The Post Sticks Up For Bush

[vraiblonde]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43186-2003Dec30.html

You know something's happened when the candidates get so out there that the Post has to bust them out and defend their mortal enemy, George Bush.

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by kwillia
How interesting... so does Pete ...

....................

 

[dems4me]

this reference is simply an editorial - someone's opinion. There have been other editorials posted that support Dean and discredits Dubya.

 

[SamSpade]

You don't grasp the concept of an editorial.

A letter to the editor is the opinion of a reader. He might be Henry Kissinger, or a foreign head of state (who have been known to write them) or just anyone who reads the Post.

An op-ed piece is the opinion of a columnist. Sometimes they aren't written strictly for the Post, but reprinted with permission from elsewhere.

An editorial however, is the opinion of the paper itself, and carries no byline.

 

[dems4me]

yes I get it -- and an editorial is still an editorial by any other name. It stems from someone's opinion not verbatum fact.

 

[SamSpade]

I still don't think you do, because your first response was to suggest that OTHER editorials support Dean. As if another example of an editorial isn't the same "opinion" thing you're marginalizing.

The whole point here was that the Post itself was going on record as supporting Bush in this instance, something it doesn't do. The Post's *opinion*. Dean was being an ass trying to call Bush on the carpet regarding the mad cow situation, because it isn't a national problem, the situation actually *proves* it's being handled correctly, and being a doctor, he knows this but is being disingenuous about it.

Safire of the New York Times believes Dean will actually LOSE to Gephardt in Iowa, win by a smaller margin in NH and continue to have a tough time down the road in the primaries. I believe him. I think all those who've jumped on the Dean bandwagon are going to be disappointed.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by dems4me
this reference is simply an editorial - someone's opinion.

You miss the point. the Post is notorious for supporting ALL Democrats, regardless of the issue. They haven't had a nice word to say about a conservative since....I can't remember when. For them to come out for Bush tells me that a) their desire to tear up Howard Dean for the cause is greater than their desire to bash Bush OR b) they honestly see this Mad Cow crap for what it really is: a stupid scare tactic that has no basis in reality.

 

[dems4me]

I disagree, at the top it says
"washingtonpost.com > Opinion > Editorials " Opinion being 2nd in command for the weblink. It is still someone's opinion. For 1) the Washington Post (the one that busted Nixon in Watergate ) (I think) (Bernstein and Woodall), would never go against a Democrat and for 2) again its an Opinion - how can it not be interpreted as just an opinion when the link says what it says above!??? Also, while I'm at it, I suppose us left-wing folk think that Watergate was a made-up conspiracy as well. Whatever, God Bless all and have a safe and Happy New Year!!! I need to run for party now!!!

 

[Frank]

"I disagree, at the top it says "washingtonpost.com > Opinion > Editorials " Opinion being 2nd in command for the weblink. It is still someone's opinion."

Pardon my French, but you're an idiot. No one is disputing it is opinion. Of COURSE it is an opinion. Look at ALL of the responses to you. They all agree, it is an opinion. We're in *agreement* over this. What is *significant* is, this is the opinion of the Washington Post, the newspaper.

"For 1) the Washington Post (the one that busted Nixon in Watergate ) (I think) (Bernstein and Woodall)"

WoodWARD - Robert Upshur Woodward. He still works for the Post, actually. Carl Bernstein has moved on to other things.


", would never go against a Democrat and for "

Well hoooo-ray. Now you actually GET it. They DID go against a Democrat, and it is there in black and white. The paper took a position against Howard Dean. And because they never DO take a stand against a Democrat, and never DO endorse a single Republican, THAT is why it is remarkable. For them to take a stand against a Democrat strongly suggests that person is WAY out of line. Are you getting it yet?


"2) again its an Opinion - how can it not be interpreted as just an opinion when the link says what it says above!??? "


Yes and it is just amazing that after this many posts, you still don't understand that everyone agrees with you on this point. It is important because it is the *opinion* of a newspaper that never takes issue with Democrats that a Democrat was out of line on something.

Yeah, I am seeing THIS thread going on forever.

 

[Penn]

Definitely an interesting editorial.

What I got out of it was that Howard Dean would do well not to bash the Bush administration on this matter, as it seems the system in place accomplished it's goal: detect and isolate a problem at it's soonest.

So, immediately Howard Dean jumped on this "supposed failure", when there really wasn't one in the first place!

