What I find amazing is that Clark Gallagher, a died-in-the-wool conservative Kool-Aid drinker on 99.9 percent of issues, thinks Reinhard is participating (consciously or not on Dave's part) in a machievellian Republican smear campaign.

I've always thought Reinhard was more idiot than evil. And, judging from the column, I guess Gallagher does, too.

Reinhard is a lazy ideologue. He is a partisan political hack. A propgandist. He's certainly no journalist whose only obligation is to the truth.

It's frightening to think that Reinhard managed to suck in the entire Oregonian editorial board on this one. I wonder if anyone on the editorial board decided to independently investigate any of Reinhard's accusations against Edwards before they yanked the endorsement?

Enquiring minds want to know!

I have no doubt whatsoever that Reinhard knew he was running with bogus info in his column. I had several email exchanges with him yesterday and asked him to provide some shred of information that confirmed that Edwards had paid for the push polling he mentioned in his column. Nothing. He merely counter-attacked by asking why I would assume it was the Republicans. I explained to him that I had been a part of that push poll and that the language could only have been intended to turn people against Edwards, which pretty much precludes the Democrats from having sponsored it. (Having been a recipient of TWO push polls in the last week or two that involved the Edwards-Curry race... one of which asked very specific and inflammatory questions about Curry and religion and Edwards supposedly using Curry's religion as a wedge issue... the wording was so blatantly aimed at turning people against Edwards I actually laughed and told the pollster what he was doing was immoral.) Reinhard's response to me was that as far as he was concerned Edwards had done it and he thought it was "strange" that I would think this was the work of Curry and a Karl Rovian figure! I, of course, wrote back that I thought it was odd that he could assume the push poll was Edwards' work with no proof and that if he really couldn't figure out why I would think this was the work of a disciple of Karl Rove he must not be much of a journalist.

In any case, last night I got a recorded phone call from someone informing me that the Argus had stepped up on this issue. I assume it was from the Edwards campaign, and I just have to say, "GOOD FOR THEM!" Everytime a campaign lets the Republicans get away with slurs like this and doesn't fight back aggressively, an angel loses their wings.

Let's get one thing straight that is muddying this whole issue. Just because a poll contains negative arguments toward one or another of the candidates does not -- I repeat, DOES NOT -- make it a "push poll."

Candidates and professional pollsters include negative arguments in their benchmark polls to test whether certain messages are effective, either against their opponents or against themselves. If you are responding to a poll and the questioner is reading what sounds like an attack script, they may actually be testing new messages.

A "push poll" makes no attempt to gather information, but rather is used to spread negative information about a candidate. It's purpose is to sway opinion, not track it.

Now, it's a little late in the season for benchmark polling, as nearly every poll in the field right now is a tracking poll, and so less likely to be testing message. But it isn't out of the realm of possibility that an extreme partisan Republican got a call for a legitimate poll that was testing the effectiveness of the "radical religious right" message for EITHER side, and totally misinterpreted it. In any event, it doesn't appear Reinhardt and the O ed board looked into it very hard.

That is, of course, IF IT EVEN HAPPENED AT ALL! Gallagher is right, the O got hoodwinked on this one.