[denydenydeny]

Bias much? The AP, as usual, manages to crowd novel-length bias into a thousand-word article. First of all, the article is written from a Democrat third-person-limited point of view:

Democrats charge the effort is a cheap political stunt and a personal attack.

Note the lack of any attempt to summarize the Republicans' beliefs.

Instead of offering Murtha's resolution, Republicans plan to reject a similarly worded resolution offered by one of their own to show support for US troops.

The wording is such that it reads like the Republicans are rejecting support for US troops.

Democrats say that's a "counterfeit" resolution, charging it guts Murtha's thoughtful approach to the situation.

Again, no attempt to convey the Republican point of view.

The fiery, emotional debate climaxed when Ohio Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, who is the lowest in seniority, recounted a message a Marine colonel wanted to send to Murtha.

What on earth does her seniority have to do with anything? Other than to associate the term "lowest" with Republicans.

[zbigreddogz]

In fairness, the 'lowest' remark does have some reason to exist. The person that yeilded her floor time introduced her as the newest member or somthing.

[Gondring]

What on earth does her seniority have to do with anything?

In fairness, it was used as an excuse for her breaking of Senate etiquette, and when the Dems do such things as flout Senate etiquette, FR tends to erupt in hisses against them.