by David Safier
I've got no problem with the Star giving space to the Chris Simcox saga. I excerpted the New Times story about Simcox's weird mixture of alcohol, guns, his family and the police. It's a pip.
But why is this a story the Star covers, when it leaves out so many meatier political stories, like the 7 religious leaders who flew to D.C. to tell McCain about their objections to SB1070, which makes it look like McCain is on the other side of this issue from spokespeople for major religious groups? Or like the story about the move to lighten the faces on a Prescott mural, which points to a just-below-the-surface (and sometimes right-at-the-surface) racism in Arizona?
I know. The Simcox story bleeds, and the Star loves that. Our "local focus" paper runs murder and rape stories from all over the country.
But let me offer another possibility. Simcox was an adviser to Hayworth. Hayworth's name is mentioned in the story 6 times. And the McCain campaign has one of those "deeply troubling" quotes Republicans love about the association between Hayworth and Simcox.
Our "Speak no evil about McCain" daily relishes the opportunity to trash Hayworth and make McCain look good by comparison.
No story is too petty to cover if it gives McCain a boost. No story is too significant to omit if it puts McCain in a bad light. That was true during the presidential campaign, it's true in primary season and if McCain comes through the primaries, I imagine it will be true in the general as well.
C'mon, Star, prove me wrong. Let's see a story that might cause the McCain camp a little grief.