|
News Blogs
 
112th Assembly District ad sparks war of words
By Lee Coleman
Friday, September 26, 2008
Republican 112th Assembly District candidate Tony Jordan is accusing Democrat Ian McGaughey of Wilton of lying in his radio commercials about his town tax record. Jordan said in a prepared statement that McGaughey claimed he didn't just "cut taxes, he eliminated them." Jordan wants his opponent to pull the ad from the radio because, Jordan claims, the town of Wilton created its no tax town budget in 1982 for the 1983 budget year, when McGaughey didn't even live in Wilton. McGaughey responded by saying that the Town Board must create and approve a town budget each year that has no town general fund or highway fund taxes. McGaughey, who is serving his second term as a town councilman, has voted "year after year" to keep the town a "no tax" town. "I stand by my record," McGaughey said. "I'm proud of that." He has no plans on pulling his radio ad. For complete local election coverage, including a list of all local races, a link to find your polling place and biographies and video Q&As for candidates for state and federal offices, visit DailyGazette.com's special election section at www.dailygazette.com/elections.
comments
|
Advertisement
| ||||||||
July 4, 2009
9:28 a.m. [ Suggest removal ]
Once again, I question what this Votes & Notes Blog is all about? The last time I commented, I was told it was for items of interest that weren't covered in the print edition. But this story was there yesterday. I still say, "If you want candidate blogs, invite the candidates to blog." Having regular reporters blog for them inescapably compromises the reporters.
2:12 p.m. [ Suggest removal ]
And Grant, I will say AGAIN that our reporters are not blogging "on behalf" of anybody ... They are blogging when they get some information they consider newsworthy but for which we don't have the room in our print edition ... If you read both items you commented on, you will see that they are about issues brought up by one campaign and that we went out and got a response from the other candidate and did some of our own reporting to detarmine if the claims had any validity.
I hardly see how determining the truth of a candidate's claims is reporting "on behalf" of anybody unless it's your candidate that got caught in a lie.
Would you rather we just let candidates say whatever the hell they want without checking the veracity of their claims???
11:32 a.m. [ Suggest removal ]
Fortunately for all of us who read the Gazette, associating one of your reporter's names with a story (print or blog) gives it an imprimatur that causes your readers to treat it differently than if it were to be labeled as just coming from a politician's press release. Like it or not, we trust you guys more than them!