The Washington Times[http://wwww.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060907-082834-5145r.htm ] has a subtly uproarious editorial entitled "Thanks, Sen. Allen et al.," praising the increasingly erratic politician for introducing and amendment to restore funding for brain injury treatment for veterans to the defense appropriations bill. What's noteworthy about the amendment is that he stole it, word for word, from Dick Durbin (D-IL), who was about to introduce it but stepped aside at Allen's request.
The embarrassing Allen has been driving Republican operatives crazy ever since the "Macaca" fiasco. This latest stunt is yet another bizarro catastrophe in a campaign that the GOP has to win; so Tony Blankley (the Unification Times's editorial page domo) is desperately trying to put a happy spin on the situation. He describes Jim Webb's pointing out Allen's blatant political pilfering of the Durbin amendment as "political mudslinging" and a "manufactured 'Whose idea was it?' controversy," but retreats to safer ground:
Even assuming that Mr. Webb's allegation were true, so what? No one cares whose idea it was; voters only care that it gets done. How ironic that Mr. Webb, a combat-injured Vietnam veteran who fancies himself a political outsider, would get himself so entrapped in inside-the-Beltway politics.
This is really the Blankster at his best: high-quality journalistic damage control that oh-so-subtly slips a stiletto between Allen's shoulder blades while at the same time patting him on the back. I love the "et al.," as well as the "so what?" A true tour de force.
cwhig