editorial left me disheartened. I hardly know where to begin in citing errors of commission and artful omissions. Like not mentioning that Fossella outspent Harrison 13-to-1 in 2006. Or suggesting that Staten Island went 57% for Bush in 2006, when there was no presidential campaign. They should also check back and see whether Mr. Bush is still as well-liked there as he was last time he ran. I remember Harrison quoting approval ratings for Bush of 28% in 2006. I found this excerpt particularly astonishing:

"Brooklyn has its own congressional districts -- three in their entirety and parts of two others. The 13th C.D. is Staten Island's only congressional district. Population distribution and fairness dictate it should be considered a Staten Island seat."

What does that make Bay Ridge - the Puerto Rico of Staten Island? Are its residents only allowed to vote for Staten islanders, not to represent their own district? Were I a resident of the Brooklyn part of this district, I'd immediately start a campaign to be redistricted into one of "Brooklyn's own" districts, where I'd be allowed full participation.

The tone of the piece leaves little doubt about where they stand, as well: using words like "livid" and "pique" to describe Harrison pretty much say it all. That's why the call it "opinion", I guess. I don't want to sound defeatist, but I don't have a good feeling about the Harrison campaign, and it's not coming just from the Advance, or the SI Democratic Committee, or Vito Lopez' endorsement of McMahon. The worst sign to me is that the last two articles the New York Times ran about this district didn't even mention Harrison's candidacy. He's officially a non-person there - and they endorsed him in 06.