Who's deserting what, again?

[from Steve Benin @ the Washington monthly blog]

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele appeared to be relishing Sen. Evan Bayh's (D-Ind.) decision not to seek re-election to his U.S. Senate seat in 2010.

In a statement, Steele put Bayh's announcement in the context of other recent Democratic retirements, saying that it was a sign Democrats were "running for the hills because they sold out their constituents and don't want to face them at the ballot box."

Is that so. Here are a handful of relevant details for the RNC to consider:

In the House, there are more Republicans retiring than Democrats.

In the Senate, there are more Republicans retiring than Democrats.

Among governors, there are more Republicans retiring than Democrats.

I can appreciate party hacks spinning as best they can, but c'mon. Does Michael Steele not have a staff to check his statements before they go out? Did it not occur to anyone at the RNC to think, "You know, if we use retirements as a baseline, and our retirements outnumber theirs, we may look foolish"?

Now me:

Apparently the ability to count isn't a requirement for the leader of the RNC.
Apparently the ability to draw a considered conclusion based of facts is also not required.

My, what a surprise.

Update: Some on the left are attacking Bayh for the possibility of allowing the Dems to lose his Senate seat. Given the tripe that slither like elected representatives, one guy who walks away, telling the truth about the sad state of our process, is not a reasonable target. I can't fault anyone who hasn't the stomach for the surreal Roman Circus that is Washington. When the people we elect grow some nads, we'll have have a system that works.