How about some balanced reporting on political contributions by a so called "few lawyers" versus the "massive" support by one Don Blankenship to oust a few Democrats?
It looks like one out-of-state Virginia political corporate hack gave more to a dozen or so Republican candidates than a large group of lawyers gave to 12 Democrat candidates.
Thats right, Blankenship's contirbutions exceeded all of the combined contributions from all West Virginia lawyers that CALA writes about.
It is fascinating -- and highlights the complete lack of candor and moral degradation of CALA -- that those in control of CALA (Blankenship and his friends) can write such a piece complaining of the "many" participating in the political pocess, yet fail to acknowledge that the real threat in this election cycle is the attempt by one single out-of-state corporate mogul to attempt to buy many legislative seats just like he used millions of dollars in the last election cycle involving just one West Virginia Supreme Court seat.
Why not let The West Virginia Record be complete and accurate by reporting that ONE and only ONE out-of-state Virginia big business political hack gave more money to West Virginia candidates than a large group of instate lawyers gave to in-state candidates?
Blankenship is the real story here on "buying votes" in West Virginia, but it appears that The West Virginia Record is true to its political strategy of supporting and encouraging "one-vote rule" by casting its vote that ONE and only ONE out-of-state political corporate hack should rule West Virginia citizens.
Yours for clearer communications in the hopes that you take at least a more balanced approach in reporting the facts as opposed to the "spin,"
James C. Peterson
EDITOR'S NOTE: Peterson is an attorney with Hill, Peterson, Carper, Bee & Deitzler.