OT: on the subject of Rogan, here's one of your "planted" articles from a week back, from the chief disseminator of WH spin, as I've been informed countless times. The rag of rags, according the impeachment advocates, as opposed to "objective" Drudge and the Washington Times. Judging from the editorial page, I credit the WSJ with about the same level of objectivity as those last two.
A Rising Star Risks Being Eclipsed by His Growing Notoriety nytimes.com
Even without the impeachment issue, Rogan's district would have been a battleground in 2000. The 27th Congressional District, which runs along the San Gabriel Mountains from Burbank and Glendale through Pasadena and San Marino, is in transition. Registered Democrats now hold the majority over Republicans in these Los Angeles suburbs by 44 to 39 percent. In November, Rogan was barely re-elected, with 50.8 percent of the vote, over an unknown whom he outspent two-to-one.
My comment at the time was, red meat or dead meat? It looks to me like Rogan would be a tempting target regardless. As for the general issue of payback, the Republican majority in the House is paper thin. I'd say offhand that it's reasonable for Democrats to put on a big push there. Anyway, I've been assured countless times by the hobgoblin free minds of the right that the impeachment push will be forgotten in a month, but starting 6 months from now Democrats will be hanging their heads in shame for the next 30 years as Clinton is finally revealed to be the antichrist. |
