The media frequently lament the lack of real choices in elections and the near-certainty of incumbent re-election. If those media opinions are honest, then I am surprised there has been no coverage in The Times of Dr. Frank Creel's opposition to U.S. Rep. Tom Davis (R) for Virginia's 11th District congressional seat.
Does the media really care about a debate on the issues? I noticed no reporter from The Times attended the press conference kicking off Creel's campaign, and no coverage of the candidates' stands on the issues has been run.
Is it any wonder that elections are not "competitive" when no coverage is provided to bona fide candidates who have managed to scale the large hurdles to ballot access erected by the GOP and Democrats to ensure their continued power?
Rather than serving as a check on government power, the press is serving to help the incumbents--and after the election will probably go back to complaining about "politics as usual."...
Thank you for this post. Just goes to show how liberal the media really is (if there were any doubts). Most of the media are also in favor of increasing Virginia's sales tax by 11% to ease the traffic problems in Northern Virginia.
In fact, if the tax referendum passes, the one person who will benefit the most would be John T. "Til" Hazel, a major developer and lawyer and strong supporter of Davis.
"It's time (tax hike opponents) quit their moaning and whining. Developers make this world function." - John T. "Til" Hazel, The Washington Post, 9/24/02
It's really quite simple. More roads from more taxes lead to more development which leads back to the starting point of more traffic. Taxes are not going to be the solution to our traffic problem - ever. Here's my father's position on "Why Our Freeways Are Parking Lots"