"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
No Convention For PWC Clerk
By Greg L | 6 May 2007 | Prince William County | 8 Comments
The Manassas Journal-Messenger followed up today with a re-hash of the PWCRC press release announcing that the convention for Clerk of the Court will be canceled with the withdrawal of Lucy Beauchamp. Every quote in the press release is used in the article, plus one soundbite from Beauchamp. I don’t know whether to be pleased that if you write a press release like a newspaper article it’ll quite likely be slightly repackaged and form almost the entire basis for a piece of journalism, or to be disappointed that the MJM is so uninterested in what’s going on in this race that they won’t dig much at all beyond what’s sent to them.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
8 Comments
Views: 637
Loading ...
Well, they already had two articles about it from Lucy’s point of view, and they ran an ad from Lucy’s campaign about it.
So while I agree with you that it’s sad that papers run press releases almost verbatim, I’m not dissapointed that they didn’t rehash everything they already said twice.
The real question is, Who will the paper endorse, and how much will the bad press that Kopko has received impact the endorsement?
So you don’t know whether to be “disappointed” that the MJM (and the Pot News, too, for that matter) didn’t join in your campaign against Kopko? Or are you really “disappointed” that Kopko isn’t the story?
Perhaps this simply demonstrates the objective irrationality of your campaign against Kopko, Greg.
The Kopko cabal has apparently won this battle -
but not the war. Some may argue with Koranic
intensity that the rules were followed but it simply
won’t pass the smell test - Lucy was apparently
unwilling to practice the sharia politics of the PW
GOP mullahs. Good for her- she will win in November.
Not so fast, I think that this may cost both Michelle and Lucy the clerkship. The Democratic Candidiate - Ryland has to be in the driver’s seat now for this race.
“Big Dog’s” rant is childish… much like the candidate he/she apparently supports. The fact that Lucy couldn’t turn out enough votes to win a convention in May bodes ill for her chances of turning out enough voters to win in November.
However, I am concerned about the sentiments expressed by Anon 11:19. It would be foolish to dismiss Ryland (who, while not a friend, is a friendly acquaintance of mine); he is a serious candidate who once, let us not forget, filled in as Clerk when Dave Mabie’s predecessor retired, and was the Democrat nominee in 1991. The question he has to answer is why a practicing attorney would want to become Clerk of Court.
Lucy’s actions in trying to harm the GOP and its nominee strike me as a classic case of childish sour grapes. Now that Lucy’s GOP support is melting away, I see an increasing likelihood that she will simply drop out and throw her support to the Democrat.
“Lucy’s actions in trying to harm the GOP and its nominee”
Now telling the truth - or the truth as one legitimately sees it - is harming the party. If the “party” didn’t put itself in this position so frequently, maybe it couldn’t be harmed.
And maybe I missed it, but I haven’t seen Lucy say anything negative in regard to McQuigg. If she did, please point it out, because I truly did not see it.
I don’t see any inconsistency in Young’s remarks - the party is right, the leadership is right. Period. In regard to Gill and in regard to Beauchamp.
I am trying to figure out how Greg can think that this is merely Lucy being a bad sport, but not Lucas. The only difference is that Beauchamp was not willing to stick around and take it and Lucas is. They both contend to some degree that the “system” may have been manipulated against them in some manner, and that the manipulator is Kopko. Why is it feasible that Kopko manipulated in favor of Gill, but not in favor of McQuigg? Simply because there was no exchange of cash?
Well, Anon 2:27, it’s hardly surprising that someone who has never lifted a finger for the GOP would try to harm it when it became apparent to her that she couldn’t get from it what she wanted. As for “truth,” remember that this is the same School Board Chairman who allowed the County schools to be used as a stalking horse for higher taxes… twice. When I look for “truth,” I look in the direction precisely the opposite from the one Lucy Beauchamp is pointing to.
“I haven’t seen Lucy say anything negative in regard to McQuigg.” Have you seen Lucy say anything at all? I haven’t. She’s just trashed the GOP, and by implication, its nominees. That she hasn’t been specific and directed at McQuigg specifically doesn’t diminish the fact that she is trying to harm the GOP.
I happen to agree with your last paragraph; Greg is hardly consistent. The difference between the two is, of course, that Kopko has associated himself with an attorney representing someone suing Greg, against whom Julie is running. I doubt that it’s more complicated than that.
It certainly is entertaining, though.