In an article headlined "The Conservative Machine's Unexpected Turn," Washington Post reporter Peter Baker gets a little too light in the metaphor department. He begins by noting that the White House wanted to build an army to fight for his judicial nominees. "Yet now, as the president struggles to sell the nomination of Harriet Miers, much of Bush's army is refusing to leave the barracks -- and part of it is even going over to the insurgency."
Since the "I" word is now standard lingo for the press to describe the anti-democratic terrorists of Iraq, is that really the best image for the Washington Post to apply to disappointed conservatives? (While Baker used the word "conservative" eight times in the article, and quoted Jay Sekulow with another two C-words, reporter Chris Cillizza's piece today on Emily's List -- the PAC that funds only pro-abortion female Democrats -- didn't have a single liberal label in it.) This is not the first time Peter Baker has grown a little overenthusiastic in his metaphors.
On April 1, 1999, Baker grew rhapsodic over the Senate campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton, the....queen of the world? "But the sight of the First Lady back on the world stage where she feels so sure-footed brought into sharp focus the peculiar trade-offs facing her as she decides whether to run next year....How does a woman who eagerly told an audience this morning about education and economics in Guatemala and Uganda turn her attention to the pork-and-potholes issues that arise in places like Utica and Ithaca? How does a woman whose international profile is so high that bystanders in Africa two years ago referred to her as ‘the queen of the world’ adjust to becoming a low-ranking member of the seniority-conscious Senate?" It made Baker the runner up in our year-end "Hillary Rodham worshipping" category.