Print Columns   |   Web Chats   |   Blog Archives   |  

Bobby Haircut and the WashPost

The last time I saw Greg Massoni, Gov. Bob Ehrlich's press spokesman, he was bemoaning the decision to have the governor spend valuable campaign time appearing on Washington Post Radio. The previous time I saw Massoni, he was whining about having had the governor visit the Post newsroom to make his case for reelection.

"Why do we even bother?" Massoni said, peddling the all-too-common Republican campaign line about the supposedly liberal press and the purportedly harsher treatment that Ehrlich and other Repos get at the hands of papers such as the Post. Of course, this is largely a time-tested campaign strategy to build up the base by slamming the news media as an anti-Republican institution. And to his credit, Ehrlich--unlike his lieutenant governor, Senatorial candidate Michael Steele--has not hid from reporters (though the governor continues his silly war against the Baltimore Sun, Ehrlich's favorite foil.)

Today, the Post's editorial board throws a wrench in those Republican conspiracy theories about the press by endorsing Gov. Bobby Haircut for a second term. The editorial board is a very different and separate animal from the news operation of the Post, and the endorsement came as a great surprise to the paper's editors and reporters, just as it did to the Ehrlich camp. (Though the idea that the Post editorial page automatically endorses Democrats was never true, and is especially not the case in this election. Already so far, the editorial board has endorsed the Republicans in the races for Howard County Executive, Anne Arundel County Executive, and in northern Virginia's 10th congressional district (Frank Wolf.)

At the least, the Ehrlich campaign will now likely do some quick editing on the slams against the Post that it has included in some of its fundraising letters.

Beyond that, the endorsement's value is open to question. In the Post's circulation area in the Maryland suburbs, Democrats hold a dominant position, especially in Montgomery and Prince George's counties. Still, in some areas, especially in Howard and Anne Arundel counties and in southern Maryland, as well as in more conservative sections of the two big counties, the Post's embrace of Ehrlich could prove meaningful to voters who aren't big fans of the governor, but also aren't impressed by Democrat Martin O'Malley's performance as mayor of Baltimore.
One major issue here is the Baltimore-centrism of O'Malley, but also of Ehrlich and Democratic Senate candidate Ben Cardin. These candidates ignore the crucial issues of the Washington suburbs at their peril, and O'Malley has paid less attention to those issues even than Ehrlich. The Post editorial board seemed swayed as much by Ehrlich's insistent support for the Inter-County Connector highway as by any other issue; the editorial gave the governor a bye on his four-year slots mania and his role in hiking college tuition rates by huge margins.

Polling has so far shown O'Malley fairly well ahead, but both sides believe the race is still volatile. What impact do you think the Post endorsement of Ehrlich will have?

9:30 AM UPDATE:

On Baltimore's WBAL radio, the talk station that provide Ehrlich with his most friendly forum, the chatter this morning was about the Post endorsement. Talk host Ron Smith pronounced himself astonished at the embrace of the governor by what he considers a liberal paper. "I thought I was hallucinating," Smith said. "I'm still trying to digest it. It's an amazing thing." Smith attributed the Post's editorial decision to its conclusion that Ehrlich, unlike most Maryland politicians, had paid some attention to Washington-area concerns, particularly by pushing for the construction of the ICC and by imposing the flush tax to benefit environmental improvements in the Chesapeake Bay. Still, Smith said, he would have taken long odds against a Post endorsement of the governor--very, very long odds.

10:30 UPDATE:

On the blogs, the Post's endorsement is drawing more shrugs than anything else. On Maryland Politics Watch, David Lublin writes that "I doubt that the editorial will save Ehrlich's flagging campaign.... it is hardly a ringing endorsement. It contains plenty of criticism of the incumbent.... While ultimately plumping for another term for Ehrlich, the editorial ironically refutes the central theme of Gov. Ehrlich's campaign in its description of Mayor Martin O'Malley.... Maryland's swing voters are not concentrated in the counties where the Post's writ runs strong. Montgomery and Prince George's are not just lopsidedly Democratic, they are solidly so."

At Free State Politics, Michael Raia argues that the Post editorial board is too enamored of split-party government: "The weakest argument the Post's editorial made was that Ehrlich's party affiliation is helpful to the people of Maryland. The ed board is wary of a return to single party government at all levels, as evident in many of the paper's Congressional endorsements this cycle. But Ehrlich's party affiliation does not put checks on the Assembly, it only magnetizes partisan division and further gridlocks legislative progress."

