Tom and Gerry's Best Friend Forever -- 'nuff said.

Eric asks in his diary "will this unpaid advertisement be recorded as an in-kind donation?" I ask, will the constant drumbeat of pablum for Byrne and Feder on RK and NLS be recorded as in-kind contributions to those two candidates?

How can you complain about the Post when you ignore Connolly all the time except to bash him.  You ignore 10th CD candidate Mike Turner because Lowell is on Feder's payroll.

How can you in good conscience criticize the Post for giving Connolly legitimate coverage on his state of the county address when RK is nothing more than a propaganda machine for the Byrne campaign?

Besides, Byrne got coverage in the Post when she denied that her campaign funded a negative campaign mailing against Connolly and then the reporter confronted her with the evidence and caught her in a lie!

disclosed to the FEC.  The Washington Post's tireless work for Tom Davis, JMDD and Gerry Connolly is NOT disclosed.  That's the difference, nothing to do with pots or kettles here.

Also, I'd point out that the Washington Post is a major, profit-making corporate media conglomerate, while RK is just a blog that covers its expenses through advertising.  Also, RK is totally up front that it is a progressive, partisan Democratic political blog.  Where's the Washington Post's similar disclosure?  Right, you won't find it, because they pretend to be an unbiased news reporting outfit.  And if you believe that...

The Post has a constitutional right, just like you do, to publish whatever it wants.

I don't get the point of your comment about "disclosure."  What is this rule or law you cite about disclosure? Newspapers and pamphleteers have been supporting or criticizing candidates since the earliest days of our nation.

You can defend RK's puffery on behalf of Byrne and Feder until you're blue in the face, but in the end it is still pure propaganda, nothing more.

The Post takes all politicians, including Connolly, to task when it deems it appropriate.  You tell only one side of the story all of the time.

You have a right to tell one side, but that doesn't make it right.

Why are you raising this issue?  

As to supporting Leslie Byrne, that's because the overwhelming majority of readers and editors of RK support her.  And, just as the Post makes endorsements, so does RK.  

By the way, none of us here have a problem with the Post making endorsements. What bothers us is when they try to play off their biased commentary as "news."  When they do that, bloggers (like Eric in this diary) will call them on it, as well they should.  Frankly, I don't think the corporate media gets nearly enough criticism, although fortunately there are excellent groups out there like Media Matters.

Historically, newspapers were known to be very partisan and little better than pamphleteers in bias.  For example, from the early days of the republic, there were Federalist newspapers and Democratic newspapers.  By the time of Jackson and Lincoln, there were Democratic newspapers and Whig newspapers.

Today, however, newspapers go to great lengths to firewall their editorial staff from their newsroom staff.  They represent (or 'disclose') to the public that their news reporting is balanced and unbiased.

The sad reality is that most of what is perceived to be biased reporting in the newspapers is simply nothing more than amateur journalism--an inexperienced reporter who fails to ask the right questions or dig for the "other side of the story."  This is the inevitable result of the financial crunch that the print news media is undergoing.  They are losing their experienced reporters to lay-offs, on-line new media, and other more attractive career options.  The youngsters filling the void aren't up to snuff.

I see this effect daily in my industry.  Less reporting and more regurgitating of press releases.  What is most sad is that many blogs, RK included, seem to think that they are somehow filling the void.  They aren't.  They are part of the phenomenon and not part of the solution.

"Never attribute to malice that which can be readily explained by incompetence."  -Unknown.

If the day comes that the Post openly admits to biased political reporting then the question I pose is meaningless.  Let me know when they make that statement and I'll gladly retract my question and admit I was wrong to ask.

They are in the business of selling unbiased fact.  Please reread their article and tell us, with a straight face, it doesn't have a heavy pro-Connolly spin.  If this was a piece on Connolly's housing plan as the title and opening paragraphs suggest, how come 7 of 14 paragraphs were dedicated to how great Gerry is or how great Fairfax County is under Gerry's leadership?  That information was completely unnecessary in the context of that article and only serves to promote Connolly.  

