I got this one via another blog, but the post has been deleted for some reason. Anyway, here’s something to take a look at: the 2006 Connecticut Senate election results.

And now let’s take a look at the numbers from 2000:

A little fishy, no? Now, the blog I snipped this from seems to have been a fiercely “liberals suck” kind of thing, and that this situation isn’t evidence of a democrat conspiracy may have precipitated the deletion.

And that is the peculiar part. In 2000 it would have been the democrats handing Lieberman his victory, but in 2006 it would have been the democrats handing it to Lamont. Does Holy Joe have personal connections to the vote counters? Very strange indeed that his main challenger would stop at the same number each time.

I make lots of comments about the redcoats on the site, and I don’t hide that. Whenever a story crops up or I see a video that shows a particularly ugly side of the right I comment on it. Periodically I do it as a snarky comment about an election or what I anticipate will be a reaction to something. I’m very harsh on the right, but it’s only in the context of another story.

However, one thing I have not done since I was green in the political blogging world is waste entire articles on rambling about conservatives (though I did make that “conservative handbook” a while ago, but that was just for the sake of comedy). Take this guy, and yes I know I responded with an article bigger than his and am now writing yet another. He’s written a list about “uninformed liberals,” with points like these:

- These are the liberals that still believe that President Bush went AWOL in the National Guard just because Tom Brokaw reported it on 60 minutes. No need to comment on this one.

- These are the liberals that think all conservatives are white, upper class males.

Now, this is where my problem comes around. I know lots of uninformed people, I know lots of liberals, I know lots of conservatives, I know lots of independents and 3rd party types. I have never heard anyone say either of these, nor any of the points on his list. Right off the bat, I thought us liberals thought conservatives were dumb redneck bible thumpers, while we consider ourselves the educated elite. These are straw men of the highest order, made so the list maker feels better about himself.

But here’s the nugget of the problem: I watch highlights on FOX, I listen to Rush periodically, I’m familiar with the books they write. So much energy is spent by conservatives on insulting liberals. Ann Coulter’s written multiple books on the subject, O’Reilly and Hannity use lots of air times talking about liberals (or “secular progressives” to use Bill-O’s term), and Limbaugh frequently babbles about the evil liberals.

Conversely, even the ultra-lib Keith Olbermann rarely, if ever, talks about how awful conservatives are. In Al Franken’s books he goes after specific targets, but with one exception that I can think of doesn’t attack entire ideologies. John Stewart? Never says anything about conservatives (I don’t consider him a liberal so much as a comedian, but whatever).

It bothers me, frankly. Lists about liberals, books about liberals, airtime spent talking about liberals. These people should spend time just talking about issues. Go after liberals specifically, throw in a comment now and again, but these general-sweeping straw men do nothing good whatsoever. Often I think it’s just to pound out some words and to sound smart, which is exactly why I’m doing it.

Before you hit me up about the irony of writing an article about conservatives who write articles about liberals, at least give me credit for sticking to examples instead of sweeping generalizations.