By Marc Fisher |  October 25, 2006; 7:54 AM ET
Previous: Everybody Hates Us: Let's Eat Worms | Next: Why Baseball Is Losing a Generation: Fox

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Wow. The Washington Post will support Haircut so Haircut will stop picking on the Washington Post. And Sorry Marc, but attempting to distinguish the board from the rest of the Post is hogwash. The Post is all one business. I don't care how big the Post thinks it is, I'll still be voting for O'Malley.

Posted by: MD Voter | October 25, 2006 8:20 AM

I've always believed that endorsements work ONLY when they are exactly the opposite of what is routinely expected. Therefore, the Post's endorsement of Mr. Haircut will probably have a positive impact on his re-election chances although it is anybody's guess whether he can win outright.

Posted by: Questioner | October 25, 2006 8:30 AM

So, the Post has endorsed four Republicans and how many Democrats?
52? 87? 104?

Four endorsements certainly proves your narrow point -- a straw man, really -- that the Post doesn't "automatically endorse Democrats," but it doesn't speak to your premise that the press is impartial. If it were not liberally-biased, you'd find a lot more than four, token Republicans worthy of endorsement.

Posted by: KK | October 25, 2006 8:35 AM

Endorsements don't win elections. This one might actually backfire; I know conservatives who I think would prefer to die rather than vote for someone endorsed by the Post.
Bobby Haircut needs a strong crossover vote to win. That requires a strong list of accomplishments that overcomes party loyalty for some voters. The strong list of accomplishments isn't there, and it's not a good year for Republicans to bank on crossover votes anyway.

Posted by: Philogenes | October 25, 2006 9:14 AM

You're a piece of work Marc. You complain about Gov. Ehrlich's press spokesman bemoaning a meeting with reporters from the Post yet you, a columnist employed by The Post, insult the governor almost daily by calling him Bobby Haircut. You can't have it both ways.

Posted by: Give me a break | October 25, 2006 9:18 AM

The Post gets a single endorsement correct and they think that buys them a pass for all of their Left wing-biased reporting? Guess again!

Posted by: Rufus | October 25, 2006 9:31 AM

I am truly astonished by the stupidity of the WaPo editorial board. If your reading of the endorsement is correct, the most significant item that swayed the Ed Bd is Erlich's continued insistance on following through on the ICC. This proves that he is not as Balto centric as O'Malley.

What this proves is that he has tied his reputation to a project that is, at best, of dubious benefit, now.

I honestly think that this is a part of a growing body of evidence that the WaPo is truly losing its grip on reality on this and a number of other issues.

Personally, though it no longer affects me or my children, the tax hold and raising of tuition in the MD higher education system is a much more powerful argument. That argument says that Erlich, like many of his ilk, is quite willing to sacrifice the future for current popularity.

Frankly, I've been seriously considering ending my subscription to the dead trees edition, and this is simply one more piece of straw.

Posted by: Catcher50 | October 25, 2006 9:32 AM

This is rather humorous. As if we're to read this, collectively slap our heads and remark, "Wow, he's right! I guess the Post is impartial after all!"

Posted by: FFx | October 25, 2006 9:41 AM

Marc,

There you go again. From all your weasling -- "supposedly liberal," "purportedly harsher treatment to Repos," "what he considers a liberal paper" -- I'm wondering how you see the Post's political stance.

Do you see it as: completely impartial; enlightened; moderately but reasonably biased; or what? Is it mere coincidence that 95% of its political endorsements are liberal?

Posted by: KK | October 25, 2006 9:47 AM

I guess I am the only person in the known universe who is, in fact, influenced by the Post's endorsement of Ehrlich. I don't like to vote for Republicans generally - and especially not this year, when they deserve a good whipping - and I can't say I really love Ehrlich's record I'd give him a low B, overall, or a C plus.......but O'malley is just another ambitious pol with no substance- that is, no better than the Gov - , and I do think divided government is a good brake....so the Post's endorsement gives me a sense that it's not totally crazy to vote for a Republican when he's the lesser of two non--great-candidates.

Posted by: tybee | October 25, 2006 9:58 AM

It was an interesting endorsement to say the least, actually listing Bobby's weaknesses much more effectively than the O'Malley campaign has been able to do of late.

