In the Right

David Freddoso at National Review Online ran some stuff, and so did Matt Lewis at Townhall.com, and W. James Antle III at The American Spectator.

Even The Hill got into the act.

All of it began to appear online on Tuesday, May 5 -- one week to the day after Arlen Specter announced his party switch, and some Pennsylvania Republican establishment leaders began their effort to draft Ridge.

That timeline is about right: On Tuesday, the call would have gone out from Toomey headquarters to put down the beers and start the opposition research on Ridge; by the weekend, they would have had time to sift through his legislative record and pull out highlights/lowlights; by Monday, they would have figured out which were the most damaging items and begun leaking them quietly to selected conservative writers; and by Tuesday, the oppo began appearing online.

Have I interviewed any Toomey campaign staffers or consultants to verify this sequence of events?

No, but I don't need to.

Just as the existence of a building argues for a builder, the fact that the articles exposing the potential difficulties for Ridge all started showing up on the same day argues that it wasn't random chance.

And I've been a party to one or two opposition research dumps over the course of my career.

That the Toomey campaign was able to turn on a dime from opposing Specter to opposing Ridge is a credit to its leadership.

That the Toomey campaign was able to conduct a flash opposition research operation and then analyze, package, and place the material in the space of less than a week is a testament to its professionalism.

Note to the NRSC: Toomey's campaign has demonstrated it's being run by grown-ups. Perhaps they should be given a chance to show what they can do?