So if he had a picture of himself with Bill Clinton on his web site, would that mean he's claiming that Clinton has endorsed him? I don't think so. And hopefully Bill Sherman doesn't either, since Sherman's web site has just such a photo.

http://www.billsherman.org/aboutbill.html

I don't see the weasel factor. It looks like every other campaign web site or brochure. See the candidate! See him with other mucky-mucks with whom he regularly works on the issues of the day! See him on his bike! See him with ordinary folks! See him with his family! It may be cheesy, but it's time-honored, and not weaselly.

Ron Sims gets photographed with every person on the planet. I just don't believe in the sinister implication that he is endorsing everybody standing by his side. I think y'all are holding Pedersen, about whom I have no opinion, to a silly standard (do you want a disclaimer? "No inference should be made that any person appearing on this web site has endorsed Jamie Pedersen or any other candidate"). Let's catch him jaywalking or having a smoke within 25 feet of a bar or something else truly awful before concluding he's a weasel.

sigh, it's a shame, considering the really good clean campaigns great candidates like Dick Kelley, Bill Sherman, and Stephanie Pure are running.

Looking forward to the July 22nd Town Hall Candidates Forum for the 43rd!

Huh? --- this is some sort of scandal? To get yu photo taken with activist political leaders - esp. such nefarious types as Murray and Sims.

I think the weasal is in its cage next to your desk Josh.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, go look for a real political story.

By he way, the theory out there is that Ed Murray recruited Jamie to run, and has chickened out somehow now that its time for an endorsement. Maybe that is the real story?????

Ms. Pure meets the Devil --- sounds like a Stranger interview teaser line..... Who is she?

First Savage claims Pedersen asserts himself as the only candidate to support marriage equality, although Pedersen does not; now Feit claims that Pedersen asserts that certain politicos endorse him, although, once again, Pedersen does not.

This is some crack investigative journalism: fallaciously assigning a candidate a position and then lambasting him for it. Fine work. Keep it up.

WF-

The difference being that Sherman's photo with Clinton *has a caption* that clearly explains that Sherman worked with Bill, and that Bill isn't endorsing him.

I just checked out Jamie's site, and it doesn't look like such a big deal after all.

To call Pedersen a weasel because he has photos of himself with other elected officials on his campaign site is silly. Even worse, however, is using this trivial attempt at a "gotcha" to insinuate a string of weasel-like behavior on Pedersen's part. Part 9? Are we skipping all the parts between one and nine? I started out interested in some of the issues Dan was bringing up related to Pedersen. With this post it just seems like a pile-on vendetta. I haven't yet made up my mind about whether to support Pedersen in this race, but it's pretty easy to support him as a general candidate against muck this.

Let's see some real news and information about the race for the 43rd.

I suppose it would be too hard to select the endorsement button on Jamie's website to see the current list of endorsements.
The photos gave me context into the work that Jamie has done for my community.
I'm not sure why the bash Jamie posts continue here. I guess we'll have to continue to wonder what their real agenda is......

Hmm.....i think this is fully legitimate reporting. Having photos on your website of yourself with politicos definitely implies endorsement if there's no disclaimer. i think it's worthy news.
thanks Josh!
kate

Jamie Pedersen tried to friend me on MySpace. Har har.

If this is the Kate who also works at the Danger, you need to disclaim yourself, or it is news that you have implied you are impartial and not just another hack friend.

Get real Stranger homies, if NEWS drove up in a bus, the drivers crotch would be more interesting than the cargo at the Stranger.

With many many millions of ad revenue, this is the extent of investigative reporting - or is it a spoof of same? Yes, it is a spoof, oh, how silly I am. Har, har, har.

Photos showing Jamie mixing and mingling with all those layers of good local Dems implies nothing - unless one of them has his fly left open, take a closer look Josh.

And remember Kate - disclaiming ALL is the buzz word there in the anti news room.

I used to like Jim Street but am leading to Jamie. He seems like he runs his own ship - and has a record of working on many issues.

Plus he came by the house last week - I do like the doorbelling effort. Impressive.

Ed Murray has never come by in all these years. Maybe he needs a crowded primary?

Jake1 writes: "By he way, the theory out there is that Ed Murray recruited Jamie to run, and has chickened out somehow now that its time for an endorsement. Maybe that is the real story?????"

This is not the case. Although Murray did make an effort to recruit a gay candidate to run for the seat, they each declined. Pedersen was not among those targeted.

That said, no candidate in the race necessarily needs Murray's stamp of approval to be considered legit - although I guess for the sole gay candidate in the race, it couldn't hurt.

I think the Stranger (Dan, Josh) should just admit who they're supporting in the 43rd (it's obviously not Jamie Pedersen) so we can discount this lame gotcha journalism they're peddling. All these earnest attempts to frame Jamie as a weasel Fall. So. Flat.

Myspace is devolving politics. Thank God we know one of Jamie's favorite show's is the West Wing and, oh, he likes Rufus Wainwright too. I don't need to know this stuff about my politicians. I do want to know where they stand on issues beyond vague platitudes.