The U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts to replace Ted Kennedy is heating up. Republican Scott Brown has made it "tick tight" (to borrow from Dan Rather) for Martha Coakley, and Democrats are very nervous, and spending money on TV ads. It's on the Washington Post front page today. ABC's Jake Tapper added this from the White House on Twitter Wednesday morning:
Gibbs says "a lot at stake" w/Mass. Senate race but POTUS still has no plans to go. Hmmmm.
Do they fear a repeat of New Jersey, proof Obama might hurt more than help, even in a blue state? This makes me wonder: how are ABC, CBS, and NBC covering this race as it heats up? They haven't done a single story yet.
So they haven't touched on outrageous Democrat plans to delay seating Brown if he wins. They haven't touched on Coakley's debate gaffes from Monday night, like saying (as we lose American fighters to roadside bombs in Afghanistan) terrorists "are not there any more."
How can liberal journalists say Sarah Palin's dumb, and let Coakley say stupid things like that?
When will the referees of campaign discourse rule on Coakley suggesting Brown is a cad for voting against forcing Catholic hospitals to dispense (sometimes) abortion-causing pills to rape victims. Kathryn Lopez has more. The Boston Globe has suggested that maybe Coakley's the soft-on-rape candidate.
It's a little bizarre that the broadcast networks would cover Ted Kennedy's death and funeral as an enormous story, but ignore the campaign to replace him.