Thursday, October 20, 2005

Local Papers Hit Craddock, Yet Again

Three different local papers have all recently come out with negative attacks on Chris Craddock yet again this week. Connection reporter Bryan McNeill seems to constantly wish to bash the entire Craddock campaign. His antics go so far, that he has pushed the stories on the Golden/Marsden race behind Craddock's in the Burke Connection. -Chris has no part of Burke in his district. The Burke Connection talks about Chris' Traffic Tickets. The Centreview Talks about the Reese endorsement and debate. The Times newspaper discusses Gary's endorsement.


At 10/20/2005 03:58:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Man this guy McNeil is really on a rampage against Craddock. I don't remember him historically reporting for the Centre View. In the past Bonnie Hobbs was the main reporter there and I always thought she did a good job and was at least fair. that paper used to be a fairly even handed publication. Seems now like they have swung further left than the local Time Community rag.

At 10/20/2005 07:52:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Telling the truth - that's swinging to the left? This isn't good publicity for Craddock, but it appears to be factual.

Both Craddock and Werkheiser are irresponsible when behind the wheel.

It's unfortunate that you partisan hacks can't condemn his driving behavior while still supporting the guy for office. Maybe somebody on "his" side just needs to tell him to slow down and grow up. It does no good to surround anybody with yes men. And we wonder how politicians and Hollywood types get so far out of the mainstream - this is exactly how. Nobody can admit reality and step up and tell the truth. SLOW DOWN YOU FOOL BEFORE YOU KILL SOMEONE! It's that simple.

At 10/20/2005 11:42:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

My comment was not directed at the traffic ticket issue. Actually I think that issue is nearly meaningless considering the number of people who speed around there every day. What I meant was that the tone of the articles are clearly for Caputo and against Craddock. Take a look at the wording the guy uses about Craddock's being "flustered" while answering a question about abortion and meanwhile mentions nothing about Caputo fumbling about the question on Partial Birth Abortion. He calls Craddock "Anti-tax" which is false, he's anti-increasing taxes. He talks about reese's support for a tax increase that was intended to "increase state spending on education, public safety, and human services" when this is actually far from the reasoning used at the time for the increase. The excuse was it was to "save the states AAA bond rating". Not to increase spending. In the end it was needed for neither, but that didn't stop McNeil from painting it as a positive.

Also in the article on the traffic tickets he throws in a totally unrelated reference to Craddock's former campaign manager at the end. Something gratuitous and having nothing to do with Craddock's driving record. He also completely forgets to mention Craddock's comments on the subject.

It's clear the guy is trying to highlight Craddock's negatives while soft-peddling Caputo's weaknesses.

At 10/21/2005 11:18:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bryan McNeill clearly has a political agenda, and these local papers are just a stepping stone for him and his dream to some day write for The Nation, or for's direct-mail pieces.

What's more is that I know of at least 6 people who have sent in letters to the editor, that were either pro-Chris or they simply disputed some of the claims from McNeill's inaccurate reporting. None of those letters ever made it to print, while plenty of pro-Caputo, anti-Craddock letters were highlighted quite nicely.

These papers are anything but unbiased, and the reporting is shoddy, at best!

At 10/21/2005 12:06:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whatever the papers are doing, Craddock should be in control in this district. Why do we have such trouble finding strong candidates?

At 10/21/2005 02:49:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This might be the strongest GOP district in the county, but Craddock can't solidify it. I've met Caputo a number of times and he's a nice guy but not such a dynamic personality that he should be able to pull this off or even be within striking distance. Have any big hitters in the business community (i.e. NVTC or the Board of Trade) comeout for Craddock? The Chamber has a new blog on this site called "PolicySoup" and I don't think they mentioned a Craddock endorsement either.

At 10/21/2005 02:54:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2:49 -- this is not the strongest GOP district in the county - that belongs to Tim Hugo in the 41st. The big hitters that you mentioned opted to stay neutral in the race.

I agree on the reporting by Brian McNeil. He's obviously trying to build his portfolio of news clippings or something. I have never seen the Centreview publish such biased articles.

At 10/21/2005 03:24:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thats because the NVTC and BoT endorsed Caputo. The heavy hitters came out for him.

At 10/21/2005 03:25:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

First, there is no evidence that Craddock is not in control. Just alot of biased press reporting and an attack-web-site which can only point to traffic tickets as a reason not to vote for him. I have not seen any polling data coming out and Caputo's campaign continues to get shriller and shriller by the day which could be evidence that they are seeing trends not going their way.

Second: "Why do we have such trouble finding strong candidates?"

Please see my explanation in the thread below "From the Mailbag" for my explanation of why Chris Craddock is the Republican candidate. Also why he should still be supported by the district btw.

Three years ago we had too many good candidates in the 67th which is why we ended up with Reese to begin with. Two conservatives split the vote losing to Reese in the primary 40-30-30. We have plenty of good candidates in the area who are already in office (Cuccinelli, O'brien, Hugo). We just need to keep behind them. I personally think given the chance, Craddock will serve well.

At 10/21/2005 03:28:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

They all love taxes anyway...same folks that funded the referendum campaign in 2002.

At 10/31/2005 10:51:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Craddock has lost momentum because he's done a lot of simply foolish things that have opened him up for criticism as being a kid, naive, immature and inept. After Harriet Meirs, Libbygate, Katrinagate, people really are looking for competent, non-controversial candidates. We don't need fools making fools of themselves at high schools, arrogantly failing to pay their car registrations (mmultiple times, making silly staements about $9.5 bullion tax increases when even a Craddock supporter has to know that represents a third of the State budget. Sheesh!

On top of all this, Caputo is an active, well respected member of one of the largest Churches in the district. It's hard to slime someone who's that well known with failed strategies that worked in the 80's. Caputo's pulled long-time Republicans like me to his banner because Craddock is a real weak candidate, representing fringe ideas and non-mainstream politics. This guy will embarrass Fairfax and Loudon Counties if he ends up in the GA.

This is not Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan, this is the heartbeat of ignorance that loves itself and intolerance that will be self-defeating in less than 9 days! Way to go Republican Party!

At 11/09/2005 12:14:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Craddock lost by a ton. His homophobia, racism, and prejudice eventually came out and were on full display.

Anyone who supported this nutjob needs to seriously re-examine themselves.


Post a Comment

<< Home