I always have said that Karen/Anonymous is a Woman rocks, and this article is certainly no exception. Here are some excerpts (bolding added by me for emphasis):
...Mr. Connolly is the WaPo's second choice. They would much rather have Tom Davis to endorse in the general election. He's their boy and has been for years. Indeed, the Post may yet endorse Keith Fimian in the general, though I suspect they will cite Connolly's government experience and moderate, pro business credentials once again to endorse him over a neophyte in the general election in November. And they'd be right to do that.[...]
Once again, the Washington Post is simply being true to their pro business, anti-working class and anti labor bias. The Washington Post has long been the cheerleader for free trade, outsourcing, and the war in Iraq. They are to the right of Gerry Connolly by a mile. But given that Tom Davis isn't around anymore, Connolly, at least, fits into the moderate, centrist pro business, pro developer mold, with a dollop of liberalism on social issues, that the Washington Post likes.
In an era of a shrinking middle class, a declining economy, rising unemployment, and an endless war in Iraq, sapping our nation's strength, the Washington Post has basically endorsed business as usual.
But Leslie Byrne, like Jim Webb, who endorsed her early, represents change. Is she sharp edged? You betcha! Like the "strident populist" Webb, she'll fight for us!
Great stuff, thanks to Karen for explaining it all so clearly.
If newspaper endorsements mattered all that much Obama would have won the primaries in PA and TX.
Still, sad to see how out of touch with reality their editorial page often is on matters of importance. Hell, they still support No Child Left Behind.
That they complain (unjustifiably) about supposed sharp-elbow tactics by Byrne (say what?), shows they've got nothing substantive in favor of Connelly and are just makin' stuff up as they go. And this empty charge smacks of sexism as well.
WAPO no longer home delivers where I live. And now, should they restart home deliv., I'd say no thanks. Byrne deserves far, far better than this. How the Post could so blatantly favor Tom Davis and Jean Marie is beyond me. WAPO has long ago shown it is all about supporting mostly Republican ( with some --few--exceptions) and pro-war agendas. But America is at its best when it leads by example, not force. And, so, like so many washed up, arcane, and useless elements of the GOP, WAPO slinks toward oblivion.
I'm off to do some phonebanking for Leslie now :)
But given that Tom Davis isn't around anymore, Connolly, at least, fits into the moderate, centrist pro business, pro developer mold, with a dollop of liberalism on social issues, that the Washington Post likes.
This quote describes Mark Warner to a tee.
Mark Warner's new television ad has Republican State Senator John Chichester supporting him and Chichester is well to the right of Connolly, Davis AND the Washington Post.
If the Washington Post endorses Warner, do we cancel our subscription?
Warner gets praise from the left when he runs as a centrist, picks up endorsements form those right of center, and we are told that it enlarges the tent, and allows Democrats to expand the base and win elections.
Barack Obama does the same thing, picking up support of hundreds of thousands of Republicans across the country. During the Virginia primary, nine per cent of the There numbers are so great they are nicknamed Obamican's by Obama himself.
So why the double standard here regardng Gerry Connolly? If you are going to be consistent here, can I assume you will be withdrawing your support of Mark Warner?
As a more centrist candidate, Connolly appears to be able to pick up more moderate voters in a general election.
Don't be so sure he's the more "electible" candidate.
Neither Mark Warner nor Barrack Obama have the blatant ethical challenges that Connolly suffers from. He has admitted taking "consulting fees" from companies with re-zoning applications before the county, hiding behind a fig leaf opinion from the county attorney. He draws a salary for a practically no-show job at SAIC, while pushing for a Tyson's Corner Metro stop in front of the SAIC headquarters. He has stiffled debate and public comment at open meetings of the county Board of Supervisors and even stooped to belittling and insulting citizens who dared to publically disagree with him.
Other than that, he's a great guy.