Fred Hiatt loves divided government and multiple groundbreaking ceremonies. Who knew?

Posted by: howie | October 25, 2006 9:58 AM

I asked my parents, What has Ehrlich done? And my father replied, He tried to get casinos to open up to help the Eastern Shore.

Tried to open casinos? and failed? that's IT???

I'm glad I moved.

Posted by: Bethesdan | October 25, 2006 10:03 AM

If the "liberal press and the purportedly harsher treatment that Ehrlich and other Repos get at the hands of papers such as the Post" are just a figment of the imagination, and "The editorial board is a very different and separate animal from the news operation of the Post" then why do YOU say "the endorsement came as a great surprise to the paper's editors and reporters"?

Posted by: RL | October 25, 2006 10:18 AM

Oh brother. It's a good thing the online columnists keep reminding everyone that the editorial board is completely separate from the news side of the post. Reelect Ehrlich? What a load of hooey. He hasn't accomplished anything. You can blame it on divided government, and you can also blame it on Ehrlich not representing the desires of the residents of the state.

Why is it suddenly a bad thing for a candidate to have come up through Baltimore? It seems to have worked pretty well for Schaeffer (in his saner days) and for Mikulski.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that our undivided, good legislation-passing state government returns soon.

Posted by: Disgusted in AACo | October 25, 2006 10:21 AM

How can one be liberally-biased?

Your either liberal or biased.

Well, we know what side your on Mr. KK, biased right wing religious fanatic.
(I bet you support the comments of Rush "Oxcotin" L. towards Fox)

It's people like you small minded and selfish...that hurt a lot of people in this country with your selfish acts.

This brain washing of political parties scares me and makes me wonder, will there be another Civil War of some kind, and this time it'll be Red States vs. Blue States. (Hey wait a minute those are gang colors...oh well go figure)

Posted by: Frankey | October 25, 2006 10:25 AM

Ehrlich get's a C and O'Malley gets a D+...good luck Marylanders!

Posted by: Frankey | October 25, 2006 10:30 AM

Frankey,

Man, that hurts! How could you tell? What in my posts gave me away, sweetie? I thought I hid it so well. And am I correct in getting the impression that you diapprove? That hurts even worse because from your previous posts I thought that you and I were soulmates. Bummer.

Posted by: KK | October 25, 2006 10:34 AM

I used to work at the post very recently. Though the paper is all one business (actually dozens of businesses that are barely connected) there are solid walls between the edit page, the newsroom and advertising. I know for fact that the influence on each other is negible.

Posted by: Ex-Postie | October 25, 2006 10:37 AM

It is truly amazing how many campaigns drink their own Kool-Aid. One talks to newspapers to get one's message out!! Erlich could just talk to the Times but than how would Post readers get his message (such as it is) straight from his mouth? I have alway's felt that liberal democrats should attempt to appear more on "conservative" radio for jus the same reason.

Posted by: A. Hardwick | October 25, 2006 10:37 AM

Ah, Frankey and KK is going to start scrapping. Let me go microwave a bag of popcorn and sit back and watch this.....

Posted by: Round 1 | October 25, 2006 10:38 AM

KK, you have a weird idea of Liberalism. No liberal paper would ever have argued so vociferously and blindly about going into Iraq like the Post did.

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 10:43 AM

The Washington Times has made an annoucement that it is endorsing Michael Steele. Don King AND the Washington Times! I hope Steele is preparing his concession speech.

Posted by: MD Voter | October 25, 2006 10:55 AM

Mr. KK, it's ok, be yourself, it's your one sidedness that bothers me.

Be more open to other ideas, thoughts and opinions.

Is there anything about a liberal you like?

God save America please! The evils of the devil are amoungst us.

Posted by: Frankey | October 25, 2006 10:59 AM

Fisher, I enjoy how you picked two anti-Ehrlich blogs to quote. C'mon give a fair representation.

As for no one seeing it coming--I've been saying it for weeks and even had a small side bet with an O'Malley supporting friend.

Why would the Post endorse O'Malley, because he is from Rockville? O'Malley loves to talk about consensus is how we fund things, but that's not an answer--that's bull. Ehrlich said I'm going to build the ICC and unlike everyone else who said that, he's actually building it. Ehrlich said he'd shake up Annapolis and he has.

