To the BJ: What's that you say about DeVitis?

When the Beacon Journal endorsed Republican Anthony DeVitis over Paula  Prentice, his Democratic opponent for the 36th Ohio House District, it conceded that it agreed more often with Prentice on policies.  But it turned to DeVitis anyway because it believed he was a moderate who could have an influence on  the conservative (or Hoofbeat Republicans  - my word) in the House.

The paper ignored his loyal support of his side of the aisle on key issues in its erroneous vision of him as a potential game changer.  Folks,  it's only a two-hour trip down I-77 from downtown Akron to the spooky legislative chambers in Columbus, but still long enough for an Akron-area Republican to change political style and tone from a local editorial board interview upon his arrival among his political caretakers.

As a reporter who once  hung out with the pols  before and long after legislative business, I saw it happen more than once.

That brings me to Friday's follow-up editorial from the BJ tower that sounded more like regret from a teachable moment than considered re-approval, of the endorsee. Clearly, the paper's voice rose to a shout in condemning the ugly TV commercials   -  bought and paid for  lies, really - under the headline: DeVitis and pals, again.

A couple of points raised by the editorial: A commercial acidly accuses Prentice, a Summit County councilwoman, of not filing campaign contributions.  But the paper noted:  "Technically she did not fail to report contributions because she didn't receive any - none."

Or how about this whopper from a mailer by the Ohio Republican Party, which the paper said "grossly" inflated DeVitis' "record of pulling Ohio's economy out of a hole, quite a feat for a guy in his first full term".

Oh, did I mention  that the Devitis, temporarily the moderate, says he doesn't condone negative campaigning, but silently accepts the benefits? "Tarnished his image", the BJ concludes.

Not quite a conclusion, I'd say.   When a paper can post a political rap sheet like this one, the next logical  step would be to withdraw its endorsement. Other disillusioned  papers have been known over the years to do so.

Scroll down in the  redemptive teachable moment. You should find it somewhere.

Post- election stuff from the other side of the universe

 POST-ELECTION DEBRIS:

In an interview with WKSU's M.L. Schultze,  Republican Don Robart, who was defeated as Cuyahoga Falls mayor in  Tuesday's election,  seemed quite puzzled why some of us placed him in  the Tea Party's grasp, saying:

"I think they're (sic)  calling me the darling of the Tea Party was quite an exaggeration.  For the most part I don't even hardly know those people..."

For someone who doesn't hardly know ''those people", it does seem fair to ask how he could have excitedly praised the Tea Party throng  at their rally in his city as  the "moral, fiscal and social conscience of America?"  Who knew?

* * * * *

Are we witnessing the end of days?  I sensed that the human race may be preparing to cash it all in after reading Chairman Alex Arshinkoff's learned explanation in the Beacon Journal of why voters were in a mood to throw out a lot of incumbents.  "I think they're (voters) fed up with politicians," the combative Republican county boss opined. "They don't see an end to the bickering and the fighting."  Based on local experiences, I think I might know how we can begin to turn that around,  Alex.  But why bicker?

* * * * *

Throughout election night, NBC's Chuck Todd continued to remind the viewers that President Obama's approval ratings had fallen to a new low without once noting that  Obama is barred by law from seeking a third term.  So for any  non-candidate, such ratings are little more than table talk.  Iconic Ronald Reagan's disapproval rating (Gallup)  rose to 56 pct.  in January 1983 - one point higher than Obama's 55 pct. in August 2011.   We won't even mention that George W.Bush's highest  disapproval rating led all other presidents with 71 pct. in October, 2008. So to Chuck Todd, I ask:  What's the point?

* * * *  *
Finally, the Ohio Republican Party was out the morning-after with stunningly breaking (and overcooked) news.  Blared State GOP chairman Matt Borges:  Obamacare was a disaster and Democrats "will be held accountable in 2014."  Ummmmm....Careful, Matt,  that you don't peak too soon under that barn-and-silo logo  on your party's official media releases.

The GOP CAN keep them down on the farm

A few people (probably Republicans) have  wondered why I frequently refer to the
GOPers running the Ohio legislature as "rustics". Being old-fashioned enough to believe that a picture is worth a thousand words, I again refer to the official photo logo adorning the top of every official press  release from the Ohio Republican Party as the symbol of the party of regressives.   I don't see a single skyline of an Ohio city nor an urban thoroughfare.    Simply a barn and silo.  Tell me that "rustic" doesn't befit the ordinary Republican politicians, even the ones who live in Upper Arlington or Hudson.

* * * * *

Speaking of the Ohio legislature, the GOP sausage machine that   ground out the new budget also produced some of the  oddest defenses that edge out the best of  Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert,  today's gold standard of loony  utterances.   There was Rep. Ron Hood, the Ashville, Oh. Republican who introduced an abortion bill in mid-June that was augmented in the final hour as a  budget amendment.  Referring to the American Cancer Society's  rejection of the notion that abortion leads to breast cancer, Hood said he didn't think these issues needed to be stated as fact. Only, he said, as a possibility. Or not.

Then along came Rep.  Terry Boose, the Norwalk Republican, insisting that a state budget is a statement of numbers, not top-heavy policy.  But Democratic Sen. Tom Sawyer of Akron would have nothing to do with that kind of talk that stresses  numbers over policy.  "He doesn't know what he's talking about," Sawyer said. "The budget is 80 pct. policy and 20 pct. numbers".  Right.  Working from the same column of numbers, the budgeteers will find a way to inject their own policies. (Remember the adage that figures don't lie, but liars do figure!)

* * * * *.
Dear me. My copy of the Beacon Journal arrived Monday morning without a single word about the budget that Gov. Kasich signed (as a guy thing, no less) on Sunday evening.    The Plain Dealer, however, nicely filled the vacuum with a long piece that topped the front page.  So how much longer can the BJ sustain its motto of Informing Engaging Essential?  I'm not awaiting a reply.