From the Scripps Howard News Service, quoting from a Sunday Washington Post story:
In this past Sunday's Washington Post, looking back on an experience he said he would not wish on anyone, Sidarth wrote: "Everywhere I went, though I was identifiably working on behalf of Allen's opponent, people treated me with dignity, respect and kindness. I cannot recall one event where food was served and I was not invited to join in the meal."
The following day, he went on, "even after Allen's comments had highlighted my outsider status, I was not allowed to depart without eating ..." And, he said, Allen's staff gave him accurate directions to the senator's next campaign event.
All else aside, this speaks highly of Allen and Sidarth's fellow Virginians. There was more than just one winner in that campaign.
What do you know. Allen's campaign wasn't spiteful, or hateful. Allen's supporters weren't racist hicks who saw only a "strange" person not like them. They didn't treat him mean, and contrary to the idea that Allen saw Sidarth as some opponent to be vilified, he and his campaign saw him as a person to be treated with dignity and respect.
Do you think a front-page Washington Post article in the week after the macaca incident which explained to Virginians how Allen and the campaign REALLY treated Sidarth would have been worth 10,000 votes? I think so. And I think they thought so to. Which is why you didn't read this story until AFTER the election was over.
It's one thing to agressively pursue and overreport stupid stories again and again, but to hide the truth from the voters until after the election in order to help your preferred candidate is what a CAMPAIGN does, not what a real news service does.
Which tells you what the Washington Post was for the Webb campaign this year.