Michael Tomasky is not content to argue, in the wake of Mary Landrieu's defeat, that Democrats should write off the South as politically unfriendly territory.  In his Daily Beast item of today, Tomasky goes to great lengths to trash the region in the ugliest of terms.

"Reactionary, prejudice-infested, fetid, reject[ing] nearly everything that’s good about this country, just one big nuclear waste site of choleric, and extremely racialized, resentment," is how Tomasky slurs most of the South, saying "almost the entire region" is as he describes it. 



On Sunday, CNN’s Inside Politics spent several minutes hyping the supposed headache Tea Partiers could give GOP leadership despite the Republican Party winning their 54th Senate seat following Saturday’s runoff in Louisiana. During the discussion, Robert Costa of The Washington Post insisted that Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is trying “to govern responsibly and he wants to set the party up for major gains in '16. And that started in 2014 by pushing back the Tea Party and it starts now by making sure that all the passions and eagerness in the House don't overtake the party.”  



Clashes between leaders in the Democratic Party are rarely reported by the press, which regularly points out even the slightest disagreement among Republicans as a sign that the GOP is crumbling before our very eyes.

That wasn't the case on Tuesday, when New York Times columnist Thomas B. Edsal asked if ObamaCare is destroying the Democratic Party because that “redistribution scheme has angered and alienated working-class and middle-class Americans.”



On December 11, the continuing resolution currently funding the federal government will expire and that seemed like the perfect opportunity for the folks at National Public Radio to speculate about a possible GOP-caused government shutdown. Appearing on NPR’s Morning Edition on Monday, December 1, Steve Inskeep and Cokie Roberts went to great lengths discussing how the Republican Party could shut down the federal government. Even though Roberts conceded that a shutdown was unlikely, the NPR correspondent did her best to repeatedly play up how the GOP wants to “to keep the option open all the time.” 



Sometimes, one has to remember that op-ed writers don't always get to pick their headlines, though I would hope that they're allowed to register their objections. So it's not clear that Los Angeles Times guest blogger Joel Silberman is responsible for the headline at his Monday blog post about how, or even whether, to deal with relatives who disagree with you politically on Thanksgiving.

But Silberman's resume indicates that he would probably have been comfortable with the headline used: "What to do if your crazy right-wing uncle comes for Thanksgiving." Excerpts and some background on Silberman follow the jump (bolds and numbered tags are mine; links in final two excerpted paragraphs are in original):



An Associated Press story late this afternoon has New York Senator Chuck Schumer saying the darnedest things, with only a tiny bit of pushback from reporter Charles Babington.

In the wake of a midterm election rout which saw Republicans win at least eight Senate seats, increase their House majority, and take gubernatorial races in at least three deep blue states (MD, MA, and IL), Schumer now says that Democrats erred in pushing passage of the Affordable Care act, aka Obamacare, at the supposed expense of economic issues. Hey Chuck, that's because the Keynesian clowns in the Obama administration thought they had the economy totally under control in 2009 thanks to the stimulus plan.



Demonstrating that serving as the Palace Guard for Dear Leader is a 24-7-365 enterprise, Zachary A. Goldfarb, policy editor at The Washington Post, somehow felt the need on Sunday morning to critique the Saturday Night Live opening skit which appeared the previous evening.

Twelve hours after the skit was first broadcast, Goldfarb, whose whose full archive going back to August indicates that he has not written a WaPo item for Sunday publication in the past four months, nitpicked a comedy skit for — oh the humanity! — failing to distinguish between an "Executive Order" and "executive action" (bolds are mine):



Immigration is the issue where the New York Times' liberal slant is most obvious, and the paper's heavy coverage Friday and Saturday held true to form, after President Obama's prime-time Thursday announcement that he would bypass Congress and grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. Obama even used the same "out of the shadows" phrase liberals -- and the Times -- use so often, while the Times insisted Republican resistance was futile.



While all three major broadcast networks covered the failed vote in the U.S. Senate to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline on Tuesday night, ABC and NBC neglected to mention that political motivations were behind the vote to aid the reelection efforts of vulnerable Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana that will take place on December 6. 

After previously being held up in the Senate for years, the vote was finally allowed early Tuesday night and fell one vote short of the 60 votes needed for passage as only 14 Democratic Senators joined with all 45 Republicans to approve the measure.



In a Tuesday article, Baltimore Sun media critic David Zurawik examined the reason behind Fox News beating every other TV news outlet in the ratings – including NBC, ABC and CBS – during November 4 midterm election coverage: "...it's time to think seriously about what that says about Fox, CNN, MSNBC, the state of network news today and the role TV plays or doesn't play in providing us with reliable, trustworthy information."



Now online: the November 17 edition of Notable Quotables, MRC’s bi-weekly compilation of the latest outrageous quotes in the liberal media. This week, as voters dealt Democrats a stinging election defeat, liberal journalists insisted there was no mandate for conservatives. "I don't think this was a big, ideological election," NBC's Tom Brokaw pronounced, while CBS's Bob Schieffer agreed: "It really was a referendum on both parties."



The New York Times and Washington Post both enthusiastically greeted the announcement of President Obama's plans (conveniently announced after the election, constitutional objections aside) to bypass Congress and declare amnesty for some illegal immigrants, or as the Times cutely put it, "to enforce the nation’s laws with discretion."