It wasn't that long ago that journalist Tim Mak left the Washington Examiner to join the staff of the Daily Beast.
And now it may not be that long before Democrats in the nation's capital do everything they can think of to run Mak out of town.
Minorities paid less
On Monday, Mak wrote this in an eye-opening post headlined "Democrats pay Black staffers 30 percent less" than whites:
"For example, African-American staffers on Democratic campaigns were paid 70 cents for each dollar their white counterparts made. For Hispanic staffers in Democratic campaigns, the figure was 68 cents on the dollar.
"And a recent study by PowerPAC+, funded by a major Democratic donor, revealed that less than 2 percent of spending by Democratic campaign committees during the past two election cycles went to firms owned by minorities."
Problems on both sides
There are disparities on both sides of the partisan aisle, according to Mak, but the Democratic deficits are in marked contrast to the party's reliance upon minority voters on Election Day.
Liberal conventional wisdom ascribes such disparities to white racism, and that view is reliably echoed by the campaign authorities quoted by Mak.
The irony of explaining their own conduct by referencing an alleged societal sin they presumably seek to eradicate was apparently lost on those folks.
GOP campaigns pay more but ...
That said, one of the studies on which Mak's analysis is based was done by the New Organizing Institute, a liberal-oriented think tank that is heavily into data analysis.
After re-weighting the results in an attempt to account for multiple unavoidable problems with data collection for the study, the NOI study exposed a good news/bad news wrinkle on the GOP side of the equation.
Republican campaigns pay from 20.7 percent to 27.5 percent more than average for minority campaign workers. That's the good news.
The bad news is that GOP campaign candidates and managers hire far fewer minorities than do Democrats, by a factor of four-to-one.
On the other hand
But maybe economics rather than race best explains these figures. There is a surplus of minorities available to Democratic campaigns, which would tend to put downward pressure on salaries.
On the Republican side, there are too few minorities available to satisfy demand, which puts upward pressure on compensation.
So why do markedly more minority campaign workers choose to work for a party that pays them so much lesser than it does whites?
On today's washingtonexaminer.com
Editorial: Obamacrats are strangling due process on campus.
Columnists/Ron Arnold: If it's wet, EPA wants to regulate it.
Columnists/Noemie Emery: Hillary Clinton senses the trend and moves toward a more muscular foreign policy.
Columnists/Chuck Hoskinson: Everything Obama says about Iraq is wrong.
Beltway Confidential/Mark Tapscott: Time to lay off Tony Stewart.
Beltway Confidential/Timothy P. Carney: White people are underrepresented at Apple.
PennAve/Joseph Lawler: Here's the newest conservative alternative to the minimum wage.
Legal Newsline/Bryan Cohen: Tauro resolves Medicaid fraud allegations with Texas AG.
Video/Morning Examiner: Morning Examiner with Steve Doty for Aug. 13.
In other news
New York Daily News: FCC commissioner wants end of NFL's blackout rules.
The Daily Caller: America's worst, most-left professors.
The American Spectator: Hillary's neocon moment.
American Thinker: Is Facebook censoring Republicans?
The Federalist: If only Paul Ryan's critics could match his courage.
The Daily Beast: ISIS enemies ask Pentagon for drones.
The American Prospect: If having a foreign policy is so important, why won't Hillary Clinton spell out hers?
Salon: In defense of black rage.