Dems4me, this is just another reason many of us do not feel Howard Dean is fit to be our next president.

He continually makes brash statements that he has to clarify later, or has to explain what he really meant to say.

Can you imagine Howard Dean conducting Foreign Policy in this manner? If our"allies" in Europe do not appreciate our demeanor now, envision it in the future with him at the helm of diplomacy.

Not a pretty sight

 

[vraiblonde]

Dems, do you consider yourself a good representation of Dean supporters? I asked you that before and you took offense for some reason, but I don't think you ever answered me.

 

[Penn]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Dems, do you consider yourself a good representation of Dean supporters? I asked you that before and you took offense for some reason, but I don't think you ever answered me.

Vrai, you probably came across as too bullish or domineering.

The nerve of you asking that sort of question!!

 

[dems4me]

Maybe I'm not getting it... what I'm saying is all they did was post an editorial based on opinion. Y'all act like this was the first one they did that was Republican slanted. James Baker the Third was printed in the Washington Post editorial several times with his Republican views. Maybe I'm not gettin it, or y'all just skip through the Republican opinions that get printed. Yes, its a Democratic Paper, but it still is open minded and have been of late equally footed. What gives? Is this really a topic worth arguing over????

Vrail or Vraib (sounds arab), I don't know if I'm equipped, I was appointed to this position, not by my asking, but I am a Democrat and I do support Dean. Henceforth the meaning of grassroots in politics. As I've pointed out to those that appointed me... grassroots don't grow well in the winter, but I'm stuck with it. For y'all Republicans, y'all should be glad its me as the Charles County person, I have no experience, I just have a lot of friends that have been successful in politics and I'm gleaming from them their campaign strategies. I'm not an idiot and I don't appreciate the feedback from some, but at least I'm darn well trying to make an f'n difference for my beliefs. Which is more than some. I don't anticipate Dean beating Bush, but, its the experience I am after, and he's the best Democrat out of those poor options that I have to back. If Hillary jumps in, then I'm all in and pacing the streets for votes.

 

[Frank]

"Maybe I'm not getting it... what I'm saying is all they did was post an editorial based on opinion. Y'all act like this was the first one they did that was Republican slanted. James Baker the Third was printed in the Washington Post editorial several times with his Republican views."

I think you're right, you're not "getting it". When James Baker writes a piece, he gets a byline, and in the printed paper, it is on the right side of the editorial section. These are called "op-ed" pieces and they are written by anyone. They are usually occupied by national columnists like William Raspberry, or David Broder or Charles Krauthammer or any of a number of columnists whose material appears regularly. Some of them, such as Krauthammer or George Will, are in fact, conservatives or Republicans.

Then there are the "letters to the editor" which appear on the right half of the left page of the editorial section of the written paper. These can be written by anyone, and they have the name of the author written afterwards. These are almost alway regular, everyday readers of the Post, although from time to time, they can be famous national figures, often to dispute what has bee written about them publically.

Down the left column are "editorials" because they come from the actual *editors* of the Washington Post. They are *unsigned*. Unlike the ones you see on TV, where a disclaimer will say "this editorial does not represent the views of this station", these pieces DO represent the views of the Washington Post. It is THIS kind of column where this piece appears.

Now this has been explained to you enough times by now, and if you refuse to grasp it then I'm not sure anyone can help you out at this point. James Baker has *never* written an editorial for the Post, because he is not an editor for the Post. He *can* write a letter to the editor, and he can write an op-ed piece. Editorials are strictly the work of the paper ITSELF.

 

[vraiblonde]

Give up, Frank. You're beating your head against a brick wall.

For y'all Republicans, y'all should be glad its me as the Charles County person, I have no experience

Dems, I don't take pleasure at all in your lack of experience. That's one of the problems with Dean's campaign - it's being run by incredibly inexperienced people, Dean included.

But I do applaud you for getting involved and trying to make a difference.

 

[dems4me]

This is how I am getting experience. I want to make sure I am very experienced come Hillary's campaign in 2008 if she runs or whatever Dem is running. Dean is the one I'm practicing on and learning and getting involved. I am learning at an astonishingly fast rate however and the more stimulating I find it, the more I throw myself into it.

 

[Hessian]

Lemming.

 

[Bruzilla]

If Hillary runs she's going to need all the help she can get. I can't wait to hear her actually start to answer some real questions.