if Sodrel has that syndrome, what does Hill have?

Blue Indiana trashes Sodrel on "file-gate"...

I've already blogged on the attempted renaissance of this two-year old issue. There are legitimate questions-- which might or might not have good/easy answers. But the issue should nothing to do with Baron's attempt to avoid debates.

Ever since late 2006, good ol' Millionaire Mike Sodrel has been under fire for closing his official Congressional Office a full month before Congressman Baron Hill was sworn in and assumed responsibility of constituent services in the district. Worse yet, Sodrel by all accounts refused to cooperate with Hill's incoming district-level staff, leaving people with ongoing cases out in the cold in terms of their questions and requests.

Yesterday, Democrats took aim at Sodrel over the issue...

It gets a lot less classy after that excerpt, so I'll just stop there...

"Ever since late 2006..." and "yesterday, Democrats took aim"? Doesn't line up. The issue was raised in the transition-- and addressed in the media-- and then again recently when Hill wanted to use it to avoid debates.

"By all accounts"? Uhhh, not exactly. Maybe by all partisan Democratic accounts.

In any case, the complaint is not the sort of thing that would reasonably allow Hill to roadblock all debates for the 9th District Congressional race.

The big questions:

How can a candidate repeatedly demand debates in 2006 and then try to totally avoid them in 2008?

Why wouldn't a "candidate of the people" want to allow voters to hear from all three candidates in multiple debates?

Bottom line: Why doesn't Hill want to debate? Is it (reasonable) fear about how a debate would play out for him-- or is he just playing it safe politically (with a lead and a big money advantage)?

In any case: hopefully, Hill will soon drop his shredded fig-leaf of an excuse to avoid debates.