|
|
||
Krystal Ball tries fairly hard early to prove herself unfit for Congress Date published: 6/21/2010
WE FEEL a little like the cowpoke in "Red River" who groused to the John Wayne character, "Fill a man full o' lead, stick him in the ground, an' then read words on him! When you've killed a man, why try to read the Lord in as a partner on the job?" Not that we have delusions of divinity, but why did 1st Congressional District challenger Krystal Ball read The Free Lance-Star in on the job of blasting Rep. Rob Wittman? In her first political mailer of the race, Ms. Ball, a Democrat, didn't resort to greasy deception--she started out that way. For one thing, the piece cites a Free Lance-Star link beneath the words "Wittman won't go against the Republican establishment even when voters beg him to be aggressive in what's going on in Washington." Neither the words nor the sentiment ever surfaced in a Free Lance-Star editorial--surely a natural inference--nor does the cited link contain that verbiage--though an average reader would conclude that the mailer's words are a direct quote. The citation is of a news story chiefly about Mr. Wittman's primary race, and reflects a view voiced by a supporter of Yosemite Sam acolyte Susan Crabill, whom Mr. Wittman beat about 4-to-1. If Ms. Ball believes partisan establishmentarianism is a major Wittman defect, why didn't she challenge Mrs. Crabill for the tea-party vote? Ms. Ball's mailbox gift to 1st District households also charges, "Wittman was ranked last in effectiveness of all Congressmen from Virginia." Indeed, Mr. Wittman's sole "power ranking" by KnowLegis, a lobbying information firm, places Mr. Wittman a pitiable 432nd among 435 House members for the year 2007. But, apparently to hold down typesetting fees, the mailer omits the crucial KnowLegis notations: "Too few terms or years in office in Congress to have significant clout" and "Member has reduced power due to Freshman status." That's putting it mildly. Mr. Wittman joined Congress on Dec. 13, 2007--four days before it adjourned for the holidays. Of course he had no clout: The congressional year expired almost as soon as he found his office bathroom! Mr. Wittman was a late arriver because he had to win a special election following the tragic death of Rep. Jo Ann Davis from breast cancer. Upon such circumstances does Krystal Ball build her tower of legerdemain. Ms. Ball, in fact, has all but disqualified herself from this race. Whatever Washington needs, we're pretty sure it's not more clever deception, not more half- and quarter-truths, not more contempt for common decency. On the evidence to date, what voter, Democrat or Republican, wants to be read in on Ms. Ball's miserable act?
I am no supporter of Krystal Ball, yet find the piece disgusting. I do not normally read FLS, but the few times I have read articles in it I did not see the writing skills to be as poor as those displayed here. Could this really be the work of a Free Lance Star writer? If so, why isn't the identity of the author revealed at least as "staff writer?"
The author must be affiliated with the Wittman?s campaign. The FLS hit piece on Catherine Crabill was even more dishonest.
I have looked at this mailer. It wasn't just about a ranking. It lays out a clear argument about why Wittman is ineffective and has no independence. The ranking is unfair only if it is an anomaly that is cited in order to distort a record. Only the FLS can't make that argument, because Wittman is ineffective. He was mediocre from the beginning and he still is. Gerry Connolly gets elected President of the Freshman class in his first few days; Wittman finds the bathroom! Damned with faint praise!
I apologize for my uncivil tone, but again you miscomprehend. Ms. Ball's statement was about Wittman's RANKING of effectiveness not his effectiveness per se. The FLS gives ample evidence as to why the RANKING of effectiveness was so low. Seriously, I do apologize. I can be a bit of a wiseacre at times.
Jim, thanks for the civil tone of your comment. The disclaimer doesn't work. The FLS uses the flawed rhetorical device of "Fred couldn't find his own rear-end. Now, I'm not saying Fred is slow or anything." You can't use a quote and then disclaim the central meaning of it. The excuse for Wittman's lackluster performance is not evidence that he is effective. Wouldn't that have been the easiest way to prove Ms. Ball's allegations false? But that would require actual evidence of effectiveness.
The editorial specifically demurred from comparing the FLS to God. What does "not that we have delusions of divinity" mean to you? Also, you seem to have missed the whole point of the editorial in that Ms. Ball was trying to put words into the mouth of the FLS. Also, the article gives plenty of reason why Wittman was ranked low in effectiveness. I give you an "A" for composition and an "F" for comprehension.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
