More on the PoliticsPA thing

Chris already knows about this, since he posted on the thread, but others might want to check out this blog post in which Above Average Jane explains that there was a source to PoliticsPA regarding Ginny Schrader's conference call who felt negatively about her performance there, contra Chris's allegation that PoliticsPA was "simply making this all up" and "just making shit up".  

And it was herself:

I chose not to write about the Schrader call [beyond a brief mention]. I have been out that evening and did not get in on the call until it was half over, and already into the question and answer phase. I asked about flooding, a problem in that area. Schrader said her opponent had called for a study but she thought something needed to be done about flooding, although she didn't know what. That did not strike me as being a well-formed answer, especially from someone who ran for the office before and has had additional time since then to work on policy positions. I also noted that she described a neighboring county as having a better organized Democratic party than the county she would primarily represent. I was not surprised at the notion of one county's party being better organized but that she picked the one she did as an example, as I had heard it described as being unorganized as well. I don't have a transcript of the call but my memory is that she did say another county's party was better organized, possibly because there was a higher percentage of D's there.

Chris, you claimed PoliticsPA had no sources.  Turns out, they had at least one.

Tags: (all tags)

Comments

10 Comments

Gee
Thanks for adressing a diary to me when I already knew, and posted, on the thread in question.
by Chris Bowers 2005-08-10 11:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Gee
Wasn't addressed to you, really.  More like everyone else here, since you haven't incorporated what that blogger said into a separate posting here or as a correction into any of the pre-existing ones.
by Adam B 2005-08-10 12:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Gee
I didn't want to cause Jane any more headaches than she already had. If I had put up another post about it, discussing what JAne wrote, it would ahve generated a lot of traffic on her site. This not only could ahve crashed her server or used up her bandwith, but it could have led to a lot of flames being sent her way. She made her post, I made my reply. The matter seemed settled.
by Chris Bowers 2005-08-10 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Gee
Chris, she posts on a Blogspot site.  Server/bandwidth aren't concerns.

I think you have every right to say to people on your calls, "If you're going to get on the call, I expect you to post something about it" and not to abuse access to the calls as a way of being a source to other media.

I still think, however, that some further corrections and retractions of your initial allegations here are in order.   There was a source.  Just not multiple.

by Adam B 2005-08-10 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Gee
"I still think, however, that some further corrections and retractions of your initial allegations here are in order. There was a source. Just not multiple."

No, I won't be doing that. I already stated that I was incorrect about this on a number of occassions, including in the original posts on the subject. If that isn't good enough for you, tough.

And have you ever seen what happens to a smaller blog when they criticize a big blog, and then the big blog links back to the criticism? You can see what happens here.

by Chris Bowers 2005-08-10 01:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Gee
You've stated you may have been wrong about tying this Publius to the Publius at Claremont McKenna, but where did you post that PoliticsPA didn't "make shit up" but, in fact, had a source that was on the call?
by Adam B 2005-08-10 02:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Gee
Don't you have something better to do than make an ass of yourself?
by Gary Boatwright 2005-08-10 03:28PM | 0 recs
According to their retraction,
they had exactly one source. The original piece, I believe, claimed they had heard it from "numerous" sources. While one is a number, it's hardly a number that people would call numerous. Hence the accusation of making $#!+ up.
by catastrophile 2005-08-10 12:28PM | 0 recs
This isn't much of a source
Those are the most scatter brained comments I think I've ever read and this diary isn't much better.

If the point of this diary is to impress me with how blonde you and Jane are, you succeeded admirably.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-08-10 01:13PM | 0 recs
Neighboring county?
Which neighboring county is in question here?  Philly? Montco?  I think the suggestion that their D's are not better organized than the ones in Bucks would be pretty uninformed itself.
by looking italian 2005-08-10 02:57PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads