Offering frequent news and analysis from the majestic Evergreen State and beyond, The Cascadia Advocate is the Northwest Progressive Institute's unconventional perspective on world, national, and local politics.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Well, that settles it - now we know

On Sunday, I wrote a lengthy commentary articulating this organization's candid disappointment with the Seattle Times for its ridiculous endorsement of Dave Reichert. Among my observations:
So the Times wants to see one party rule in Washington, D.C. ended, but in of the most competitive races in the country, they're endorsing the Republican. Clearly, sending new leadership to the U.S. House is not that important to Frank Blethen and Company.
The Times chose to embarrass itself further in another editorial today endorsing Cathy McMorris for reelection in Washington's 5th District.

The Times on Sunday claimed there is "compelling reason for change in Congress", but obviously they don't believe Congress actually needs to be changed.

The Times has yet to endorse a Democratic challenger for federal office, and they have already passed over two excellent ones - Darcy Burner (and, with this endorsement), Peter Goldmark.

The Times' position is clear: Endorse incumbents, keep the status quo. Keep Republicans in charge and keep one party rule alive in Washington, D.C.

If you read the Times' endorsement of McMorris, you'll notice a striking similiarity to the Reichert endorsement. It's not as long but it is drawn from the same template: praise the incumbent Republican freshman and point out any instance where he or she has supposedly stood up to the administration, then dismiss the Democrat and pile on more praise for the Republican.

This endorsement is a complete insult to the better candidate, Peter Goldmark, who has deep roots in the 5th and is a perfect fit for the district. There could not possibly be another Democrat who is this uniquely qualified to represent his or her fellow citizens in the United States Congress.

So why did the Seattle Times really endorse McMorris?

Oh...that's right, something about an estate tax. You see, it trumps every other issue - Iraq, global warming, Social Security privatization, even oversight of the administration. All huge concerns that the Times has editorialized on but doesn't really care about.

The Seattle Times is rapidly losing credibility and relevance with its readers and with the community. Its owner's delusional obsession with repealing the estate tax has turned the Times into a one-issue paper, and that's a shame.

Don't be surprised if the Times endorses Mike McGavick for Senate next Sunday, despite the fact that Seantor Cantwell is the incumbent. If the candidate is against the estate tax (and McGavick is), that's the only qualification that matters.

Besides, Mike! should have no trouble getting the Times editorial board to believe that he's a change agent instead of a rubber stamp. Why wouldn't the Times eagerly buy the faux moderate, independent candidacy he's been trying to sell?

You can send the Seattle Times a message by donating to Darcy and Peter's campaigns, or by volunteering to win. They may not want change, but we do.

Puget Sound's other major newspaper, fortunately, is displaying common sense. We were delighted to see that the Seattle P-I has endorsed Eric Oemig for State Senate in an editorial this morning. Eric, who wishes to represent NPI's home district, is an exceptionally qualified candidate running a high powered grassroots campaign. He recently authored a guest post for the Official Blog and we are pleased to support his candidacy.

<< Home