Skip to comments.Political Faces and Labels (Washington Post readers complian about pathetic campaign reporting)
Posted on 10/21/2006 6:44:13 AM PDT by Dems_R_Losers
Regarding "In Key Races, Democrats Look at Rivals' Personal Lives; Amid Voter Disgust Over Foley Scandal, Strategists Believe Attacks on GOP at Local Level Won't Backfire" [news story, Oct. 13] and "Democratic Faces That Could Launch Thousands of Votes; With a Parade of Attractive Candidates, the Party May Benefit From the Politics of Beauty" [front page, Oct. 14]:
The Post reported approvingly of Democrats running congressional campaigns based on personal destruction of their opponents and on their candidates' physical appearances.
What happened to issue and policy differences? The Post seems to have conceded that Democratic candidates are unable to defeat Republicans based on the issues.
The Oct. 16 front-page story "Hastert's Team Mentality to Be Tested as Foley Scandal Unfolds" by Michael Grunwald and Jim VandeHei crossed a line for me.
The presentation on the front page gave readers no clue that they would be wading into "color commentary" rather than serious reporting. The tone of the piece made me wonder whether I had skipped to the Style section by mistake, and it was perhaps not even appropriate for Style.
...my objection is not partisan. I simply believe that a newspaper of The Post's stature has a responsibility to label opinion and feature writing for what it is.
A longtime subscriber, I rarely have anything critical to say about The Post. However, I was bothered that the "Hastert's Team Mentality" story included the following phrase about House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert:
"He looks like a cross between actor Wilford Brimley and Jabba the Hutt. . . ."
The context was to show that Hastert is not a made-for-television kind of guy.
The statement came across as a cheap shot demeaning to the speaker and The Post.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Now that we have the internet with sites like FR, Newsbusters, and Rathergate we can see what "newspapers" like the Post choose to print, and likely why.
If only we'd had this tool in '73.
Nixon thought like FDR he could burgle his political oponents with impunity. He didn't figure out that there was one set of rules for FDR and another for him. Too bad.
The TV networks and Hollywood movies created the Post: David v Goliath with the Post as David. We all know today who the real David was.
And yet, he's going to win in this conservative District.
Why? Because he bills himself as "a conservative" with "Western Carolina values." He's no such thing, of course, as he will prove when he gets in office, by voting down the line for Nancy Pelosi and for the unions which have supported and funded his campaign.
He will defeat Charles Taylor, a 16-year, well-wired incumbent. And the truth is that no opponent defeats such an incumbent. Such moss backs are defeated only by their own prior mistakes. And good ol' Charlie has a long list of potential felonies on his record -- mostly games with public money for personal benefit -- for which he has not yet been indicted.
The Republicans are pouring upwards of $1 million trying to save this seat. Charlie has dropped in $1.6 of his own money (he's one of the wealthiest men in Western Carolina), all to no avail.
I knew that this was the probable outcome. That's why I ran against Charlie in the primary. (Lost. Got 20% of the vote, however.) And that's why I am looking at the possibility of running against Shuler in 2008.
So on the subject of pretty-boy Democrat candidates, I've been there, seen that, bought the T-shirt.
Please see my most recent statement on running for Congress, here.
This election like no other is about issues, real issues: the second Iraq war; warrantless spying on citizens; global warming; a national debt rising higher than a thermometer in Belize; torture; a president who has misled the public; atomic bombs; and a congressional majority that has covered up its own sins.
A little more about Mr. Flinn:
Frank Flinn Adjunct Professor, Religious Studies Expertise: separation of church and state [he is for it], legal rights of religious groups, public display of religious symbols [he is against it], federal funding of faith-based organizations, religious splinter groups, cults [he likes them], paramilitary organizations....
He also is an expert on the legal rights of religious groups, especially those of cults
Mr. Flinn is what passes for religious learning at my Alma Mater and I am sure a good example of WaPo readers.
Actually, "macaca" means, "He who takes ROTC weapon and points it at black man while utteruing the "N-word". Sometimes alternately spelled "W-E-B-B".
I'm sure there will be a correction and an apology on the front page of the Washington Post on Sunday.
The WashPost is (consciously and unconsciously) letting the liberal blogs direct their reporting.
The liberals' internet is destroying the liberals' biggest asset: the media. Media needs to at least appear to attempt impartiality.
But still most of the ignorant voters in the nation get their news from the Big 3. If they do not vote on real issues, pretty boy or girl candidates that are Dems will win and smears of W have been inculcated for almost 6 years. It is alot of lying to overcome in just 17 days.