Cory Booker made headlines four years ago when he tried to take on the Sharpe James regime in Newark and lost. Disgusted with the poverty, the crime, the corruption that categorized Newark, Booker took the drastic step of moving into the projects while on the City Council. From blacks he’s faced charges that he’s an Uncle Tom, a Trojan Horse, a sellout…the list goes on.

Booker was just inaugurated as mayor. Rather than let the first campaign dissuade him, he ran again….and this time not only did he win, his entire slate of city council candidates, erasing the last political vestiges of Sharpe James’ regime.

But I’m not writing this to sing Booker’s praises. I don’t know him. And I do think there’s something to the charge that he was funded by conservatives who don’t normally give a damn about black politicians.

I’m writing this because of all the stories to write about Booker, about how his campaign had to adapt to “political reality” (this time around, Booker took money from many of the forces he roundly criticized the first time around), about the innovative solutions that Booker has in store for Newark, about Newark and the 21st Century City…what does the Washington Post focus on?


Think back to the way that papers like the Post covered Harold Ford when he first ran. Now think about the way it covers Obama. Charisma? Yes. Life story? Yes. Juxtaposition against traditional (black) politics? Yes.

Political substance? Put it this way. Can you come up with a single policy that Booker supports based on this article?