I hear a lot of Democrats arguing for divided government in the national picture, but then locally they say give all the power to one party again? The Post is right, where'd one-party rule ever get MD...higher taxes, never got the ICC done, and a lot of pandering about how we'd do great things with little record of any actual accomplishments.

Ehrlich's done more for Maryland in 4 years than his predecessors have combined: Chesapeake Bay Restoration Act, charter school laws, ICC, witness intimidation legislation, and the list goes on.

On the tuition issue you're just wrong here Fisher. Look at Glendenning's first four years--tuition increased more percentage-wise! Look at Kiplinger's Magazine online--they ranked UMD the 15th best value in the nation up from 30th in 2002! Consider for a second that half the tuition increases under Ehrlich came in the first year from a Board of Regents still controlled by Glendenning appointments. I'd be glad to discuss the numbers with you as I testified on this matter before, but remember that tuition increased 54% under Glendenning and that state aide increased a total of 53.5%. What's that tell you--that more state aide means lower tuition? C'mon, the correllation is not nearly as strong as many claim.

Prove me wrong Fish. I'm serious. I've been over these numbers and all I can find is a lot of O'Malley spin. Martin talks about 2 Bob Ehrlichs, but how about 2 Martin O'Malley's?

What about on taxes? O'Malley keeps claiming he can't pledge against taxes because of national security threats...he said it at his unleashing of his MD plan and he said it on Kojo's show this week. Somehow I suspect if there is a true national security issue, Marylanders aren't going to complain if their taxes had to go up as a result of it. It is a total copout answer because in 2002 Martin O'Malley (and this is according to reporting by your newspaper) said the state should look to let the income tax increase and they should look at increasing the sales tax (3/3/02, WaPo).

Prove me wrong Fisher.

Posted by: Bryan | October 25, 2006 11:00 AM

Frankey, thanks - I'm not looking forward to casting my ballot on 11/7 for either one of these guys.

Why have all of our politics been reduced to absolutism over the past 12-14 years?

What happened to compromise, rather than this winner take all philosophy? I am wondering is it really worth it to sit this election out. It would the first I missed since I was able to vote.

My fear is that whoever wins will do the payback for wrongs (some perceived, some real). (Firings in the state government offices a la Ehrlich comes to mind.)

What is really scary is even on the national scale, it seems that political leaders in both parties have tossed all reasonableness aside. It is a winner take all mentality. Whoever I vote for never seems to take a second to ask whether they ought to do something, rather than could they.

I'm sick of dissenting voices being shouted down!

A message to whoever wins whatever office: You are not perfect. You have no mandate. You represent all of your constituency, not just ones carrying the money bags to your campaign headquarters. Those of us that don't do the big donor drives deserve the same volume on your noise control, if not louder, than those throwing money at you. Serving in public office is SERVICE to all, it is a high calling with a purpose -- NOT JUST TO KEEP YOU EMPLOYED & BUSY!!! If you do not win, re-evaluate how you communicated with the voters.
Do not mudsling, namecall, or fingerpoint. It's very unattractive, and I remember sore losers at the poll -- it speaks to character.

If you do win, congratulations, and remember the there are people that cast the votes, not the dollar bills. Quit whining and finger-pointing, and get to work. You cannot unring the bell. You may, and should, take the high road in dealing with the other party. (sometimes it makes the other guy mad because he cannot get over the fact that there can be compromise, where a higher good is served without having things ramrodded down the legislature.)

Move FORWARD!! with the information you have. Do not say things like well we inherited this problem from the previous administration. If you are the new leader in an office you, it is your problem now!! Deal with it quickly, without delay.

(If you are going to Congress, some oversight of the Executive Branch would be a really good idea! & Perhaps think about how we will pay for the war debt now, rather than later!)

stepping off of my soapbox now.

thank you!

Posted by: MD Mom | October 25, 2006 11:03 AM

MD Voter:

The big news is not that the WashTimes is climbing on the Steele bandwagon.

Instead -- and this is all the buzz in Annapolis -- Steele will add to his Don King and Mike Tyson endorsements by scoring OJ as a big time supporter....

Posted by: aacovoter | October 25, 2006 11:17 AM

aacovoter, OJ, huh? Who's next? The Harlem Globetrotters?

Posted by: MD Voter | October 25, 2006 11:35 AM

aacovoter -- proof positive that MD Dems are racist. Black voters, wake up!!!

