Following the coverage of the Massachusetts Senate special election the past few weeks meant I had to read The Boston Globe online.

Much of The Globe’s coverage was geared towards gaming the election for Martha Coakley, including the disingenuous announcement on election morning that the race was a dead heat, when all the polling data suggested otherwise.

The Globe makes its corporate parent, The New York Times, seem downright fair and balanced.

So no surprise at this paragraph from The Globe’s headline news article about Scott Brown’s victory (emphasis mine):

Brown, an obscure state senator with an unremarkable record when he entered the race four months ago, was a household name across the country by the end of the abbreviated campaign. Running a vigorous, smart, and error-free campaign, he became a vessel into which cranky and worried voters poured their frustrations and fears, ending the Democrats’ grip on a Senate seat the party has held for 58 years, nearly all by two brothers named Kennedy.

This is a classy blog, so I can’t say how I really feel about The Globe’s obsessive need to insult anyone who does not agree with its liberal political agenda, although I came pretty close on Monday to saying how I felt about Keith Olbermann.

Last night the people of Massachusetts told The Globe how they felt. And no amount of editorial snark can change that now.

Related Posts:
Political Science?
With Advice Like This, Dems Don’t Need Enemies
Bangladesh Lost The MA Election

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
Bookmark and Share