Sunday, October 15, 2006

Star Calls Dickerson The Stronger Candidate, But Endorses Carson

Defying all logic, the Indianapolis Star editorial board proved to its readers just how incompetent and unreliable it has been on the subject of the 7th District congressional race. The newspaper described incumbent Rep. Julia Carson as someone (D) "on the far left", "disjointed in her response to questions" who "revealed a vicious streak" and "should have planned to retire from Congress" because of her health problems. Her Republican challenger Eric Dickerson, on the other hand, is described as a "stronger candidate" who "offers a reasoned moderate approach on issues" with "a strong business background" and "who can bring fresh energy to the 7th District." Okay, so obviously they recommend Dickerson to the voters. Wrong!

"With deep reservations, the Star recommends Carson for one more term," says the editorial board. So am I missing something here? The editorial board in its infinite wisdom thinks the most important issue in this race is how well Dickerson remembers each of the facts raised by an unproven charge from more than 15 years ago, which, in their words, Carson raised "in a demeaning display of win-at-all cost politics". Because he got one fact wrong--and every other fact he gave to the Star, including a strong defense and support from his own wife and alleged victim, was backed up by records which still exist--his explanation "strains credibility" they lament.

You're a real riot Alice. As he has all too well demonstrated in his comments on this blog, editorial board member RiShawn Biddle can't keep his facts straight from something that happened 15 days ago, let alone 15 years ago. Hell, Bill Clinton said he "smoked [pot] but didn't inhale", and he still got elected president. And George W. Bush didn't remember a 24-year-old DUI arrest until he was reminded of it the weekend before he was elected president.

This is only a conclusion which could be reached by a group of completely out-of-touch eggheads who think they know better than the rest of us but don't have the collective common sense of an impulsive teenager. The Star speaks a totally different language than its readers. The newspaper and its readers are like two ships passing in the night. The newspaper's profits and readership will continue to plummet and deservedly so.

In two other congressional races, which most Star readers could give a damn less about and over which the newspaper has zero influence, the editorial board chose incumbent Democratic challengers. Joe Donnelly and Brad Ellsworth over their Republican incumbent opponents, Rep. Chris Chocola and Rep. John Hostettler. Surprisingly, the out-of-touch group chose Rep. Mike Sodrel (R) over former Rep. Baron Hill. The opinions will, however, carry little weight. At no point in the long history of the Star has its influence and reach in the state of Indiana sunk to a lower power point.

For the continuing saga of disconnect and mismanagment over at the Star, check out this post TDW has this morning on an Indianapolis Business Journal article about recent changes at the Star which have its news reporters in an uproar.

13 comments:

Wilson46201 said...

Two years ago the Star endorsed incumbent Congresswoman Julia Carson although they said they tended to agree more ideologically with her Republican challenger Andy Horning. He was so sputtering angry he denounced the Star and burned some of his campaign flyers in front of the Star offices.

Dickerson says he still supports going into Iraq in 2003 - Carson voted against that endless war. Eric is anti-abortion - Julia supports a womans right to choose. Significant differences!

Anonymous said...

Dickerson should pay Wilson. Seriously. It looks like dimentia and babbling are not the exclusive provence of Julia...her minions babble, too. Pity Wilson. Soon he'll be wandering the Lockerbie area mumbling something about aliens and looking for mushrooms under bricks. Wearing long-johns and a fur coat. A poster child for meandering minds.

I read the endorsements, too. As the state's largest paper, they probably feel a responsibility to endorse on all statewide races and all Congressional races. And to be credible, they have to be bi/non-partisan. I'll buy that. The Miami Herald does similarly in most Florida races. Ditto the Los Angeles Times in California, the Chicago Tribune in Illinois.

Oh I'm sorry...I'm comparing the Star to real papers.

Sodrel? Are you kidding? By most credible reporters and observers on both sides of the political thought spectrum, he's one of two or three most ineffective newcomers to Congress. And endorsing Dan Burton in a 76% Republican district...without even mentioning his disturbing record on and off the House floor. Shameful. And they know about it--just like they know about Eric.

But what was this, a straw vote among RiShawn, Swarens, Dennis and a couple other folks? What tipped ths scale? Was it a simple majority of the goofs gathered in the room? Was one vote close? Would it have made a differnece if Mary Beth hadn't left to use the restroom? They should've told us the process by which they made these endorsements. Certainly not common sense--in any of the endorsements.

I usually like RiShawn's columns. I can tell he's just a tad bit smartass, and very intellegent. This town needs that voice. And he pisses off Amos Brown, which earns him a big star for recogninzing blatant racist diatribes disguised as reporting. He should've weighed in harder on this endorsement stuff.

It's too bad the editorial board couldn't have waited a little longer, and viewed the Ch. 13 "joint appearance" this morning with Eric and Julia. Besides the stark contrast in, well....the ability to sit and make cogent comments of any kind, it was informative. Tully's questions of both candidates were sophomoric at best. His political punditry after the interviews was comical. This is our state's largest paper's chief political columnist. Frightening.

