Should we care about today's attempt by the Washington Post to define the race between Chap and Jeannemarie? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/04/AR2007070401526_pf.html)
Is it fair that they mention Jeannemarie's huge amount of campaign money from corporate donors and support from her husband without drawing a connection between the two?
Is that especially unfair because they paint Jeannemarie as the more liberal of the two candidates who might otherwise be expected to be less favored by business?
Is it also unfair to mention not only the gun control issue but to elevate the "whisper" campaign about Chap's church being part of the anti-gay group of churches that split off from the Episcopal Church?
Is it possible that the Post left on the cutting room floor more pro-Chap quotes from Gerry Connolly, leaving only Connolly's calling them both "titans?"
Is it responsible for the Post to not mention at all that party affiliation matters?
Finally, can Chap afford to sit by and let the Post define this race as anything other than it is - positive, effective, and badly needed leadership to solve our problems vs. more of the same?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Joel,
Your cutting room floor comment is exactly correct.
James, a day after the slanted Post story, my daughter received the two-page letter from Jeannemarie that Chap blogged about at Ox Road South. I guess I'm still naive enough to think that the Post isn't actually conspiring with Jeannemarie, but it's clear they prefer the Davises. I only hope the tougher challenge will give us a better State Sen. Chap Petersen in the end. If we can get rid of the Davises, that may be it for the VA GOP here for a while.
Post a Comment