WaPo Adds Rosen as an ‘Insider’

As we all know by now, Democratic Analyst Hilary Rosen usually has a few things on her mind and she’s not one to hold back. Anyone recall her interaction with Ann Romney? Sure, she apologized. But not without first going viral.

Anyhow, Rosen joins WaPo‘s opinion pages. She’ll write daily political commentary as one of  “The Insiders”, sparring alongside Republican strategist Ed Rogers. The Insiders are a group of writers that include Jonathan Capehart, David Ignatius, Michael Gerson and more.

As Rosen writes in her first blog post, “There isn’t much that this Jewish, lesbian, liberal woman has in common with [Ed] politically, but I sure do respect the dues he has paid and the knowledge he’s gained on his journey to success.  And I am proud to be alongside him as an ‘Insider.'” Warns Rogers, “I expect Hilary to whack me when she thinks I deserve it. I won’t hold back myself.”

Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt gives her the nod: “Hilary will be a lively addition to our diverse voices. Like Ed, she is an experienced insider with strong views and an original, independent mind.”

More on Rosen…About Hilary: In addition to writing for WaPo, Rosen is an on-air contributor to CNN and Managing Director at SKDKnickerbocker, a communications and public affairs firm in Washington, where she specializes in issue-oriented campaigns and progressive causes. Previously… Rosen was Political Director of HuffPost, Chairman and CEO of Recording Industry Association of America and worked on Capitol Hill for Sen. Bill Bradley (D-NJ) and Sen.Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).

In her first post, Rosen blasts the Republicans for being divided within themselves, calling them “depressing” twice and “embarrassing.”

An excerpt: “The war within the Republican caucuses in the House and Senate embodied by the competition between these two senators provided a depressing side show to the president’s calling. Actually, it was more than depressing. It was embarrassing. Couched in their own pretense that they wanted to cooperate with the president were he only ‘reasonable,’ they went on to justify their intentions to block action on important measures by blaming — in effect — reasonableness.”