nice diversion, but it's not gonna slip by.
No diversion here. You claimed that the story had only been covered by capitolhillblue.com
I proved you wrong on that account.
as for liberal bias (gasp! whoda thunk? it still exists?
Were talking about capitolhillblue.com specifially.
You suggested the paper had a liberal bias.
The burden of proof is on you.
You have yet to step up to the plate.
this was a response to you trying to prop up your source's legitimacy
And mine was a response to your failure to show any specific claims made by the article to be erroneous (which, BTW, you still have not done.)
i've never mentioned this either
But do you deny it? (Subscribing to the "no difference between the two major parties" doctrine?
"Atta boy, mosca! Keep up the good work, and we'll make you an honorary Republican! (And don't worry--you won't actually have to register")