More obviousness for my Republican friends

Note to youse guys: If you want to blame Democrats, try using evidence.

You see, pointing to a Drudge Report post isn't "evidence". It's been long acknowledged that he posts whatever he's given without doing normal journalistic work like sourcing and confirmation - if it looks bad for a liberal, he assumes it's true (this is true of you also, my Republican friends, and is a crippling liability at the moment). "Evidence" is what ABC News has - you know, the actual IM's and e-mails which they've sourced and confirmed by getting them from either the actual pages or people involved in the case from the beginning.

Sourcing works this way: you get people who actually were involved to tell you what they did. Like, for example, the Majority Leader confirming that he personally told Denny Hastert about the Foley issue a year ago. Writing on a blog that you're "sure" Democrats knew about it and sat on it until it was politically expedient provides neither evidence nor sourcing.

Here's an interesting concept, too: Conservatives are now saying that the St. Petersburg Times and ABC News had the information and didn't release it immediately, so they must be responsible because their actions are hurting Republican election chances (because that's really the only important issue here). Has anyone in R-land considered that maybe ABC and the SP Times didn't run it immediately because it's so obviously damaging? That perhaps it was MORE responsible to sit on it until they could source and confirm what had happened - especially considering that if true, the story would certainly end careers?

NAAHHHHH, gotta be a liberal conspiracy!

Just a reminder, my Republican friends:

NO MATTER WHO LEAKED OR WHAT THE TIMING IS, MARK FOLEY INSTIGATED SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONVERSATIONS WITH TEENAGE BOYS IN THE DIRECT CARE OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS, REPUBLICAN LEADERS - WHO ARE IN CHARGE - KNEW AND FAILED TO STOP HIM.