Posted by: RL | October 25, 2006 11:43 AM

my main question is, what on earth has ehrlich done to help maryland, besides firing people for voting democratic? most of what i've seen from the ehrlich campaign are scary commercials with lots of black people in rundown buildings and a shadowy voice talking about "martin o'malley - bringing baltimore's 'success' to all of maryland." kinda suspect, i think.

Posted by: bamagirlinVA | October 25, 2006 11:48 AM

Russell Simmons has also endorsed Michael Steele. Russell is a full-on lib but has seen the light. The democratic party is not good for black people.

Posted by: Russel | October 25, 2006 11:54 AM

RL:

You've got it backwards.

It's the Republicans who are playing the race cards -- and making the clearly racist moves.

For example, seen the Republ. National Campaign Committee race-baiting ad against Cong. Ford in Tenn.?

And, here in MD., it's Mr. Steele that is playing the race card, seemingly believing that the vote of African American voters will be influenced by endorsements from the likes of felons -- yes, felons -- such as Don King and Mike Tyson, just because they are (African American) celebrities. What does Mr. Steele think? That his fellow African Americans are fools? Marylanders -- black and white are smarter than that and deserve better from their candidates....

Posted by: aacovoter | October 25, 2006 11:55 AM

RL, the point is that Don King, Mike Tyson, and OJ are not the most credible people that Steele could have chosen. They all have committed serious crimes (murder and rape). OJ was able to slither out of his conviction. Is the entertainment business the only friends that Steele can relate to and find endorsements?

Posted by: MD Voter | October 25, 2006 11:59 AM

Air America Bankrupted, by George!
Air America filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy today. They vow to valiantly remain on the airwaves in case somebody accidentally tunes in, but I fear it's only a matter of time before they hang up their microphones for good. It is truly a sad day for Free Speech in this country.

