I am beginning to think Lamnidae is not even trying to be consistent anymore.

After all the hot air about Erik Iverson, they go ahead and sing the praises of Jim Messina;

It should be interesting to see what happens in Montana Democratic politics with would seem to be a bit of a power vacuum as a result. I get the impression that most major political decisions–at least those that relate to campaigns–get vetted through Mr. Messina.

Where to begin?  Hell, I think I am just going to let the hypocrisy stand.  Or maybe I should try harder to understand a world where it is bad if a Republican CoS handles political issues, but good, or at least non-controversial that a Democrat CoS does the same thing, only you know in smoke-filled backrooms.

5 Responses to “Whats Good for Baucus, Bad for Rehberg? Pt. 2”

Wiley Cody

June 16th, 2008 - 6:21 pm

Ha ha ha ha! Seriously. Hehehehe!

Good catch Brad.

Montana Headlines

June 16th, 2008 - 10:12 pm

It’s called a double-standard. Surprised?

[…] were shown to be a hypocrite once.  My suggestion would be to turn off the partisan blinders for a little while - or just get over […]

Lamnidae

July 9th, 2008 - 12:03 pm

There’s a clear difference, that I’d imagine even you guys can ascertain: Iverson is in an official position with the party and Jim Messina was simply the chief advisor to the top of the Dem ticket. If you guys can’t see the distinction, I don’t know how to make it more clear.

[…] of criticizing Republicans for daring to fill political roles. Of course, Big Sky Cairn has already taken her to task for her […]

Leave a Reply