Alabama Politics Bleg
I'll cop to it: I don't have any familiarity with current Alabama politics, and I have too many irons in the fire right now to go start researching a whole new area.
Can anyone out there, better informed than I, explain this story to me--that is, provide some background and context? It sure seems to me there's something--a bunch?--missing from this piece. (Of course, I get the obvious.)
So, is the biggest issue here race? Sexual orientation? (It seems pretty clear it's not really the financial disclosure issue.) Deep in the story, it appears that it is race, but you'd never get that from the headline of this article or the contents of its first page.
What are we dancing around here? And, as a side issue, am I alone in thinking that the writing and editing of this story is, well, odd?
Can anyone out there, better informed than I, explain this story to me--that is, provide some background and context? It sure seems to me there's something--a bunch?--missing from this piece. (Of course, I get the obvious.)
MONTGOMERY, Ala. - A Democratic Party committee Thursday night disqualified an openly gay candidate for the Alabama Legislature and the woman she defeated in the primary runoff because both women violated a party rule that party officials said no other candidate has obeyed since 1988.
The committee voted 5-0 to disqualify Patricia Todd, who was attempting to become the state's first openly gay legislator, and Gaynell Hendricks.
...
Attorney Bobby Segall told the committee earlier Thursday that if the party disqualified Todd for not filing a financial disclosure form with the party chairman it would also have to disqualify the party's nominee for governor, Lt. Gov. Lucy Baxley, and for lieutenant governor, former Gov. Jim Folsom Jr.
"Lucy Baxley is out of here. Just let the Republicans take over the state Senate and the House. Jim Folsom is out of here," Segall said in an emotional presentation to the committee. Committee members announced their decision about two hours after the hearing ended.
Committee members and party officials said the committee's decision would not affect any other Democratic Party nominees — like Baxley — because the results of other races have already been certified.
So, is the biggest issue here race? Sexual orientation? (It seems pretty clear it's not really the financial disclosure issue.) Deep in the story, it appears that it is race, but you'd never get that from the headline of this article or the contents of its first page.
What are we dancing around here? And, as a side issue, am I alone in thinking that the writing and editing of this story is, well, odd?
