The Scozzofava campaign, under fire from the teabagging Right despite being the GOP candidate in the race, has become increasingly annoyed at the criticism. Things boiled over when the candidate called the police on a Weekly Standard reporter following her to her car yelling out questions during and after a public event. The Weekly Standard claims it was being respectful but firm asking questions. The Scozzofava campaign claims the reporter, John McCormack, was aggressive and abusive:
This self-described reporter repeatedly screamed questions while our candidate was doing what she is supposed to be doing: speaking with voters (remember, those who will decide this election?). And then this "reporter" followed the candidate to her car, continuing to carry on in a manner that would make the National Enquirer blush.
The feud has now escalated with the Scozzofava campaign leaking an email exchange to TPM:
McCormack, Thursday, October 15, 10:39 p.m.:
Hi Matt,
Two questions:
Will Assemblywoman Scozzafava pledge to run in 2010 in the Republican primary if there is a primary?
Does she pledge to vote for the Republican Leader, Rep. Boehner, as speaker of the House in 2011 if she wins?
Burns, Thursday, October 15, 10:54 p.m.:
- Dede is focused on the election that is Nov. 3.
- Dede has been clear: she supports making Rep. Boehner Speaker of the House.
McCormack, Thursday, October 15, 10:59 p.m.:
Thanks. Regarding the second question, just to be 100% clear, could you say whether she would vote to make the Republican Leader Speaker in 2011 and 2013 if she's elected?
Burns, Thursday, October 15, 11:04 p.m.:
I don't understand you're question...we haven't even gotten through this election and you're asking about four years from now? She supports making Leader Boehner the Speaker. Period.
McCormack, Thursday, October 15, 11:09 p.m.:
Okay, I'll try to explain: you wrote that she "supports" making him Speaker. That means she currently supports making him speaker. Does she pledge to vote for him to be Speaker of the House in 2011? I'm not trying to be cute. Just want to make sure you're not saying, in effect, well now she supports making him speaker but she could change in 12 months.
Burns, Thursday, October 15, 11:27 p.m.:
She is a vote for Rep. Boehner.
Btw, will you be working at the Weekly Standard in 2011? 2013? How about 2015?
Burns, Thursday, October 15, 11:30 p.m.:
Why can't you use the future tense? Can you say the following?
"She will vote for Rep. Boehner in 2011."
Again, I'm not trying to be cute. I just want to get this right.
To answer your question about my working at TWS: I might; I might not. Is that what you're trying to say about her commitment to vote for Boehner in 2011? Maybe she will? Maybe she won't?
McCormack, Thursday, October 15, 11:35 p.m.:
John - With all due respect, stop being ridiculous. She is a vote for Rep. Boehner. Period. I can say it six different ways, but that apparently won't appease you. I'm done trying.
The Scozzofava campaign thinks this makes the Weekly Standard look unreasonable. But I'll disagree.
First of all, why leak these emails to a progressive media outlet? If you're trying to shake off accusations that you are too liberal a Republican, why would you run to TPM (even if TPM initiated the exchange)? Sure, the National Review also hates her campaign, but the Washington Times would've likely played along. Weird.
But more importantly, the exchange isn't as damning as the Scozzofava campaign would have people believe. The question was reasonable -- would the candidate pledge to continue supporting Boehner in future years. Given her history, one of the Right's arguments against her is that she's a future defection threat, like Arlen Specter. It's perfectly reasonable to ask her campaign whether she's committed to the GOP long-term.
Now how hard would it have been for Scozzofava's guy to say, "Yeah, of course. Now it might not be Boehner, who knows who will run for Republican leader in future years? But she'll vote for a Republican as long as she serves." The fact that McCormack Burns refused to pledge Scozzofava's long-term support for the GOP House leader is downright bizarre and -- yes -- suspicious.
The response is Lieberman-esque, and given her difficulties with her base, it's particularly inexplicable. And to think that Burns thinks this somehow makes Scozzafava's campaign look like reasonable actors as opposed to the crazy Weekly Standard is downright bizarre. I don't know who is closer to the truth with the parking lot altercation episode, but on this email thread, it's clear that the Weekly Standard is on solid ground.