Josh seems to be suggesting, in his earlier post, that my coverage of Jamie Pedersen was… well, here’s what Josh writes:

Eli’s coverage of Pedersen, which Pedersen used as a campaign hand out, is here.

Just to clarify: Josh was my editor at the time I wrote that piece. And when a local campaign consultant wrote him to ask whether Pedersen really deserved the attention he got in my piece, Josh wrote back:

First in a series on the election. Focus was on Jamie cuz the facts stand: He’s got some early advantages. Namely cash and gay I.D. for Murray’s seat. The intent was to make that point, but then set him up as simultaneously vulnerable with all the challengers. I believe the ending and Murray quote get at that.