coleman's pursuit of an appeal is misguided because he has no chance of winning such an appeal.
We give Power Line credit for standing up for the facts in Minnesota. We just think it's funny Power Line pretends it's a big deal that a Journal editorial shows not familiarity with the facts.
Here's how the AP described the three-judge ruling from Minnesota that Al Franken had won his disputed election with Norm Coleman [emphasis added]:
A Minnesota court confirmed Monday that Democrat Al Franken won the most votes in his 2008 Senate race against Republican Norm Coleman.
And the headline:
MN court declares Franken leading vote-getter
As the Brad Blog asks, doesn't the AP really mean to say that Franken won the election?
Leave it to Politico to completely botch things up.
Yesterday, a three-judge panel in Minnesota officially declared Al Franken the winner in the U.S. Senate race between him and incumbent Norm Coleman, who's currently in month number five of his election appeals. Coleman's now going to appeal the judges' ruling to the Minnesota Supreme Court, and if he loses there, he might take his case to federal court, which could drag things out through for much of the year.
OK, that's the background. Here's Politico's priceless write-up [emphasis added]:
Even as the two sides were awaiting Monday's ruling, they were engaged in a message war - with Franken's allies amping up the pressure on Coleman to quit and Republicans blaming Franken for dragging out the process.
So not only won't Politico finally come out and call Norm Coleman a sore loser for adopting his rope-a-dope legal strategy, but Politico conveyor belts the GOP claim that it's Franken who's dragging the proceedings out.
We'd ask not why the media fail to describe Coleman as a "sore loser", but rather, why it is that
particularly since Tuesday's final count of any remaining, lawfully cast, previously uncounted absentee ballots
the media fail to describe Coleman as the loser at all, much less a sore one.
It's true. The press won't even come out and say Coleman lost the election, even though the state, and courts, of Minnesota have unequivocally announced that Franken got more votes. Last time we checked that meant Coleman lost.
Go read the whole item. Along with the press critique, there's lots of interesting legal details regarding the state of Coleman's recount challenge.
During an interview with Norm Coleman, Fox & Friends co-hosts Gretchen Carlson and Brian Kilmeade advanced a slew of misinformation about the Minnesota Senate race.
Back on its ACORN hobby horse, Fox News attacks the community organizing group and its possible role as a national partner with the Census Bureau to recruit more than one million temporary workers to go knock on doors for the upcoming census.
Fox stresses ACORN has "a history of voter fraud charges." Actually, that's how the headline is worded. In the actual online article, Fox News insists ACORN has a "history of voter fraud." (The pesky ref to "charges" gets dropped.) But does ACORN have a history of voter fraud? An ACORN rep tells Fox the organization has never been convicted of any crime, and the Fox article doesn't produce any evidence to the contrary.
It's true Republicans, amplified by Fox News, aired endless unproven charges against the group last fall and painted the understaffed outfit as an all-powerful cabal. But there's no proof ACORN's done anything wrong. But now Fox News claims that because unproven charges have been waged in the past (amplified by Fox News), that the group is suspect.
That's a nifty Noise Machine trick.
We recently noted how the folks at Pew Research Center seems quite interested in making claim that most Americans wouldn't care if their local newspaper folded. We highlighted the oddity of Pew's push since that's not what the finding of its own polls found. In fact, 55 percent of Americans would care if their local newspaper went under.
Why does Pew seem so interested in claiming nobody cares about newspapers?
Over the weekend, Pew's president Andrew Kohut appeared on NPR's "On the Media," to amplify the false claim that readers wouldn't miss newspapers, as well as amplifying the false claim that readers don't think their civic life would be hurt if their daily stopped publishing. In fact, according to Pew's own polling, 74 percent of readers think civic life would take a hit if the local newspaper went under.
Kohut also made the false claim that only "oldsters" think newspapers "play an important role in American society." Not true. According to Pew's own survey results, 72 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 39 think the death of a local newspaper would hurt civic life.
Loading the player reg...
With Norm Coleman's hopes of retaining his seat in the U.S. Senate looking slimmer by the day, a reporter from the Washington Post and an editorial from the Pioneer Press have a suggestion to (prolong the already months long election contest) bring things to a close.
Despite the fact that Al Franken won the recount and continues to hold onto the lead...
Despite the fact that Norm Coleman has been handed legal set-back after legal set-back...
Despite the fact that Minnesota is losing out with only one Senator in Washington...
Despite the fact that conservatives are using the lack of an additional Democratic Senator to stymie President Obama's agenda...
Despite all of this, the Washington Post's Shailagh Murray and the Pioneer Press think it might be a good idea to scrap everything that has happened since Election Day and instead hold a run-off election, something that even Minnesota election law doesn't allow?
How about some critical reporting that holds Coleman accountable for his hypocritical legal wrangling? Perhaps that would speed things along.
Loading the player reg...
In a fundraising email "[p]aid for by The National Republican Trust PAC," Dick Morris claimed that "the Democrats want to give almost $5 billion to groups like ACORN" in the recovery bill. In fact, the bill does not mention ACORN or otherwise single it out for funding; ACORN itself has said that it is ineligible for the funds and has no plans to apply for them.
From the February 3 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
Loading the player reg...
Loading the player reg...
In an article about the Minnesota Senate election recount trial, the AP reported that "voters testified Tuesday their ballots had been unfairly rejected as Republican Norm Coleman argued thousands of disqualified absentee ballots should be counted in the U.S. Senate race" and quoted one voter who testified that he felt his ballot had been improperly rejected. However, the AP did not note that the testimony of two of those voters reportedly showed that their ballots appear to have been properly rejected.