D&C and Messenger-Post coverage of racist mailer
It took me forever to find it on the web, but I finally managed to track down a D&C article about the FEPC ruling against Minarik’s racist mailer. It was buried underneath articles about the new site for pets owners the D&C is starting and abou a woman who collects pig-themed figurines.
The Messenger Post article was on the front page of their website.
This nugget from the D&C is kind of funny:
White, a bank manager, also criticized Rome Celli, chairman of the committee, for holding the hearing at noon Monday. White said that he could not arrange to leave his office for the noon hearing and wanted it scheduled for 5 p.m. but that Celli did not want the time moved because of the need to get the decision out to the press.
“Reaching the public through the media is one consideration among many,” Celli said. “Lunchtime is the time most convenient for those involved in this process, and candidates can and often do send representatives when their schedule does not permit them to attend.”
UPDATE:Â The D&C buried it on page B4 of the print edition.
Related posts:
You go Rome ! I say, get it out there ASAP and let the Republicans squirm.
Where was the article about FEPC in the dead tree D&C?
Wait, wait, wait. Pig-themed figurines?!?!?
This is earth-shaking stuff. Let me check my Bloglines. . . .
Page B4.
I think the story could go national.
I believe it was on B3, on the lower right hand edge of the page.
In a way, I find it difficult to fault the D&C for their low-key coverage of this story. After all, the mailers were originally designed to change the subject, and the more we talk about them, the more they become the issue, the more they succeed.
I don’t know if this is true. I’ve seen at least one Dem go down pretty hard due to negative campaigning being highlighted in the media.
In any event, at least the D&C lumped them in with the pigs. Pretty lame nonetheless.
Which Dem?
Christine Saltzberg - “Just Say No Joe” ad campaign
Out of the three times she ran for office, I recall she did considerably worse her second time, when she got slammed for negative campaigning.
Headline: “Figurines Are Anything But Boar-ing”
I was thinking about this and asking myself, “why would Republicans want terrorists to not have drivers licenses?” Well, first off, without a drivers license, terrorists are forced to use public transportation — an ideal target for terrorists if I recall correctly. Second, if terrorists had drivers licenses, they’d probably use them — and as soon as the national security agency du jour (that’s Freedomspeak for “of the day”) identifies one of them as a threat, they can immediately be identified when they use their drivers license — for instance, as identification to get on a plane.
So ultimately, the Republicans are saying they support terrorist activities. Because if terrorists had drivers licenses, it would be harder for them to execute acts of terror and easier for them to be caught.
Just to muddle this comment even further, what was it we were taught about free speech in school? Something about not yelling “terrorist!” in a crowded theater? Something like that anyway — not using the veil of free speech to incite a riot. Hmm.