The WSJ has double standards of its own on Roy Moore

The #NeverTrumps over at the Wall Street Journal's editorial page are warning Republicans that a win by Alabama GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore would be bad.

But as Alabamans decide, they should consider that there are strong moral and practical reasons to reject Mr. Moore. For one thing, Republicans have never embraced the idea – promoted by Bill Clinton's defenders for more than two decades – that bad behavior in a politician can be excused if it's "just about sex." Now is no time to change a sound position that politics is about more than policy.

A Moore victory would keep the GOP Senate majority at 52, which seems to explain the unfortunate decision this week by President Trump and the Republican National Committee to endorse Mr. Moore. But victory would come at considerable cost. The Senate would be obliged to seat him, and the allegations would surely be referred immediately to the Ethics Committee, which is already vetting the sexual misconduct of Minnesota Democrat Al Franken.

That sounds familiar.  Republicans are always warned that they must move left to win.  Before Trump won the nomination, we were warned that if Trump won, Republicans might lose the House and the Senate.  When Obama won in 2008, we were warned we must move left or we would never win.  The Tea Party was formed instead, and Republicans in the next eight years won over 1,000 seats and took control of the House and the Senate.

Did we see journalists warn Democrats that they must move right to win?

Has the WSJ ever warned the Democratic Party that if one of their Democrats won, that would be a loss?

The news pages of the WSJ have been moving left for a while, and the opinion page has also been drifting left.  It is very disappointing.

Somehow the WSJ considers the Roy Moore story completely true with no actual physical evidence.  The yearbook claim is an obvious forgery, and the WSJ doesn't give a hoot.  Again, why was a forty-year-old story fed to Washington Post journalists?  Who gave the journalists the women's names?  Someone else obviously did the story.  Was it Fusion GPS or someone just like that organization?

The irony here is that just as the WSJ chides Republicans for double standards if they dare elect Moore, they are engaging in a few double standards of their own.

The #NeverTrumps over at the Wall Street Journal's editorial page are warning Republicans that a win by Alabama GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore would be bad.

But as Alabamans decide, they should consider that there are strong moral and practical reasons to reject Mr. Moore. For one thing, Republicans have never embraced the idea – promoted by Bill Clinton's defenders for more than two decades – that bad behavior in a politician can be excused if it's "just about sex." Now is no time to change a sound position that politics is about more than policy.

A Moore victory would keep the GOP Senate majority at 52, which seems to explain the unfortunate decision this week by President Trump and the Republican National Committee to endorse Mr. Moore. But victory would come at considerable cost. The Senate would be obliged to seat him, and the allegations would surely be referred immediately to the Ethics Committee, which is already vetting the sexual misconduct of Minnesota Democrat Al Franken.

That sounds familiar.  Republicans are always warned that they must move left to win.  Before Trump won the nomination, we were warned that if Trump won, Republicans might lose the House and the Senate.  When Obama won in 2008, we were warned we must move left or we would never win.  The Tea Party was formed instead, and Republicans in the next eight years won over 1,000 seats and took control of the House and the Senate.

Did we see journalists warn Democrats that they must move right to win?

Has the WSJ ever warned the Democratic Party that if one of their Democrats won, that would be a loss?

The news pages of the WSJ have been moving left for a while, and the opinion page has also been drifting left.  It is very disappointing.

Somehow the WSJ considers the Roy Moore story completely true with no actual physical evidence.  The yearbook claim is an obvious forgery, and the WSJ doesn't give a hoot.  Again, why was a forty-year-old story fed to Washington Post journalists?  Who gave the journalists the women's names?  Someone else obviously did the story.  Was it Fusion GPS or someone just like that organization?

The irony here is that just as the WSJ chides Republicans for double standards if they dare elect Moore, they are engaging in a few double standards of their own.

RECENT VIDEOS