Tully's column today, if graded by an objective college journalism professor, would likely get a "C" for effort. And a comment something like: "Was this written whilst you buffed your nails or something? Not a lot of depth."

Kinda sums up the Star's entire endorsement effort.

Their pathetic primary and general election political coverage does not necessarily earn them the right to weigh in on these important races. Leave that to people who have spent some intellegent time on the races--like the blogs.

Anonymous said...

Wow. 9:07 I could not say anything more.

Wilson a couple more for you:
1. Eric is against the Death Penalty. Julia is against the Death Penalty.

2. Eric stands for the US Constitution as it is presently.

3. Julia is anti-freedom, pro-opressive government. Eric earned an A- from the NRA. What did Julia get? A BIG FAT "F" .. for "FAILURE". FAILURE to uphold the constitutional rights of those she was sworn to represent.

Of course none of that matters to her minions. After all they likely believe a model government is found in Cuba or Venezuela.

How about letting the media in the 2nd, 8th, and 9th report those races instead of "from up on high" here in Indianapolis. I'm sure the Bloomington, Evansville, Terre Haute, and South Bend newspapers are capable of it. A lot more than the Star sadly.

Anonymous said...

Hail, you didn't have to go to that NRA thing.

I'd wear their "F" like a badge of honor.

If Eric wins, which I highly doubt, I cna overlook one or two issues, just like I do with Julia. One-issue voting has got to go.

Anonymous said...

Wilson, the FACT is Julia is one of 15 in congress who voted to let babies that are born alive after a partial-birth abortion to be left for dead. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!

Wilson46201 said...

the so0called Right-to-Lifers hate Julia - she doesnt buy into their far-right political agenda - never has! They'll distort whatever they can to smear her and others in Congress.

It's another GOP wedge issue like guns and gays.

Advance Indiana said...

The Star's RiShawn Biddle isn't too happy being referred to as an egghead looking at what he has to say over at Expresso, although he doesn't bother with identifying the blogger or provide a link to this site, you know, the way bloggers do. Incidentally, here's a web definition for an egghead: "In the slang of the United States, egghead was an anti-intellectual epithet, directed at people considered too out-of-touch with ordinary people and too lacking in realism, common sense, virility, etc. on account of their intellectual interests."

Anonymous said...

"Hail, you didn't have to go to that NRA thing.

I'd wear their "F" like a badge of honor. "

I guess that makes you an anti-constitutional socialist also.

Anonymous said...

Wilson, here you go, just the FACTS:

House Passes Bill to Protect Babies Outside the Womb
Protection for infants who survive abortions draws 380-15 approval.

The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed legislation Sept. 26 to provide legal protection to all newly born infants, including those who survive abortions.

The Born-alive Infants Protection Act, H.R. 4292, would establish in federal law that a baby living outside his mother's womb is legally a person. Though the long-standing principle in law has been that born-alive infants are entitled to legal protection, the legislation is necessary because of recent developments in law, academia and medicine, supporters say.

Also, babies who survive abortion are being allowed to die without care and are being targeted for such deaths. At a July hearing before a House subcommittee, two nurses testified babies, some who might be able to survive with proper care, are being left to die when they survive abortions at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill. One of the babies who was born alive survived for nearly eight hours without medical care, she testified.

The 15 House members who voted against the bill were Reps. Julia Carson, D.-Ind.; John Dingell, D.-Mich.; Chaka Fattah, D.-Pa.; Benjamin Gilman, R.-N.Y.; Charles Gonzalez, D.-Texas; Alcee Hastings, D.-Fla.; Jesse Jackson Jr., D.-Ill.; Nancy Johnson, R.-Ct.; Barbara Lee, D.-Calif.; Nita Lowey, D.-N.Y.; Carolyn Maloney, D.-N.Y.; Cynthia McKinney, D.-Ga.; Nydia Velazquez, D.-N.Y.; Maxine Waters, D.-Calif., and Melvin Watt, D.-N.C.

Fine, Julia is against the death penalty, please tell me what the above is then, and to the most innocent of all victims.

indyernie said...

Letting babies die just because the abortion didn't work is a good idea to Carson?
Wilson even you can't justify that...jezz how did Indianapolis get so far left to elect her in the first place. The idea of letting those babies die (no food or care, just leave them on thier own to die) make me sick.

Anonymous said...

No, Hail, recognizing the NRA's voting report card for what it is, does not make me a Socialist.

I've actually studied the Constitution and revere it.

I understand that you are not a "well-regulated militia."

And Charlton Heston would never, ever in a million years speak for my political views.

Anonymous said...

an, AI, there you went and did it...you touched the third rail, abortion...and then everything sorta just shit-canned away....

Anonymous said...

I understand that you are not a "well-regulated militia."

"people's right to bear arms shall not be infringed"

Homeland Security begins at HOME!

Indyernie: I agree. Since when did Indianapolis become San Francisco of the Midwest? Even the diehard Chicago Dems aren't THAT far to the left.