Why didn't Joe Sousa make that comment above on the story about Governor Chafee's adult son what a hypocrite.

Why does the shill fear using his real name?
If Dan had kids drinking at his house, it would be appropriate to put him in the story. Since Dan had no part in his fathers case why would he be mentioned in the story ?

He should have been mentioned perhaps but not as the lead in. It would have been better to tell the story of the court case.

I'll agree with you Bill he is an Elected Public Official. I just question as you did why he is the lead in. All we ask from the news media is fair unbiased reporting.
Sensational Journalism belongs in the fiction section.

If Rep reilly owed the taxes, would the patch have listed his parents names....food for thought.

Write what you want, just for the love of all that is good, please change the picture.

This story should have been about the parents and not about the son as he was not involved in it. Yes he is an elected official but the story is not about him or his job and an elected official but you sure did your best to make it seem like he was involved in it. So what college did you get your degree in journalism from?

Yes, he's a political figure who is subject to greater scrutiny than the average citizen

If you met this kid you would think he is a great example of a Providence College education and a respectful young man. Politically, I do not know him. I predict this miss-step will be a big net plus for him as people smell "bullying" fairly quickly now a days and this is journalistic bullying indeed.

Part 1

The sins of the father shall not be levied on the children of the father. In this Country, we do not convict the whole family for the crimes one family member. This Country had a revolution against that type of tyranny, Read the Declaration of Independence it is clearly written in there; whole families were imprisoned and killed for the actions of the “Head of the family”. Still happens today, in Countries in the Middle East and elsewhere. Do Sandy and people here support that?

This story insinuated that this politician should be derided and looked for the actions of his parents. If he was not a politician, would he have been in the story?

This opinion of held to a hirer standard does not apply, because Mr. Reilly is not the one who owes the taxes. The press has lost its credibility when it loses sight of the story, which is the parent’s taxes period.

The press for last few decades had turned into this type entity; it goes against the fabric of what it was to stand for. No appearance of bias, or sensationalism. To deliver the truth, with out reservation, only than the facts. This story failed at it. If he is not involved in the action, no need to be involved in the story. Being involved only by relation is ignorance of basic principles of decency and integrity of the press.

The story was not your opinion Sandy, you were reporting a crime “Sandy” and giving the appearance of bias that you and your parents must have. See how that works ;-}.

Part 2

Of those 56 who signed the Declaration of Independence, nine died of wounds or hardships during the war. Five were captured and imprisoned, in each case with brutal treatment. Several lost wives, sons or entire families. One lost his 13 children. Two wives were brutally treated. All were at one time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes.

Twelve signers had their homes completely burned. Seventeen lost everything they owned. Yet not one defected or went back on his pledged word. Their honor, and the nation they sacrificed so much to create is still intact.

And, finally, there is the New Jersey signer, Abraham Clark.

He gave two sons to the officer corps in the Revolutionary Army. They were captured and sent to that infamous British prison hulk afloat in New York Harbor known as the hell ship Jersey, where 11,000 American captives were to die. The younger Clarks were treated with a special brutality because of their father. One was put in solitary and given no food.

With the end almost in sight, with the war almost won, no one could have blamed Abraham Clark for acceding to the British request when they offered him his sons' lives if he would recant and come out for the King and Parliament. The utter despair in this man's heart, the anguish in his very soul, must reach out to each one of us down through 200 years with his answer: "No."

Seems like Patch is in CYA mode...the obvious question should be - does Patch even matter in a community and if it does what are the benefits? Here is a website that needs to gain readership, so here is a story that can be spun. If his mom is good looking it would be in better respect to put a pic of her on the front of Patch to grab readers - read this months SOCO so see why they put hotties on the cover of their magazine often.

Regarding the Poll, I voted YES. I dont believe any evidence was given to indicate that the son was involved with the parents' allegedly criminal acts, so although I'm glad to know the name of the politician, I dont find him culpable.

Was it mentioned in the article that Rep Reilly has nothing to do with the court issue other than the fact that they are his parents? If not it certainly should have been otherwise you are leaving the door open for misinterpretation/skepticism & off the wall theories from people who have some level of difficulty comprehending what they read.