Bush-bashing 'Republican' Henry Lowenstein, NYT's Favorite

The quickest way to get the liberal media to pay attention to you is to claim to be a Republican who hates Republicans. It's an almost infallible public relations strategy that of late has worked well for "Republican" Monica Green.

It's also done wonders for "lifelong Republican" Henry A. Lowenstein, who has managed to get 20 different letters published in the New York Times since 2003, a remarkable feat when you consider that the Times (by its own admission) receives around 1,000 letters a day and prints only 15 on its letters page. That means the odds of the average liberal person (the paper freely admits it favors left-wing letter writers) getting his or her letter printed are about 1.5 percent.

It's worse when you think of the numbers on a yearly scale. In the past five years, the Times has received approximately 1.8 million letters. It's printed 20 of Lowenstein's.

Remarkable really. But not really all that surprising when you consider the Times's history of quoting people like Greg Packer, a liberal New Yorker obsessed with getting press about any topic under the sun.

Back to Lowenstein though. What sorts of things does "life-long" Republican say anyway? Let's take a look.

• From today's edition: "We have allowed this administration to lie, cheat and break the law, and to break its sacred oath to uphold and defend the Constitution."
• May 26, 2003: "The decline of the dollar is a sign of what may come if we allow the folly of tax cuts when what we really need is a huge influx of capital and a shrinking of our trade deficits."
• February 26, 2004: "John Kerry is no 'Massachusetts liberal' and no Michael Dukakis. John Kerry is Karl Rove's worst nightmare: a candidate who can go eye to eye with the president on foreign policy and terrorism, and whose record on health care, the environment and jobs is exemplary."
• August 18, 2005: "The Bush administration's domestic plan is to make sure that every worthwhile, successful and fair entitlement program is eliminated. The administration's constituents, the super rich, do not need or want these programs."

Sounds like a typical Republican to me. Lowenstein's Republican credentials are about as real as the "Lovenstein Institute" hoax which tricked gullible liberals into believing that Republican presidents have far lower IQs than Democratic ones.

Update 13:46. Via Freeper Brad from Tennessee, here's a look at the political contributions of a New Yorker named Henry A. Lowenstein. Seems likely this is the same guy. You can't help but notice that he only gives to Democrats, quite a feat for someone who claims he is a Republican at heart.

Update 13:59. Jonah Golberg at NRO writes: "I am amazed how many emails I get — particularly to my syndicated column address — where the reader insists that he's a lifelong Republican and/or conservative and that I should be ashamed for not supporting [insert Democratic cause du jure]. Sometimes there's almost the feel of a form letter to them."

Update 16:09. Lowenstein has always been a liberal according to a tipster:

I was sadly on his e-mail list and became the weekly recipient of many letters to the editor at the Times, many of them ending up published.

I can verify that this a--clown is NO REPUBLICAN and to my knowledge, never has been. He is an awoved liberal and anyone who knows him personally knows this...I finally had to block him from my e-mail list because I was tired of his rants.

This guy is a liberal....HUGE liberal.....I wish I had saved his crazy e-mails....

Update 17:20. Erick Erickson: "We should all try this, just as a test. We should all write about how we are lifelong Republicans who hate Chimpy McBushhitler Halliburton and see how many of our letters get printed. If you don't want to bash Bush, bash Matt and Newsbusters for daring to question the Grey Lady's integrity! I bet they'll print that one."

Update 01-08 1:55. Lowenstein is apparently a contributer to The Sunny Side: Political news for the Friends of Progressive Government. He's written quite a few posts, many of which are letters to the Times and the Washington Post, all of which are liberal. The Times should never publish this fraud's letters again.