Air America was a vital educational resource, so it should have been completely taxpayer-funded instead of forced to compete for listeners on the open market. Once again, the GOP has used capitalism to silence the lone liberal voice in the conservative-dominated radio wilderness. Now all we progressives have left to counter the Right-Wing Noise Machine is ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, TBS, NPR, CNN, BBC, HBO, HSN, MTV, VH1, Showtime, The Abortion Channel, Gore TV, Reuters, The Associated Press, Time Magazine, Newsweek, The New Republic, the Nation, The New Yorker, TV Guide, People Magazine, Teen People, Us Magazine, Entertainment Weekly, Rolling Stone, Oprah Magazine, Ladies Home Journal, Woman's Day, The Advocate, Esquire, Vogue, Cosmopolitian, Humpty Dumpty, Architectural Digest, Cat Fancy, Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler, Swank, Sugar Tits Quarterly, the Harvard Perspective, High Times, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Seattle Times, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Seattle Weekly, The Boston Globe, The Village Voice, The San Francisco Chronicle, The San Francisco Examiner, USA Today, The Washington Post, Atlanta Journal Constitution, Arizona Daily Star, The Anniston Star , The Decatur Daily, Montgomery Advertiser, The Tuscaloosa News, Anchorage Daily News Arkansas Time, Tuscon Daily Star, The Alameda Times-Star, Contra Costa Times, The Los Angeles Daily News, The Fresno Bee, Marin Independent Journal, Merced Sun-Star, The Modesto Bee, The Monterey County Herald, The Oakland Tribune, La Opinion, The Santa Rose Press Democrat, The Sacramento Bee, San Jose Mercury News, San Mateo County Times, Santa Cruz Sentinel, The Valejo Times-Herald, The Eureka Times Standard, The Ventura County Star, Aspen Daily News, The Boulder Daily Camera, Durango Herald, Fort Collins Coloradoan, Greeley Daily Tribune, The Stamford Advocate, The Wilmington News Journal, Bradenton Herald, Daytona Beach News-Journal, Florida Today, The Gainesville Sun, The Miami Herald, Orlando Sentinel, The Palm Beach Post, St Petersburg Times, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Treasure Coast News/Press-Tribune, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Macon Telegraph, The Honolulu Advertiser, Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Bonner County Daily Bee, The Idaho Statesman, Chicago Defender, Chicago Sun-Times, Edwardsville Intelligencer,Rockford Register, Lafayatte Journal and Courier, The Des Moines Register, Iowa City Press-Citizen, Quad City Times, The Storm Lake Tribune, The Hutchinson News, Lexington Herald-Leader, The Louisville Courier-Journal, Teen Lexington Herald-Leader, Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer, The Shreveport Times, Bangor Daily News. the Kennebec Journal, Portland Press Herald, The Baltimore Sun, The Berkshire Eagle, The Framingham MetroWest Daily News, Milford Daily News. The Springfield Republican, The New Bedford Standard-Times, the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, The Argus-Press, The Bay City Times, The Battle Creek Enquirer, the Detroit Free Press, The Flint Journal, the Lansing State Journal, Livingston County Daily Press & Argus, The Muskegon Chronicle, Parasites Weekly, Petoskey News-Review, The Saginaw News, the Port Huron Times Herald, Traverse City Record-Eagle, Duluth News Tribune, The Mankato Free Press, St. Cloud Times, the Columbia Daily Tribune, The Kansas City Star, St. Louis American, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Springfield News-Leader, Billings Gazette, Las Vegas Mercury, the Las Vegas Sun, the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the Nevada Appeal, the Reno Gazette-Journal, the Concord Monitor, The Keene Sentinel, the Portsmouth Herald, The Nashua Telegraph, the Lebanon-Hanover Valley News, The Bergen Record, the Burlington County Times, the Bridgewater Courier News, the Camden Courier-Post, The Vineland Daily Journal, the Parsippany Daily Record, The Jersey Journal, The Gloucester County Times, The Hackensack Record, the Newark Star-Ledger The Trenton Times, the Albuquerque Tribune, The Santa Fe New Mexican, The Buffalo News: "News for Discerning Buffalo", the Oneonta Daily Star, The Ithaca Journal The White Plains Journal-News, The Corning Leader, Newsday, The Glen Falls Post-Star, the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, the Elmira Star-Gazette, the Staten Island Advance, the Albany Times-Union, Willie the Wino's Grand Central Station Restroom Scribblings, the Asheville Citizen Times, The Charlotte Observer, the Elizabeth City Daily Advance, The Greenville Daily Reflector, The Raleigh News & Observer, the Greensboro News & Record, The Southern Pines Pilot, the Wilimgton Star-News, The Bismarck Tribune, the Grand Forks Herald, the Akron Beacon Journal, The Toledo Blade, the Dayton Daily News, the Zanesville Times Recorder, The Daily Astorian, the East Oregonian, the Medford Mail Tribune, the Portland Oregonian, The Eugene Register-Guard, the Salem Statesman Journal, The Coos Bay World, The Beaver County Times, The Bucks County Courier Times, the Wilkes-Barre
Citizen's Voice, The Doylestown Intelligencer, the Uniontown Herald-Standard, The Allentown Morning Call, the Washington Observer-Reporter, The Philadelphia Daily News, The Philadelphia Inquirer, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader, the Anderson Independent-Mail, The Myrtle Beach Sun News, The Memphis Commercial-Appeal, The Jackson Sun, Nashville Scene, The Tennessean,
The Berkeley Daily Planet, Berkeley Voice, The Berkeleyan, √ā¬°Berkemundo!, The Baytown Sun (11,374), the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, the Lone Star Iconoclast, the Longview News-Journal, The Lufkin Daily News, the Waco Tribune-Herald, the Bennington Banner, the Brattleboro Reformer, The Burlington Free Press, the Rutland Herald, The Barre-Montpelier Times Argus, the Newport Daily Press, The Roanoke Times, The Virginian-Pilot, The Everett, The Olympian, The Tacoma News Tribune, The Bremerton Sun, the Tri-City Herald, the Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, the Boston Phoenix, the Charleston Gazette, the Huntington Herald-Dispatch, Howard Stern, the Madison Capital Times, The Green Bay News-Chronicle, the Racine Journal Times, the Kenosha News, the La Crosse Tribune, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, The Sheboygan Press, The Wausau Daily Herald, The Guardian, The Independent, the Paris Daily Snivel, Der Spiegel, Democracy Now. The Huffington Post, The Progressive Review, Alternet, Dissident Voice, AntiWar.com, Common Dreams, Truthout.org, MoveOn.org, TomPaine.com, Counterpunch, The People's Kool-Aid, BlameBush!, Mother Jones, High Times, The Progressive, New Internationalist, Multinational Monitor, Covert Action Quarterly, The American Prospect, Dollars and Sense, The Progressive Populist, The Weekly Standard, New Left Review, Pacifica Radio, Progressive Mind, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, YouTube, Marvel Comics, The Weekly World News, Indymedia, DailyKos, Wonkette, DemocraticUnderground, The Prairie Home Companion, Coast to Coast with George Noory, Pravda, Granma, and Al Jazeera.

