From the Seattle Times today: “Rob McKenna made his case“.
Oh gimme a break!
I’ve had my nauseating fill this past week of gloating, pompous Republicans accusing Democrats of being sore losers for not obsequiously bending over and taking a political colonoscopy from our half-wit fuhrer and his vengeful cohorts. But the Times’ self-congratulatory piece of history-rewriting fluff is little more than partisan cheerleading.
Rob McKenna made his case? Yeah… sure… if by “making his case” you mean sitting back and reaping the rewards from $3 million of out-of-state special-interest, negative attack ads tearing down Deborah Senn.
If the Times editorial board really believes voters made an informed decision in the AG race, then it shows how incredibly isolated and out-of-touch they are. Hey guys… believe it or not, the rest of us did not have an opportunity to sit down and have a tete-a-tete with the candidates.
Of course, I think the Times fully understands that there was nearly no public debate on issues or qualifications, and that’s why they feel it so necessary to build up their candidate with fictionalized platitudes. I’ve never met McKenna (like most voters, I’m not on the Times’ editorial board), so I can’t attest to his “first-class temperament”. But I’ve listened to his public statements, examined his resume, and heard comments from former classmates and coworkers, and when the Times’ talks about his “combination of experience [and] brains” I am struck by his remarkable lack thereof.
When I make personal attacks like that, I generally like to back them up. But you know what? The Times started it… so let them prove to me why McKenna isn’t a mediocre intellect with a mediocre record.
Oh, and to their post-election pretensions to an even-handed analysis of Deborah Senn:
In her old job, we thought the line between zeal and grandstanding had been breached too often. But Senn was a smart, capable AG candidate.
The Times trashed Senn in the primary and the general election! They happily allowed her to twist in the wind as out-of-context charges branded her a corrupt incompetent. And now they throw her a compliment?
It’s not the editorial board’s partisanship that pisses me off — I’m at least as partisan as they are — but I’ve got the honesty to be out in the open about it, whereas the Times’ cloying efforts to masquerade manipulation as analysis not only makes for a bad public debate… it makes for bad writing.
Post-election conciliation my ass. It’s too late for rhetorical make-up sex… Senn has already been screwed.