I wanted to read more about the plan but the information was sorely lacking - Amy could have filled those 7 pro-Connolly paragraphs with real information about the plan.  And if she wanted to be fair to the other 3 primary contestants, she could've gotten their opinions about the plan.  

But no, we got precious little information about the plan (except to make it sound great and, gasp, the Republicans don't agree) and half an article of simplistic pro-Connolly spin.

I suppose the WaPo had to cover the State of the County Address.  We'll just have to see if the WaPo creates an excuse to glorify Connolly as opposed to merely exploiting an pre-existing opportunity.

Byrne should give a speech herself, or hold a townhall meeting.  That way, if the WaPo barely covered it, it would make it that much more difficult for the WaPo to give undue coverage to a later Connolly event that is purely related to his Congressional campaign and not related to his job as Chairman.

She might as well make the most of her situation and the WaPo's implicit endorsement as the true progressive by convincing the Fairfax County voters in VA-11 that they can have their cake and eat it too, by sending her to Congress and keeping Connolly at the helm of the County.

I'd advise her to speak out more about her signing on to The Responsible Plan to get out of Iraq and to explicitly challenge Connolly to say more on the issue.

....what a STUPID idea for Gerry to propose this. If he thinks this is going to work he's crazy. Giving county workers a benefit to get in these homes sounds good on paper, but you know it's going to be abused. Just something else to regulate. Kind of like that person driving the Mercedes Benz and going to the grocery store with food stamps.

I believe in giving back and lending a helping hand to the unfortunate, probably why I am a Democrat, but to me it sounds like Section 8 housing--we have enough of that. I've had to live next to a house that was rented section 8 before, and it sucks. Brings down the value of the neighborhood. Police were there, fights, didn't take care of the property, drug deals etc. It sounds nice to you have to live next to it. I don't think Gerry would want one living next to him. Hey, we all work hard to live in a nice neighborhood, and we don't need any more people that don't know how to take care of a home coming in. The ironic thing is that the people who will be supposedly benefiting from this don't even vote. Believe me you'll be hearing more about this one.

Gerry bought the lot next to his house so it wouldn't be developed, even though it was zoned for another home.

Ironic on a number of levels, huh?

Obama bought property next to his house, too, except that he bought it from a crook.

And as for the Connolly housing plan, I guess bladerunner would rather have vacant foreclosed houses on his street than be forced to live near county workers like firefighters, teachers, or police officers.

I guess some elites in this county don't want to live near Section 8 housing or blue collar workers.

I just love progressives who are progressive until it impacts them personally.

If I understand the county's affordable housing program correctly, work force housing includes teachers, police and fire fighters.  Section 8 is a very different program and to the best of my knowledge is not a county program.

...there will be section 8's too. It just a silly idea and the county should stay out of the real estate business. Besides the county already has a plan for county workers to buy homes at a price that county workers wages will afford. They also already have a program for section 8, there's no need to expand it.

No one in there right mind would have a problem living next to a firefighter or police officer as the "Economist" erronously said. Our county emergency personel are so under paid for the jobs they do. Instead of buying all the houses, just give them raises so they can afford the homes. Wouldn't that be easier? A lot less red tape too.

Living next to firefighters and police officers is more than fine. But after my experience with Section 8, Yes I would rather have an empty house next to me than a section 8 rental. I don't think Gerry would want a section 8 rental next to his home either.

Does Gerry even bother paying a campaign staff when he has Amy Gardner to do his press for him? This is just the latest in the series. The Post is a newspaper of record, in theory offering news reporting separate from its editorial stance, where it can endorse whomever it chooses. The problem is when a reporter's bias colors what is supposed to be "reporting." If Gardner can't be impartial in covering Fairfax County news, the Post needs to get someone else who can be.