So much for that right-wing myth about the "liberal media!"

Posted by: almost as annoying as Che | October 25, 2006 12:01 PM

Almost as annoying as Che,

Okay, you made your point. The media are conservatively biased. I withdraw my earlier, mistaken notion that the Post is liberally biased.

But you liberals still have the Hollywood studios, right? And Dixie Chicks. Don't forget their courageous stance against the President.

Posted by: KK | October 25, 2006 12:08 PM

Man, I'm glad I don't have a dog in this fight. It wouldn't have mattered to me who the Post endorsed, both are bad choices.

Marc, I can believe that there is a wall between news and editorial in that the news side won't be influenced by the paper's editorial voice. But shouldn't the wall be permeable in the other direction? Don't the folks who write the editorials ever read the real pages of the home town rag? I'd like some INFORMED editorial writers, please.

Posted by: Ol' Virginian | October 25, 2006 12:09 PM

Bamagrl, pass me some of what you're smoking. Ehrlich has a ton of Democrats in his adminstration including people who worked on campaigns against him in the past. The argument you're making is a talking point, but a bad one. Verify your facts next time you post.

Posted by: Bryan | October 25, 2006 12:29 PM

To RL,

Black Voters are not just awake, but they are reading as well...and see all deceptions since 1900's.

There are racist Republicans and Democrats...however the Democrats lean more for the (all) people.

Let's talk healthcare of the future. The Dems at least have reasonable plan rather than this sign up in time or lose your coverage message.

I think about all those senior citizens that have no one to look out for them and later found out they had no coverage, or couldn't get their prescriptions filled due to this gotcha plan!! (Who the majority signed off on...republicans)

Posted by: Frankey | October 25, 2006 1:15 PM

Boy you conservatives are a bunch of whiners. You are stereotyping an entire industry by some editorials -as if that matters to people anyway.

Go ahead and live in your fantasy world, filled with liberal media conspiracies. Those of us who actually watch the news and read the papers know better.

Posted by: JS | October 25, 2006 1:45 PM

AAAAC-

wow, that is some list! And you got me, I totally get my news from 'the abortion channel'. If I may quote Red Dawn (the greatest 'Russkies invading the midwest because of a global wheat crop failure' movie ever): All that hate is gonna burn you up fella.

Please try and remember, we're not actually the enemy. If Rove could focus a little more on the terrorists and a little less on Democrats, we might still catch Osama yet. Now, back to watching 'Berkemundo!'

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 1:49 PM

I can't help but feel tainted by this Post Editorial page endorsement of Ehrlich. I grew up with the Post. My "family" has shamed me again. Last time, this same editorial board endorsed and actively supported the War in Iraq. Wrong again.

Posted by: tainted | October 25, 2006 2:59 PM

Let's all just shun the Post Editorial Board. Tomorrow I look at Tom Tolles only, and then throw that page away. Poor Tom, his smartcartoons deserve much better company.

Posted by: Shun em | October 25, 2006 4:26 PM

Can we cut out the juvenile 'Bobby Haircut' stuff? We get it. You've done it to death. Grow up and move on. It doesn't have any place in political analysis. And frankly, it's not even funny.

Posted by: M Hanson | October 26, 2006 11:06 AM

I'm frankly grateful for Gov. Ehrlich's "insistent support for the Inter-County Connector highway" because I'm sick and tired of sitting in traffic and watching my taxes being spent on someone else's HOV and Metro ride while I listen to yet another report about how "opposition" from a few vocal malcontents is holding up a vital road project.

The last Democratic governor caved in to environmentalists from Vermont and reneged on his 1996 campaign promise to build the ICC. He even tried to sell off the right of way to ensure it would never be built.

Erlich is providing a transportation option for the benefit of the majority, at long last. It's a welcome change that took a lot of guts. He deserves to be reelected.

Posted by: CEEAF | October 26, 2006 1:06 PM

Well I'm not surprised Fisher ignored my post--it is pretty obvious where he stands (try posting some facts next time Fisher rather than hopelessly incorrect innuendo).

Posted by: Bryan | October 26, 2006 5:44 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2010 The Washington Post Company