THE POWER OF THE JUMP: The power of the jump rears its ugly head again today in our local Dog Trainer. As I have discussed recently, the Times has had a steady drumbeat over the past few days about how the California budget crisis is the Republicans’ fault. That drumbeat continues today, with a little help from the power of the jump.

The headline of today’s article is Brulte’s Hard Line Sharpens Budget Divide, and the subhead reads: “GOP leader strengthens his party’s hand with a vow to punish colleagues who back a tax hike.” Brulte, the head of the GOP in the state Senate, did indeed announce that he would oppose the re-elections of Republicans who voted for tax increases. But he did so several days ago. It is hardly news today that he did this — except that the Times wishes to keep this issue on the front pages every single morning.

Moreover, Brulte’s position does not seem to me to be that remarkable. Brulte stated his position in a letter to the Times last week: “I find it interesting that The Times . . . takes offense that I use my position to do what it and other newspapers across the state do on a regular basis: endorse or oppose candidates for public office based upon their positions and views — in my case, tax increases.”

Today’s article is interesting for several reasons. First, as I said, the story is not news, but it is on the front page. Second, the article acknowledges the obvious truth that Brulte’s position “represents one half of the budget standoff in Sacramento . . . On the other side of the debate, Democrats continue to resist any efforts to cut more deeply into social programs, preferring tax hikes to further spending cuts.” But — this acknowledgement, like virtually every other mention of the Democrats’ intransigence this past week, comes after the “jump” — meaning it is on the back pages that hardly anyone ever reads. (I have discussed the issue of the “jump” on these pages many times, including here, here, and here.) Today, in order to hide the quote about the Democrats’ obstinacy on the back pages, the paper has to place the jump absurdly high in the story: after the seventh word in the fifth short paragraph of the story.

Third, the article repeats the theme that, despite Democratic stubborness, “it was Brulte’s remarks that have caused the greatest stir in recent days.” One wonders: among whom? And why hasn’t the greatest stir been caused by the Democrats’ decision (discussed in my post from yesterday) to take $2.4 billion of federal money and use it to restore spending cuts, rather than reduce the deficit?

I think you know the answer, Gentle Reader.