I’m a bit behind.

I’ve been sick, so excuse me while I pour through some “old news.”

Bias all around.

• Did you see Rep. Harold Ford, Jr.’s letter to the Commercial Appeal on Wednesday?

Your Jan. 10 headline, “Ford Jr. accused of links to Abramoff,” was grossly unfair and wrong.

I don’t know Jack Abramoff, have never taken money from Jack Abramoff or any of the tribes he represented. There is absolutely no evidence to support these allegations. None whatsoever.

It is my strong hope that the editors of this newspaper will place a higher standard on accuracy and not become a mouthpiece or advocate for one candidate over another in the U.S. Senate race.

This U.S. Senate campaign in Tennessee will be one of the most competitive and interesting in the nation, with plenty of compelling stories generated in the weeks and months ahead. Let those stories be about who has the better answers for the future of Tennessee rather than false accusations.

U.S. Rep. Harold Ford Jr.

Washington

Links added.

I find this letter amusing for several reasons:

1. For starters, the letter’s dateline is “Washington.” Maybe it’s unfair of me to laugh at this, given that Ford was elected to work in D.C., but the other letter writers have their Tennessee hometowns listed. Doesn’t Ford live in Memphis? Do you get the feeling he’d rather live in Washington, anyway?

2. Ford says the headline is “grossly unfair and wrong,” but paragraph one attributes to the Corker campaign the accusations objectively referred to in the headline, with ample pushback by Ford spokesmen included. Simply responding to such charges, even once, is often a luxury not afforded to conservatives.

3. Ford implies that the paper has become “a mouthpiece or advocate” for another candidate in the Senate race, presumably Bob Corker, and complains there is no evidence backing the accusations. But the paper specifically sources the Washington Post and Associated Press as confirmation for two of the alleged Abramoff connections and later adds, “press accounts have linked all four to Abramoff’s lobbying work.” The Appeal allows Ford spokesmen to respond to Corker’s campaign no fewer than three times, and the Ford campaign is quoted directly four times. The Corker campaign is not directly quoted, even once, in the article, while a representative of the Van Hillary campaign is at least given one partial direct quote, two words long.

4. Ford calls his own campaign “one of the most… interesting in the nation, with plenty of compelling stories…” So, I guess we can’t accuse him of modesty.

Also, just as an observation, I find it interesting that Ford uses the old-fashioned method of responding to the newspaper via a letter to the editor. Of course I don’t frown on that practice or find it unnecessary; Ford probably gets plenty of exposure that way, and it makes sense to have your response printed in the same place the accusation was made.

On the other hand, readers have a harder time determining how valid his complaints are in a format where the original report is not reposted or linked. And the editors, for whatever reason, do not respond or allow their reporter to do so.

I notice that neither the article nor Ford’s letter is listed on his campaign News Room page, while a Jan. 6 CA article is included. For more details from the Ford angle, you would have to visit the unofficial Ford for Senate blog. Perhaps the campaign simply hasn’t had time to post that entry to their official campaign website yet.

• For a vivid contrast to this episode, see John Farmer’s blog post, “Media Bias?”

Farmer also writes in response to an Appeal article, written by the same reporter, as it turns out. In this case the reader can immediately click to the orignal article and read the candidate’s response in detail. Online, the conversation becomes much more interesting and informative… and if the Commercial Appeal was interested in defending its report, it could easily do so by submitting a comment, and the dialogue would continue.

• Finally, the Memphis Flyer’s Jackson Baker weighs in on the County Commission primary debate discussed last Friday.

I’m a little suspicious of Baker’s “fireworks” line and following quote, if only because he fails to mention that this very episode was questioned and clarified later in the debate, with several in the audience offering varied accounts of what they thought they heard. On that note, I’m not of much use: I don’t quite remember what candidate Mike Rude said, exactly, which is why I was glad the point was clarified. Unfortunately, Flyer readers are left without that clarification.

Is it bias? I have no idea.

Perhaps Rude will write a letter to the editor. ;)

America is shifting Leftward.

• So says Dick Morris. Do you agree?

Tennessee Ethics.

• The Bryson vote failed 15-16, with outgoing Republican caucus leader Jeff Miller voting with 15 Democrats, and Sen. Micheal Williams (R- Maynardville) abstaining. That means indicted senators will be voting on their own ethics reform. Doesn’t that just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside? At least Wendi Thomas is looking on the bright side.
• Here’s a report from Tre Hargett:
  

  The proposed bill has some components which I believe are long overdue and some which I believe may have some unintended consequences, however I believe all members of the General Assembly will step up to the challenge before us. We must work together to re-establish the public’s confidence in Tennessee government…

  We can enact the most stringest lobbyist, legislator, and campaign finance laws in the nation, but if we don’t elect good legislators then we won’t have good government. Conversely, though if we elect good legislators, we can have good government regardless of the degree of restrictions placed on anyone involved in the process.

  For now, though, it looks like we’ll have to settle for whatever compromise the good legislators can strike with the bad ones and hope for the best.

Memphis.

• Mayor Herenton has made a no new taxes pledge for this year. This comes just days after Herenton endorsed Commissioner John Willingham’s 2.5% payroll tax idea. Like they say, you’ve got to read between the lips.
• Dutch Treat Luncheon meets tomorrow. It’s a monthly, non-partisan townhall meeting for patriots.

Have a great weekend.

If you are a subscriber, you should be getting the January issue within the next few days, if it hasn’t arrived already. That should help occupy you over the weekend while the blog is on break. See you Monday, Lord willing.