So, the Seattle Times has this tradition of endorsing two candidates for every seat in a contested primary, which personally, I find kinda stupid, but well, it’s a tradition, so what the heck. So on those rare occasions when the Times chooses to endorse only one primary candidate, you just know there has to be something dramatically wrong with the opponent:
Of the three candidates for Position 2, we are drawn to the fiscal restraint championed by Republican Heidi Munson. She is endorsed over Democrats Luis Moscoso and Dave Griffin.
Munson is essentially running on pledges of leaner government, tighter spending and an open mind about new ways to doing government business, including working toward a greener environment. Her earnest rhetoric fits the times.
Moscoso knows the inner workings of Olympia, but the challenge for him is to broaden a perspective shaped by representing the Washington Public Employees Association/UFCW 365 and union issues for Community Transit workers and drivers. He knows the territory, the question is how tough he can be in the interest of all taxpayers.
Hear that? After 33 years of public service and community volunteerism, Luis Moscoso is so totally unacceptable to the Times, that they’re forced to break with their dual endorsement tradition, and endorse only a single Republican in a primary for a race to replace a retiring Democrat in Democratic leaning district. Because, of course, Moscoso is a labor leader and a party Democrat. And that, for the Times, is an instant disqualification from public office.
The fact that Munson is a crazy-ass teabagger, well that’s just fine with the Times, as long as she never represented any unions.
So my question for the Times ed board is: why do you hate working people?
Washington has a long proud history as a pro-union state, and it remains the 4th most unionized state in the country (with about 1 in 5 workers being union members). And that percentage is certainly higher in King County.
But each successive generation of elitist Blethens doesn’t care about that chunk of rabble-readers. They care far more about serving a tiny group of their investor-class neighbors over on the Eastside. In addition to their obvious knee-jerk editorial opposition to unions, there is a complete absence of local labor news (unless it involves a strike or dispute).
Just another reason why people seek news elsewhere now that they have options. I will sorely miss the printed newspaper, but the industry has itself to blame for its impending extinction. The good news for Times editorial writers is that new jobs await them at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The Times has a long tradition of being anti-union, since pre WW1. Dog bites man.
@1 so what labor news would you like them to report? Mob hits? Extortion? RICO charges? Just wondering.
The Times-endorsed teabagger candidate, Heidi Munson, was rated “not qualified” by the Municipal League, which is about as centrist an outfit as it gets. The Blethens are so pathologically anti-union that they would endorse even a dimbulb like this against any union-backed candidate.
Get ready for the Seattle Times to endorse Rossi (and only Rossi) in the top-two primary. As I mentioned in a post yesterday, last week they did Rossi a favor by an expose’ on his main opponant, Didier. This allows Rossi to make sure Didier’s numbers are low, without Rossi having to go to the inconvenience of actually attacking him. That makes it easier for him to cuddle up to the Tea Party in the general election.
Then on Friday, the Times ran a story about Patti Murray’s securing $44 million for the Hanson Creek Dam repairs (it still needs House approval). They could have turned it into a story about how much benefit Washington State receives from having a senator with that much clout on the Appropriations Committee. But instead, they gave it a bare-bones treatment, buried the story (throwing it out with the “Friday trash”), and didn’t even put her name in the headline.
Then on Monday, they ran a headline which claimed that the GOP’s allegations that Murray’s ability to bring home pork had “put her on the defensive”. But nothing in the story supported that headline, other than a claim by Rossi that she shouldn’t be bringing money home from Washington because it adds to the federal debt. The Times article waited until after the fifth paragraph in the story to print Murray’s response, to the effect that somebody somewhere was going to get that money, so it might as well be Washington instead of some other state.
I expect that the Seattle Times endorsement of Rossi will follow a string of negative stories about Murray which don’t provide any real information, only repeat “questions” about Murray which originated in Rossi’s camp. Then they will argue that Rossi’s rhetoric of “fiscal restraint” is “what’s needed in these times”, and then dismiss Murray simply by claiming that “we need a change”, without providing any clear reasoning why.
Which is yet another reason why the Times endorsements are so far out of touch from it’s readership base that it’s no wonder it’s in financial trouble. It used to blame it’s financial problems on the P.I., but it can’t anymore. Now it desperately tries to blame the unions and Google for mistakes which are clearly the blame of past and current Blethen management.
What the Seattle Times endorsement of Rossi SHOULD SAY, if they were being honest about it:
We endorse Dino Rossi for Senator. He is a two-time loser in a statewide election, and he will probably lose this one as well. But we know that Patty Murray won’t sign on to any bills to make labor unions illegal, and Rossi promises he will do so if we only endorse him. He has also promised to demand an anti-trust investigation of Google, unless they agree to pay some of their money to us, and to amend the current laws so this isn’t clearly extortion. How could we say no to that offer?
Some may point out that if he wins, Rossi will only be a freshman senator in the minority party with the other party in control of the White House. As such, his prospects for making any impact on behalf of Washington State are, well, zill. We acknowledge as much, and argue instead that it is a benefit. As a do-nothing Senator, he will be a fitting colleague of his counterpart in the House, Dave Reichart. We like members of Congress that don’t do anything except what we tell them to do, so both Riechart and Rossi get our endorsements this year.
As for Murray, we must admit she has been an effective Senator for the State of Washington. But her interests and the interests of Washington state, and the nation as a whole, are different from the interest of the owners and publishers of the Seattle Times. For that reason, we decline to endorse Murray.
@3 When gangsters take over unions, the workers are victims, you stupid asshole. And when Republicans take over government, everybody is the victim.
Must not be any nasty unions in Canada
@3
How about news of contract SETTLEMENTS that are reached without acrimony or work stoppage?
How about news on internal union elections? (No commercial media has reported on the fact that two of the state’s most prominent and longest-serving labor leaders are about to leave office and be replaced.)
How about coverage of state and regional Labor Council meetings where unions debate and VOTE on what positions to take on everything from viaduct replacements to candidate endorsements?
Or how about a few of the same self-promoting “feature stories” that individual businesses routinely get (in the “Business section”) about specific unions, who they represent and how their members benefit?
Shall I continue?
@9
or how about a story on how many of the construction unions got greedy over the last few years of good economy and priced themselves(and the companies they work for) out of the current construction market.
just sayin….
8
Don’t they have socialized medicine up there in Canada, too? The jobs statistics must be a glitch, hardly sustainable.
Thank you. Luis Moscoso is the best possible alternative for the citizens of the distict. What does not surprise me is the totally disrespectful and at odds endorsement of the Times. Luis is much the peoples representative.
Steve G.
the movement is Tea Party.
Luis will win this race. He is working hard; he is meeting with business leaders as well as labor leaders. His opponent is totally inexperienced and uninspiring.
This endorsement says far more about the Seattle Times than it does about the race in the 1st.
@6,
rhp, I am an editor at The Times. I have been reading your uninformed drivel for too long to remain silent. Ask anyone who has ever worked at this newspaper — even Ivan, a frequent commenter here who holds no love for the company or the Blethens — and they to a person will tell you that the news and editorial functions here are entirely separate, and that the choice of news stories and play have nothing to do with candidate endorsements. In fact, if there is any subtle influence at all among the news-siders, it would be to buck against the editorial page.
So, in terms appropriate for this venue: STFU.
ya, I didnt think anyone, especially labor goon, had any response to the union contracts being out of whack over the last few years.
you reap what you sow.