Newspaper coverage of Congressman Joe Walsh’s child support payment problems diminished over the weekend.
I could find only two mentions in Chicago’s daily newspapers.
Walsh was ridiculed in the Chicago Tribune on Saturday. That’s probably the edition that is least read during the week.
The Tribune, of course, did not endorse Walsh and, at best, is Establishment Republican.
Thinking back on the endorsements I received in 16 state rep. elections, I can’t remember one I got when it could have made any difference.
Here’s a taste from the editorial, a suggestion for “an excellent slogan” for Walsh’s next election:
“Joe Walsh: He hates spending his own money, and he hates spending yours.“
A Sunday Chicago Sun-Times editorial page contribution also talks about the 2012 election.
Carol Marin, never a friend to conservatives, nevertheless seems to want to provide some “you know what, Walsh might win in 2012, even though he’s been trashed in the media” text she can point to just in case Walsh pulls off what will now be considered another stunning upset upset.
She reprints the front page of Thursday’s Sun-Times (just in case any Sunday readers missed it on Thursday, I guess).
Then she points to the first two words in the headline: “TEA PARTY.”
And, she starts her column,
“Don’t underestimate Joe Walsh.“
Considering the way all but the We Ask America polling firm dismissed Walsh’s possibility of beating Melissa Bean, a Marin favorite, I’d say the senior female opinion-maker in the Chicago area is hedging her bet this time.
Huffington Post reported Saturday that MSNBC’s Laurence O’Donnell has banned Walsh from his program until he pays his back child support.
Northwest Herald Executive Editor Chris Krug thinks pretty much everyone has watched the video above in which Joe Walsh goes toe-to-toe with Chris Matthews.
Krug also weighed in his Sunday. column. In view of his being part of the decision-making group that decided to endorse Melissa Bean last year, I find this comment of particular interest:
“So what I am now thinking is that, regardless of what he has done, does, says or might say, there may be room in Washington for Walsh for years to come.”
Are Krug and Marin laying the groundwork to explain a Walsh 2012 victory, however unlikely they think that possibility is?