Once gain, the WaPo misses the point. Yeah, I know-nothing new, but worth noting.
The WaPo ran a column on Sunday (8.30.2009) that chastised a McDonnell campaign ad. The advertisement quoted Deeds as saying he sponsored the most supplemental budget amendments. The ad goes on to say the Deeds supplemental amendments totaled 1 billion dollars. The entire rest of the General Assembly combined-both houses, both parties-offered a combined 7.7 billion dollars in amendments. In other words, on average all other members offered up amendments totaling $55,400,000.00….or $944,600,000.00 less than Creigh Deeds.
The writer, Anita Kumar, chastises the McDonnell campaign for not saying that 870 billions dollars of Deeds Billion was for teacher salaries. Last time I checked, that’s the type of complaint that come from the opponents campaign-not from the media.
She finishes her hit piece (because let’s face it, that is what it really is) by saying Deeds is proud of his support of teachers, and that McDonnell says he supports raising teacher’s salaries but has not said how he would do it.
Here’s the thing-and here is why this is truly a hit piece-Creigh Deeds has not said how he is going to play for it either. Deeds submitted a boatload of spending bills to benefit an interest group he wanted to endorse his candidacy without offering up (1) what taxes he wants to raise to pay for his spending spree OR (2) what programs he would cut to enable the payment. And you know he hasn’t, because if he had the WaPo surely would have mentioned it in the article!
So the WaPo takes a purely partisan pose to nitpick an ad for revealing Deeds tendency toward profligate spending-and his being proud of it…and then not so obliquely criticizes Bob McDonnell for not doing…what their candidate of record has not done.
Therein is what is equally revolting and revealing about the Deeds campaign and the thesis kerfluffle. Deeds apparently does not have record that is worthy of running on-or else he would be running on it. He is more than willing to propose all sorts of spending bills, but unwilling to say how he will fund them. It is revolting and quite revealing that he wants to move beyond his record, and even his opponents accomplishments and proposals, and instead try to make the campaign focus on an academic paper written two decades ago.
The WaPo has shown their true colors and will try to keep the pot brewing…because they long ago ceased to be objective in their political coverage.
But despite the WaPo efforts to pull Deeds over the line, I have a hunch that by October 1 the thesis will be old news, and all that will be left will be Creigh Deeds trying to find other ways to distract attention from his General Assembly record and his lack of ideas and his taste for unrestrained spending that can only be called Creighnomics–a willingness to fling money with great abandon at any problem without bothering to mention how it is going to be paid for.
It is revolting and revealing, both for a candidate for high office and also his prime media supporter.