lay off it already.

someone at the inky must hold a vendetta against mayoral candidate bob brady, at least that's my perception. he's received the worst publicity by far... beginning with saidel's dropping from the race (gotta buy the archived article) before brady even aanonced his official candidacy. then came the challenge of his petition, the negative reporting of which is justified because he was in the wrong. but when his intelligence was questioned, it really seemed that they were questioning questioning. while reporting on it, since it was discussed, is expected, what about commentaryon the fact that one candidate was using "heh, he's dumb" comments to put down a candidate. ... what about the dirty politicking side? are these candidates in preschool that they have to question someone's intelligence to win? (apparently, because for knox it seems to be working in his favor).

most recently, he's been hit by the lack of endorsements he's received and then today, his family was exploited because they work in the government, a story that makes assumptions of political influence it can't prove.(hey, if it was proven, good story).

even his brief positive coverage seems to imply a negative twist ... i agree his influence on the community college's strike was a great political move and likely why he orchestrated it ... but that's to be assumed. aren't all the candidates doing that? isn't that, whether you agree with it or not, the nature of politics?

don't get me wrong, i don't even want brady to win. and heck, he's brought most of these things on himself through years of ... well not corrupt, he he's definitely an insider that uses and likely abuses his power. but why is the inky harping on his bad side? i find it hard to believe it's all innocent reporting, when there's little in the way of attack on other candidates.

and fattah, where the heck are you? have you dropped out? oh wait, i'll just watch tv to hear your ideas since you barely comment in the papers...