Originally Posted by Impugn

The Democrat shenanigans currently affect a slim Senate majority. When Tim Johnson had his health problems, the MSM was all on top of the prospect that a GOP leader would be appointing his replacement under very specific rules should Johnson have to step down and/or die. This would have resulted in a defacto GOP Senate (VP with tie-breaking vote). The MSM even went so far as to suggest (via my "favorite" MSM tactic) that "some people say..." the GOP governor should appoint a Democrat to replace a Democrat out of the spirit of bipartisanship. Kumbaya and whatnot.

Where was the MSM outcry and calls for "bipartisanship" when Sen Heinz bit the big one in PA and the governor appointed a Democrat to replace him? Again...::crickets chirping::...

Name me an occasion where the GOP pulled some shit like without MSM rallying against it. You can't. The de-gerrymandering of Texas as some sort of example (districting that had ridiculously preserved a Democrat majority in the state legislature in what is clearly a Red State) doesn't wash because all major MSM outlets were shilling for the Democrats the whole time.

So, yeah, one is indeed worse than the other. The fact that you don't recognize that is testament to nothing but the effectiveness of the MSM (on some people, apparently).

Unfortunately, Massachusetts matters. They all do. They might be acting locally, but they're thinking nationally...if not globally. Shouldn't be that hard for you to grasp that concept seeing as people freely ascribe that mentality to just about everything else.