I don’t take a subscription to the Arizona Republic and the community-mini-version that was tossed on my carport this morning is a good reason why.
Joanie Flatt decided to write a column on Len Munsil and JD Hayworth titled, “Munsil, Hayworth make me glad I’m an Independent.” With great curiosity, I anxiously began to read about some new breaking revelation on the demographic psychoanalytical reasons why Ms. Flatt needed to profess partisan independence. Instead, to my great disappointment and anger, I got some old, reheated, regurgitated gossip column about a push poll that occurred before the Primary Election. In essence, it was another hit piece on Len Munsil.
If you recall – and I put myself at risk in falling into the same mudpit as Ms. Flatt – there was an illegal push poll conducted prior to the Primary Election which revealed a very personal story about Len and his family. The Munsil campaign went public about the story only after it was made an issue. Regardless, it was on the scale that anyone could relate to.
So I have to wonder why Ms. Flatt would take up the pen and revisit this story? Could it be that Ms Flatt Van Winkle awoke from a long slumber and felt she needed to comment on the story? Could it be that she had nothing substantive to write on other than some political gossip? Or, could it be that she simply holds great disdain towards cultural conservatives that she is trying to keep the story alive in order to keep taking shots at Len Munsil?
I would assert the later given her history of writing columns against cultural conservatives.
Remember the recent column in which she attacked Colette Rosati insinuating that Rosati was an anti-semite? I know Mrs. Rosati and Mrs. Rosati is anything but an anti-semite. What Joanie Flatt didn’t tell you is that she and her other RAPAW’s (Rich Anglo Pro-Abortion Women) held a fundraiser for Carolyn Allen who was Colette Rosati’s opponent in that senate race. Did I mention that Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona co-hosted that event with Ms. Flatt?
No the real motive here is that Ms. Flatt wants to keep the story of Len Munsil’s personal business alive in the public arena. The mere revisit and mention of the story is meant to serve as a media-sponsored attack on the Munsil campaign. I’d venture to say that it may even trigger matching funds by Clean Elections.
Imagine that I hypothetically brought up a story about Ms. Flatt’s addition to prescription drugs or that she has had three abortions or that CPS took her children away from her during her youthful years? Of course, I don’t know if these incidents are true and they are certainly none of my business, but the mere mention of them in the public arena now casts shadows and doubts as to Ms. Flatt’s reputation and credibility. It serves as a hypothetical attack on Joanie Flatt and the unwary reader will walk away with a certain impression of Ms. Flatt.
My point is this. While certain columnists feel the urge to linger on the personal life of conservative candidates like Len Munsil, the readers don’t care. They are smart enough to know when the old liberal media is tossing red meat and seeking to agitate readers to respond.
Fortunately, their are blogs like this which will point out what’s really going on in the press room.