Actual press coverage
I was quite pleased to see that a local newspaper printed a substantive discussion of the campaign in the 21st congressional district. The Record (sometimes called the Troy Record since it's office is in Troy) ran an article by Robert Cristo on Thursday, October 12th. It appeared on page 10 in the Local News section, though I could not find it on their website. It is a big article, covering more than half the page.
The article really gets my message out better than any other media story so far. First it prints my attack on McNulty for voting for the Iraq war, and his more recent waffling (he now says the war was a mistake, says we should get out, but just voted to continue funding it). Meanwhile the McNulty quotes do not deliver any kind of clear message (because he doesn't have one).
The article then moves on to my "stop wasting money" theme, detailing my criticism of the Republican leadership and Bush. It even hits my key point about not wasting billions defending rich countries. It again quotes McNulty, but again his position is lost in unclear Democratic Party rhetoric.
Thank you to The Record for giving substantive coverage to this campaign.
I should also give kudos to the Times Union for calling me to get my opinion on the North Korean nuclear test, and reporting what I said. Their article is on the web (for now at least) at: http://www.timesunion.com/ASPStories/Story.asp?storyID=524211&newsdate=10/12/2006&BCCode=MBTA
Thanks to Cathy Woodruff for calling and to Liz Benjamin and the TU for printing what I had to say about this issue. They had spoken with Sweeney and McNulty, and decided they should hear what the challengers had to say. This was a particularly good article because it showed a strong contrast between myself and the other three. All of them spoke about sanctions and diplomacy, in typically vague politician terms. I said we didn't need to take a lead role, that the four countries surrounding N. Korea (Russia, China, Japan and S. Korea) are quite powerful and don't need our help. It also hit on my key position - that we've been defending Japan and South Korea for 60 and 50 years, and it's time they took care of themselves.
I should also mention that the Daily Gazette also mentioned me in an article, apparently about Eric Sundwall's effort in federal court to get back on the ballot - I was there supporting Eric. Unfortunately I haven't seen the article. I think it was written by Bob Conner. This one has me confused though. I got a call and an e-mail from some Republican leaders saying that I shouldn't say bad things about Sweeney. This was in reference to that article in the Gazette. I saw some friends in Scotia that evening and asked them about it. They told me the article just mentioned me briefly, and that I hadn't said anything bad about Sweeney. If anyone has that article and can scan it and e-mail it to me, I'd appreciate it.
3 1/2 weeks to the election. Hopefully the voters will get to read a bit more about the differences before they vote.
The article really gets my message out better than any other media story so far. First it prints my attack on McNulty for voting for the Iraq war, and his more recent waffling (he now says the war was a mistake, says we should get out, but just voted to continue funding it). Meanwhile the McNulty quotes do not deliver any kind of clear message (because he doesn't have one).
The article then moves on to my "stop wasting money" theme, detailing my criticism of the Republican leadership and Bush. It even hits my key point about not wasting billions defending rich countries. It again quotes McNulty, but again his position is lost in unclear Democratic Party rhetoric.
Thank you to The Record for giving substantive coverage to this campaign.
I should also give kudos to the Times Union for calling me to get my opinion on the North Korean nuclear test, and reporting what I said. Their article is on the web (for now at least) at: http://www.timesunion.com/ASPStories/Story.asp?storyID=524211&newsdate=10/12/2006&BCCode=MBTA
Thanks to Cathy Woodruff for calling and to Liz Benjamin and the TU for printing what I had to say about this issue. They had spoken with Sweeney and McNulty, and decided they should hear what the challengers had to say. This was a particularly good article because it showed a strong contrast between myself and the other three. All of them spoke about sanctions and diplomacy, in typically vague politician terms. I said we didn't need to take a lead role, that the four countries surrounding N. Korea (Russia, China, Japan and S. Korea) are quite powerful and don't need our help. It also hit on my key position - that we've been defending Japan and South Korea for 60 and 50 years, and it's time they took care of themselves.
I should also mention that the Daily Gazette also mentioned me in an article, apparently about Eric Sundwall's effort in federal court to get back on the ballot - I was there supporting Eric. Unfortunately I haven't seen the article. I think it was written by Bob Conner. This one has me confused though. I got a call and an e-mail from some Republican leaders saying that I shouldn't say bad things about Sweeney. This was in reference to that article in the Gazette. I saw some friends in Scotia that evening and asked them about it. They told me the article just mentioned me briefly, and that I hadn't said anything bad about Sweeney. If anyone has that article and can scan it and e-mail it to me, I'd appreciate it.
3 1/2 weeks to the election. Hopefully the voters will get to read a bit more about the differences before they vote.
posted by Albany Lawyer at 9:04 AM
1 Comments:
Wow, you got a great quote in the TU. Very cool that they gave you so much ink compared to the other quotes. Funny how your 'challenger' position is actually different than your opponent's, unlike a certain race to the north. I'll say it, I'm shocked that the TU gave you so much play. But...
(you knew there was a 'but' right?)
I remember seeing this article in the TU and I honestly don't recall seeing your quote in there, although you'd have thought I'd notice since I just posted that Q&A with you. I guess what I'm saying is that I read the beginning, saw quotes from the incumbants and the obligatory quote from their darling Gillibrand (who I can't imagine would know a bilateral talk if it bit here you know where), and didn't read to the end. Hopefully a lot more people were more observant than me, read to the end, and got some more information to help them decide who to vote for next month.
Post a Comment
<< Home