Actually, Jim, we're not "pissed off" that in broaching the topic of negative campaigning with Wadhams you failed to question him critically on the subject. We're not upset either that you avoided a discussion of Wadhams' own documented negative campaigning tactics (such as lying to the news media and surreptitiously hiring bloggers to attack newspapers) in favor of such softball approaches to the topic as, "How do you keep it from becoming a free for all and staying on message?" And, "The Washington Monthly wrote of you last fall, quote, 'The mercurial Wadhams can shift from amiable to antagonistic in an instant.' An instant, Dick. Is that true??" And we're fine with the fact that in asking Wadhams about the "macaca" incident you neglected to ask the natural followup question: "Why did you lie to the news media at the time and claim they were putting words into Sen. Allen's mouth "that he did not say?" No, what we point out impassively in our items, such as the one we did on your March 14 interview (http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200703150006) with Wadhams, is to show how by not conducting a real news interview, you essentially provided a platform for conservative misinformation. That is, you teed it up for Dick Wadhams and let him drive it up the middle instead of pulling back the curtain and asking him to explain for your viewers how the tactics he uses serve the public good. Review the recorded video and transcript on our site Jim, you didn't even come close to asking a critical (not negative, but incisive) question of this man. Just because allegedly "everyone knows" that Wadhams is -- as you put it -- "loose with the facts" doesn't mean you shouldn't have asked him about it. He gets away with it because of a compliant news media. You certainly are not the only offender, but our item showed how you were acting true to that form. Bill Menezes Editorial Director Colorado Media Matters

this sounds alot like some lame review they wrote about my brief intvu with Wadhams in Colorado Media Matters. i think it think reaches a few dozen people with alot of spare time on their hands. get over it people. wadhams hasn't run many successful campaigns in Colorado because the media fawns over the guy. he's just very good at framing a race in a way that strikes a chord with voters. i brought up negative campaigning. he talked about why it works. he's a kick-butt, no prisoners, down and dirty, often loose with the facts campaigner. everyone knows it. i told him that's his reputation and he agreed with me. is there a follow up question i missed? his political opponents who are preoccupied with Wadhams and want voters to loathe him as much as they do should spend more time finding good candidates and getting their message out. so Wadhams has won alot of races because the media loves him? right. maybe the people who obviously shudder at this guy's success should learn to beat him at his own game. as a member of the media, i must say it's nice to get slammed by lefties lately after so many years of being derided by the right as flaming liberals with not-so-hidden agendas. we seem to be pissing off both sides off these days which is usually a good indication that we're playing it right down the middle. Jim Benemann/CBS4 News

Where is Pat Waak, and why isn't she out front exposing Wadhams for the type of bottom-feeder that he is?