(1)he was capable of talking himself right off a cliff;
(2)With his "Red Bull Style, it is sometimes hard to tell what's his core belief";
(3)When he praises Ohio's "innovative Third Frontier, he still says things that suggest he doesn't understand or care how it works."
(4)If you listen to him talk about "phasing out Ohio's income tax, reducing the state's commitment to public schools or even making university professors work harder" he says things that suggest he doesn't understand or care how it works.
(5)And "does he understand that being a Fox News provocateur is not the same as being the leader of a diverse, complex state?"
Still, the PD, in its wisdom, settled on his all-of-the-above style that, with a "roll of the dice" mindset just might enable Ohio to regain its self-confidence and sell itself to the world.
Or it might not.
I would put this in one of the leading fingers-crossed hedge-your-bets, we're- not- sure- what-this-guy- will- do endorsements in memory.
But that's the PD for you. You may recall that it was deeply divided on a presidential endorsement in 2004 and the best that the editorial board could salvage then was to bow to publisher Alex Machaskee, a visceral Republican, who opted for George Bush over John Kerry. The mighty paper on the lake settled internal strife by endorsing no one for president.
When newspapers complain today that their credibility with the readers is falling in the polls, they might look into the mirror when they serve up cognitive dissonant pieces like this one about the Republican elephant in the China shop. It is classic editorial gibberish.
Posts
8 comments:
Obviously, they're running out of leftist hacks at the PD. Perhaps you should come out of retirement.
When I eventually decide to retire, you'll be the first to know. Your baseless argument leads me to believe that you may have had a hand in writing the editorial.
If someone owned a restaurant and the PD gave them the kind of review it gave Kasich, I don't think they'd tape it to the register for the customers to read.
"The chef refused to tell us what kind of mystery meat the casserole was made of, or whether or not it would make us sick, but we're bored with the restaurant across the street even though the food is safe and palatable".
That wasn't an endorsement, it was a caveat emptor.
Abe, you meshuganeh.
Point 1 - With people like you, it's imposible to win. Had the PD said nothing but praise for Kasich, you would have called it a hagiography, and said the PD is absolutely blind. So now that they show balance by acknowledging what they perceive to be Kasich's shortcomings, you then accuse them of a "lefthanded" endorsement.
Point 2 - I'm not sure what a "visceral"republican is, but if a newspaper is to be judged by its owners political affiliation, I suppose you'll agree that everything the New York Times (ie, the God of the atheist left) says is discounted, b/c its owners are reflexive democrats.
Point 3 - When you talk about credibility faling with readers . . . nearly all of that lack of trust, if not actually all of it, comes from conservatives who see the manifest liberal bias in media reports. Come on, Abe, admit it, reporters are mainly lefties who think thy're going to change the world. The worst spin of all comes from un-bylined AP & Reuters "reports". The PD - a paper which gives coloumn space to hyper-liberal Connie Schultz, if anything, and which lives in the heart of democrat/corruption filled Cleveland, falls too often on the left wing side of the ledger.
Wow! Meshuga-what? Hmmm ...I see I have another illegal alien on my hands. I particularly like your description of the NY Times as the "God of the atheist left". Is that original with you? By the way, a visceral Republican is, well, someone like you - a conservative from the gut. But please come back, you meshuganeh, you!
Hey Anon,
Have the guts to identify yourself or the imagination to come up with a nom de plume. In either case, you have clearly demonstrated limited understanding and cognition. What do you do with yourself when you can not hate? Oh, I know, you take the O'Donnell pledge.
Medals all around for the Cowardly Lions of the Right, who manage to summon the courage of their oft quoted and adored Founding Fathers- who then name call, post anonymously, and just as quickly as they appear scurry back into the forest.
Don't Tread on Me becomes "Don't Thread on Me" with these patriots all too often.
Such endorsements should come as no surprise. What would surprise me is if anybody paid attention to them. Newspapers' credibility these days, deservedly so, is lower in public opinion than support for either political party. In other words, even among the dwindling number of people who read the papers, the publishers' blessings appear to have become irrelevant. If I were the governor or Rep.Sutton, I would ignore the editorialists and focus my attention, like a laser, on turn-out-the-vote efforts.
Post a Comment