- The Note insults our intelligence with the pretense that the conservative Washington Post editorial page is not conservative, writing, "Pigs flew on Sunday, when the Washington Post endorsed Roberts for Chief." Remember, they are the guys who told us what a great response the federal government had made to Katrina.
Even without getting into a deeper debate about the political slant of the Post, this is ridiculous. Their first editorial, after his original nomination to the Court, was mostly positive, and demanded the Demcorats and liberal groups give him a "dignified confirmation process." They complained about Democratic treatment of Roberts in 2001. They regularly complained about Democratic obstructionism and repeatedly told Democrats not to use the tactics that Republicans used for years.
Miguel Estrada? Supported by the Post
Priscilla Owen? Supported by the Post
Michael McConnell? Supported by the Post.
The only nominee they opposed, I believe, was Pryror, and even as they were opposing him they would deride the Democrats for doing the same.
Whatever else the Post is, the idea that anyone working in the Washington press would've imagined for an instant that, barring some unforseen revelation, the Post would've opposed Roberts is ridiculous. The people writing for the Note are not that stupid, whatever their flaws, so there's only one thing left to conclude: they enjoy doing their part to continue to perpetuate the notion that the beltway media, of which the Washington Post sits on top, is liberal.
Corrupt.