The latest New York Times did yet another story on Steele…

…only this time it had a very welcome sentence in it.

Mr. Steele declined a request for an interview.

Dan Riehl caught this first, and I concur: there are times when you pick yourself up, walk it off, and get back to work – and Steele’s gotten to that point. Yes, the media doesn’t love the GOP, except as a punching bag. And yes, the media loves to see Red-on-Red fights, the latest of which has spent far too much time occupying people’s brains than it should have for the last two weeks. And yes, there are ongoing philosophical issues between the various factions of the GOP that are causing all sorts of dynamic tension / impending meltdown / what have you.

Meanwhile, there’s a race going on up in NY-20. Is that less important to you than whether Steele’s sufficiently pro-life? If it isn’t, Tedisco can always use the help. There’s also a race going on over in IL-05. Are you looking for a better hill to fight and maybe die on than whether or not Rush is going to doom the GOP? If you are, Pulido wants to hear from you. Virginia and New Jersey are having elections for governor this year. Are you tired of the debate over who should be the next Presidential candidate? Then the NJ GOP and the VA GOP would be happy to redirect your interests to something a bit more topical.

I could go on, but hopefully you get the point. There is business that must be attended to, and at this point we are merely amusing the Other Side.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

2 thoughts on “The latest New York Times did yet another story on Steele…”

Comments are closed.